I’ve been thinking a lot lately about why science fiction romance lacks for more new romance readers. I have my doubts it’s the science fictional components. Rather, I’d argue there’s a stronger case that the lack of abundant Alpha heroes in the genre that cause it to fly under the radar.
Alpha heroes are present in virtually every romance subgenre (e.g., vampire, rake, business tycoon). In fact, the popularity of paranormal romances is practically synonymous with the Alpha vampire/shifter/demon heroes.
I have nothing against Alpha heroes per se. My concern is when it seems to define a genre/subgenre as a whole. In Paranormal Romance VS Urban Fantasy, Jordan Summers wrote:
"I also think that readers are moving to Paranormal Romances because the books are hero-centric…I think alphas lend themselves to paranormal romances.”
Which echoes SB Candy’s observation in On the role romance novels play that romances “…portray female fantasies, and most women-who-like-men want their fantasy men to be dangerous yet nurturing and protective.”
Then there’s this comment by AQ in response to the SB post:
“But are women in romance novels really the protagonists?
“On a percentage basis of the entire genre, my impression of current romance novels is that the heroes are primarily the protagonists while the heroines are the primary point of view character (or narrator) and that if the hero has a point of view that it’s been heavily filtered through a feminine narrator to fulfill the female fantasy aspect Candy mentioned above.
“The hero has generally has the major emotional character arc, the hero has the goals while the heroine tends to be reaction mode, the hero still is the one to primarily confront/defeat the villains (not always still talking percentage impression here). The heroine are generally victimized/traumaitized (romance tropes: fated mates, captive, blackmail/revenge, secret baby, etc.) Yes, the heroines survive and score moral victories but again these victories seem to be the result of reaction rather than action on the heroine’s part or through action by the hero. Hence my perception that the hero is generally the protagonist and not the heroine.”
I suspect that all of the above is why SFR hasn't found a larger audience yet. Ms. Summers goes on to state:
"But I believe now readers are looking for the fantasy (ie a strong male who’s willing to take charge, protect what’s his, and isn’t ashamed to say so)."
When I read that statement, I didn't see the hero-centric aspect. I saw the damsel in distress scenario. (And this isn't a response to Ms. Summers directly; it's my reflection on the issue at large.) With such diversity in the romance community, is this fantasy really so prevalent? Did vampires etc., tap into the ultimate damsel in distress fantasy?
In response to the My Paranormal Malaise post at Dear Author, Lisa Paitz Spindler asked:
"Why is it the paranormal character is so often the hero and not the heroine?"
Yeah, what's up with that?
Are readers looking for *the* fantasy or *a* fantasy that takes them through a wonderful romance, regardless of who's in charge? In the future, technology can be the great equalizer. I'd have a difficult time buying a big bad Alpha male taking charge and doing all of the protecting when the heroine has access to all kinds of advanced weaponry, or engineering/robotic feats at her disposal.
As Lisa pointed out when she sent me AQ’s comment, many stories in science fiction romance don’t subscribe to the hero-as-protagonist mode. In SFR, a heroine is just as likely to be the protagonist, or at least share top billing. And she’s just as likely to be an admiral, scientist, or space pirate.
One thing I love about SFR is that I get more variety—both hero-centric and heroine-centric stories. We can't strictly associate SFR as replete with Alpha heroes or as being hero-centric, yet these very aspects are both an appeal and a bane. Many readers like variety, but publishers need high concept stories that are easily repackaged over and over again.
SFR is not so easily repackaged. I've been wondering if readers who love Alpha male heroes can enjoy SFR heroes, who more often than not tend to be "good guys." The genre offers heroes who are strong yet not dominating (e.g., Admiral Philip Guthrie from Linnea Sinclair’s HOPE’S FOLLY, March from Ann Aguirre’s GRIMSPACE, and General Thomas Wharington from Catherine Asaro’s ALPHA).
What do you think? Can SFR attract new readers with stories that involve non-Alpha heroes, and wherein the heroine is the true protagonist? Or are romance readers in general too addicted to a certain type of fantasy?
Joyfully yours,
Heather
Postus Scriptus: Thanks to Lisa Paitz Spindler & Alison for their contributions to this post.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Does Science Fiction Romance Need More Alpha Heroes?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
39 comments:
"(It is) the lack of abundant Alpha heroes in the genre that cause it to fly under the radar."
Too true.
To me there are two Alpha male types in SciFi which can attract new readers who want/need the Alpha male as the protagonist (whether the POV character or not)
First is the Cyborg style character with the incredible powers. The second is the telepathic character with the incredible bed technique. Novels using these will possibly attract more readers to the genre who like the predictability.
The trick once readers are hooked on the genre and not put off by the fact that aliens are involved is to introduce them to the scifi books where the female is the protagonist and the male is supportive.
Linnea Sinclair's books have them all. She has cyborgs or part cyborgs Rhis Vanur (Finders Keepers) and Kel Paten (Games of Command) but she also has the normal human supportive male with the super powered heroine. Accidental Goddess is a great example.
Alison
{thoughtful look} Looking for the sheep dogs among the wolves?
Good luck.
{raise hands wardingly} Don't get me wrong. I love those characters so much, they're usually my favorites. However, they've been around at least since medieval times, and most seem to be relatively obscure. Readers who are interested in less forceful males really need to search them out. {lop-sided smile}
I, for one, would be delighted if that changed. {SMILE}
Anne Elizabeth Baldwin
The romance genre usually results in a clash of two alpha males. It's my opinion that Walter Scott wrote the first of what we would recognize as Romances. In Ivanhoe, he has two alpha males clashing over the "Jewess", Rebecca. But I really don't think of the Knight of Ivanhoe as being an alpha male. At the beginning of the novel he's in disguise, which isn't exactly an alpha male action.
Brian certainly was an alpha male. He never would have disguised himself, unless it was to steal a woman. Ivanhoe -- whose name was Wilfred, for heaven's sake -- was forced to become an alpha male in order to take Brian on. And I think that's what made the novel so interesting.
Personally, I think bringing in Romance readers to science fiction romance is a lost cause. If they're like my sisters and mother, they don't want a hint of anything "speculative". Swords are ok, but only in a historical romance. And even then, they're suspect.
A better approach might be to make science fiction romance more palatable to those who devour urban fantasies. But I think urban fantasies are popular exactly because of that fantastical element, which you really can't bring into science fiction unless you call it "psionics" or use aliens with powers. Personally, I find psionics interesting, but you won't attract any "hard science fiction" readers with it.
Science fiction romance will need to find its own angle to make it succeed. It needs to come up with something as tantalizing as vampires and werewolves and fey, like a psionic alien, the fey as progenitors of the human race--stuff like that.
Such a hero would certainly be more interesting to me than a studly vampire.
If SFRs become replete with the standard romance alpha males, I'll probably quit reading SFRs. What I can tolerate in a historical I cannot tolerate in a contemp, an urban fantasy or an SFR. I ESPECIALLY don't enjoy future-set books in which the worldbuilding has seemingly been warped so as to provide the most alpha-male-centric, sexually tittillating, lopsided culture possible.
No, no, no! Bring on the Betas! Variety, please. Mr. Sulu, Geordi LeForge, AND Captain Kirk. C'mon, we love 'em all!
Every time, someone asks the "why don't you read SFR?" question on the reader lists I'm on, the overwhelming answer is readers don't like the technology and other planets.
Leisure has most of its SFR success with historicals set in space where the alpha pirate captain changes his ship for a space ship.
Single title SFR is most successful when the action is on contemporary Earth like Sue Grant's novels.
All the above have alpha males as do the more science fictiony writers in this genre.
Even the historicals these days have a stronger female to fight along side the alpha male, and the vamp novels have strong females.
In other words, it IS the technology, not the lack of alpha males.
I've never really been a fan of the Alpha male and it's one of the reasons I stopped reading romance for years. When I finally did come back to romance, I sought out stories where the heroine held her own and while the hero might come to her rescue, she could also come to his, be it SFR, historical or paranormal.
I agree with the others who say bringing Alpha males into SFR would ruin the genre for me. I want to read about an h/h combination who can work together to solve the problem and foil the villain and not some Alpha guy who has to come to the heroine's rescue every time you turn around.
@Alison I would love to read about more cyborg heroes. I agree that Linnea's Alpha heroes strike a nice balance. I also thought Katherine Allred's hero Thor from CLOSE ENCOUNTERS had Alpha traits without being obnoxious.
Looking for the sheep dogs among the wolves?
Oh, Anne, you know it! Lol! I like Alpha males on occasion, but I want them well rounded. Another factor that came to mind is that usually I gravitate toward stories where the danger arises from the antagonist/external plot rather than the bad-boy hero.
A better approach might be to make science fiction romance more palatable
I believe there's a wealth of stories to be told that take place in contemporary or near future times. Regarding the lost cause issue, aren't there readers who wouldn't touch paranormal when the market was in hibernation? But infuse it with rehabilitated vampires & Alpha male wonders--and voila!
I hope SFR doesn't become so predictable, but sometimes you just can't avoid lightening in a bottle.
alpha-male-centric, sexually tittillating, lopsided culture possible.
Writer and Cat, exactly. #Worldbuildingfail.
Welcome back, Kimber An! Variety rocks. But when there are limited slots for print books, to me that makes a case for going digital. Then readers have more choices.
@ Marilynn To echo my statement above, might quite a few of these readers be the same ones who would have been aversive to horror elements before paranormal romance became popular?
Now, it may be that authors have yet to find the best fit for SFR and new readers. Who knows what that will be. Steampunk, maybe?
But what I endeavored to point out is the close association of Alpha males and paranormal romance. Alpha males were popular in other subgenres prior to PNR's rise, so readers were primed for that extra flourish.
The science fictional elements are a factor, no doubt, but given the stronghold Alpha males have in romance makes me wonder if the issue goes deeper than individual subgenre tropes.
h/h combination
Susan, thanks for sharing. I prefer the combinations, too, because it means they are working as a team. With Alpha heroes it seems so very one sided a lot of the time.
"Every time, someone asks the "why don't you read SFR?" question on the reader lists I'm on, the overwhelming answer is readers don't like the technology and other planets."
I agree with Marilynn's comment. It is a lag over from the fact that for many people their first view of science fiction was "hard" science fiction, where the world building was the core reason for writing the book.
Most genre readers want to be taken out of their everyday world or at least see their everyday world in a new light.
They don't want to have to spend a lot of time understanding the world building behind the character arcs being developed. This is what makes scifi romance so difficult for many readers.
A long history of "rules" laid down from the past in books dealing with mythical creatures such as werewolves, vampires, elves, witches allow a lot of paranormal world building to be assumed. This then allows authors to explore variants of these assumptions.
SciFi Fan Fiction such as Star Trek and Star Wars spin offs also allow for a minimum of background world building.
Totally original scifi has to spend more time creating this background and even in "soft" scifi this can detract from the readers main interest, namely the development of relationship between the characters.
This will always be the case
Hence the development of some scenarios which don't need such detailed world building eg cyborgs, telepaths can give some familiarity and hence soften the "alienness" for many would be scifi Romance readers.
When readers can appreciate the incredible scope a SciFi world has for eliminating current real world racial and social stereotypes and allowing alternative ways to showcase the main themes which are at the heart of any HEA Romance genre writing, they may overcome these prejudices.
Think of books with these recognisable alpha males as being the entry portal for attracting more readers to the sub genre. Once interested and less put off by the different worlds, the more adventurous will appreciate the huge variations on themes that can then be explored.
A more thorough understanding of the fact that there is "soft" scifi and "hard" sci fi would also help.
{chuckle} I've loved that analogy ever since I ran into it in a Darkover Special-Fans short story. The story pointed out that there are sheep, and there are wolves, but there are also sheep dogs, who aren't so meek they're herdable, but aren't mean or nasty, either. As far as I'm concerned, the sheep dogs are the most interesting of the three. {SMILE}
Sheep dogs have always been around, from Caradoc of King Arthur's court and Ogier the Dane of Charlemange's court, to Kawelo, sometime chief of Kaua'i and Issunboshi of Japan. To mention four of my favorites from legend. {wink, SMILE}
As to those who say "no, it's really the technology that put off readers," my training in Library Science says you're both right and wrong. For any given book or group of books, there are many reasons why it appeals to certain readers, and many reasons why it doesn't appeal to other readers. {pause} You may be right that that's a very important reason for many people. However, it's not the only reason. There are others; people are too variable to all have the same reason. The trick is to identify the reasons, and figure out which of those reasons could be addressed without losing to much of the current readership. We'll never appeal to the folks who think all fiction is a waste of time. We won't appeal to the folks who won't look twice at anything that wasn't written by a Great Master of Literature. We'll probably never appeal to the folks who don't like their love stories watered down with action, either. (At least I hope we won't, because I'm one of those people who needs more than just a love story to hold my attention for the length of a novel. {lop-sided smile}) But there are other ways to broaden the appeal that will work, yet won't throw us off. Any of those ways should translate into more books we like being easier to find than they are now. At least they should if both we and the new readers who'd like them can find them. {SMILE}
Anne Elizabeth Baldwin
“A more thorough understanding of the fact that there is "soft" scifi and "hard" sci fi would also help.”
Meh. I don’t believe there is such a thing as hard or soft or medium-rare science fiction. Just as I don’t agree with folks who get upset or feel the need to correct me when I say “scifi” (instead of the long form, or whatever else that sounds more legitimate and less “hifi” pop culture to them). But that’s a whole other conversation :)
To me, I think it’s a perception thing. As Anne said about people being different and impossible to put in tagged boxes (she didn’t say that, but that’s what I got from it...Anne, correct me if I’m wrong). For example, a LOT of folks think girls aren’t into science and technology. So maybe these same folks will maintain girls/women aren’t much into SF because of the science/tech angle. I disagree. In fact, if I disagreed any harder my head would explode.
Seriously, how many high tech companies now bite their thumbs because they didn’t think about gals when they came up with their products? And I’m not thinking simply adding pink skins to their e-devices. I mean serious, targeted female-centric research.
Ahh, those alpha heroes. Man, I don’t who first came up with this term, but I’d like a word with them. Can you imagine a species where those types would be the alphas?! That species wouldn’t last long. Diving headlong into trouble, manhandling the females, acting like bulls on speed. Mffft! That’s not “alpha” behavior. I’m not sure *what* it is!
Both Linnea’s and Susan’s work rock for very different reasons, to very different people. I don’t think one is more popular than the other because of where the stories happen. They write great stories. Simple as that. And readers recognize that.
I would not change a thing in the publishing world. Right now, with digital publishing, I can buy a sexy werewolf historical, a western contemporary, a forbidden Romeo/Juliet SF love story, or a tentacle-of-lurrrve tale set in Edo-era Japan. All within a few minutes. All from my chair at home. How cool is that?! Sure, I wish I could have even MORE choice within the SFR category, but hell, there are good books out there. And smart readers.
Have you noticed how they tend to hang out here, too? Heather, dude, that’s one fun ride this Galaxy Express!
Perhaps the equality of the protagonists IS the reason for SFR's niche? I admit coming to SFR via SF and frankly, find most Romances hard to read because the Alpha Males are basically all the same to me. I tend to see many of them as jerks. Yes, I tend to find most vampires boring too.
That doesn't mean I've never found Romance I like, I have.
But I've always, always wanted SF that didn't skim over the romantic elements and in which I could feel like the hero via the heroine.
My new favorite series stars a male protag, not truly Alpha since he's physically deformed, but the First two books, the ones that hooked me on the series and were the romantic ones starred his mother.
My gut feeling is that the diversity of hero types and the fact that SFRs feature many female protagonists is exactly why the genre started to begin with.
Maybe I'm wrong. All I know is that I've been in science fiction TV fandom for decades and probably 80% of the stories written by ordinary fans ADD romance to the SF shows--telling me that all those people wish there was more romance in their SF. And many of the stories star women who are secondary characters.
I understand the desire to increase readership, but if it ain't broke why fix it?
I like the diversity in heroes/heroines. That is exactly what I was looking for and could only find in fanfiction for so long.
I say just write good books, diverse books, talk them up all over and more readers will find them without purposely trying to change.
I agree about the sfrs with alpha males and less tech being a way of drawing in the readers who don't like tech.
I like the diversity in SFR and wish there were MORE tech in novels.
Heroes I like are like The Doctor, Jack Harkness, Gary Hobson, Kirk, Aral Vorkosigan, John Sheppard, or Paul Atreides from Dune. They're strong but with softer sides.
I agree with M.A. and would like to know the title of the book series with the deformed hero and his mom.
I like to read, and write, stories with protagonists who have some disability, deformity, or other thing which the majority considers a weakness. In real life, we all have weaknesses and I've always admired people who grew above and beyond their weaknesses in order to accomplish their goals. I think this is one reason I liked Branden Kel-Paten in Linnea's GAMES OF COMMAND book. He was horribly self-conscious about being part machine, but it's what made him human enough so that when the love of a good woman came along he became more than he ever dreamed.
"80% of the stories written by ordinary fans ADD romance to SF schows"
That was a great big "bing-bing" moment for me. Thank you, M.A., for sharing this. They DO add the romance, don't they! So folsk want the tech *and* the romance.
I wonder how my upcoming futuristic novella will be viewed. My heroine has no real accomplishments or special abilities, she's been warehoused in a harem since her teens, so she is similar to a historical /traditional woman.
The cyborg Hero briefly regains his humanity until a failsafe in his system shuts him down...He has Alpha moments and moments of helplessness.
When I subbed it I considered that my lack of a kick ass warrior woman heroine might hinder it. It did get a rejection that mentioned characterization. Hmm.
Perhaps it is a throw back to the futuristic/historical type romance? Though it wasn't what I consciously tried to create.
Bet you M.A.'s favorite series is Bujold's Miles Vorkosigan. ;) I really adore his parents Aral and Cordelia and would love another couple books about them. Actually what I REALLY want Bujold to write is a book featuring Miles' cousin Ivan. Talk about your non-alpha hero! But he's just so much fun! :)
You just inspired me for a post about paranormal heroes! Loved this article, thanks for sharing Heather!
My word is nooki (e) haha. Nice.
I tend to think it's the tech more than the characters, too. Although, I will conceed that it could be the way the characters are marketed. Case in point.
On a percentage basis of the entire genre, my impression of current romance novels is that the heroes are primarily the protagonists while the heroines are the primary point of view character (or narrator) and that if the hero has a point of view that it’s been heavily filtered through a feminine narrator to fulfill the female fantasy aspect Candy mentioned above.
It's interesting that you bring this up, Heather, because there was a thread over on the AAR forums just last week about first person POV and someone make the comment regarding how in detective fiction many times the sidekick is the narrator observing the detective solve the crime. Which helps to keep the reader in the dark about all the clues in mysteries or mystery-type plots but when we apply that to how the pov works in a romance novel--well, the ramifications are interesting, aren't they?
What I'm not sure we're taking into account is when the narrator, whatever pov is used, actually is the active protagonist in the story, whatever genre we're talking about. Consider Linnea Sinclair's books. I don't believe it would make any difference whether her heroes were considered "alpha" or not because her heroines would still be in charge of their own story, if you get what I mean. They don't play second fiddle to anyone but that also doesn't mean that the hero automatically is a lesser man in any way. He simply is who he is, too.
As a reader, the problem I've always had with the use of alpha a descriptive term within the romance community has more to do with the way it original came into play as a way to describe the jerk type heroes. We've tried to "evolve" it from that but I'm not sure we can. There's always going to be a certain degree of association with that male/female dominant/submissive vibe going on. I'm a lot more comfortable with just describing the full personality of the protagonists as they are in the story whether male or female. Try it sometimes and you might be surprised at the freedom it brings because when characters are viewed without regard to "alpha-ness" suddenly they can be seen as the cyborg with a heart, the vampire with a conscience, the intelligent werewolf or even a warlord with a scientific interest on the side in a medieval. And on and on.
We've all seen and read them, but have we seen them described that way all the time? Here's where we get back to selling those characters, not to the average reader but to the average publisher who's convinced about what the average reader wants. Linnea's books have caught on for a reason, though, so maybe there's a some doubt as to what the average reader likes, hmmm?
I once saw a cartoon of a bunch of cave men, throwing spears at a saber tooth tiger that has already mauled several. One of them is saying to another, “I can’t imagine how stupid the beta males must be feeling, left behind with the women.”
This encapsulates the fact that alpha males are all about each other. Beta males are more likely to care for the women around them. I personally like "snacho" men -- more on this here:
Snachismo, or: What Do Women Want?
http://www.starshipnivan.com/blog/?p=129
Also pertinent to this discussion is the fact that there are no biological alpha males in humans or their closest relatives, chimpanzees and bonobos. All three species have fluid and dynamic gender interactions -- the only odd thing about humans is that male alliances tend to be long and stable and that the parallel female power structures have been suppressed in many cultures. You can read more about this issue in Sarah Blaffer Hrdy's three fascinating books.
Human alpha malehood is entirely cultural, made possible by the hoarding of resources and social stratification of sedentary non-nomadic societies. Women may or may not always be attracted to "safe but bland" (or "bland because safe") men, but when they can choose freely -- or even in defiance of mores or other pressures -- they most often choose rogues, rebels and outsiders, not domineering alphas.
That's exatly it, Athena! Domineering and assholeness as SO often associated to alpha status in romance novels. And it burns. My. Toast.
I find we've been fed the stew "Alphas Must Be Domineering Borderline Brutal Assholes" in order to be alpha/strong males. And I say bullshit (sorry, Heather, I'm using bad language on your blog). *wink*
The beta-male thing reminded me of author Christopher Moore in... I think it was "A Dirty Job". The hero is definitely not "alpha" material and makes the argument that while the big strong men went hunting, the weaker males stayed behind and enjoyed the ladies. Which made me go "HA!"
This is an incredibly stimulating conversation, y'all. Keep it coming!
Oh, this is funny. It reminds me of my very own Beta male. My husband said when he was a kid the other boys teased him for hanging out with the girls on the playground. He thought the other boys were idiots. While they were out trying to get the girls to notice how manly they were, he was the one who actually got all the action!
I am loving this discussion. So many great insights. A cold is fogging my brain something fierce right now, but I hope to join in later. Now, I must crash (into bed).
I don't sit down to write and say, Oh, now I'm going to create an alpha male or a beta male or an alpha female. I sit down to write because the character has come into my head with all his or her fears and foibles, joys and jitters. I don't label my characters. I find it supremely amusing when I read others have in reviews and blogs. "Oh, Linnea did this or that or meant this or that."
I'm more likely to go, "Wow, cool. Had no clue I did that."
As many of you know, Philip Guthrie showed up in the middle of GABRIEL'S GHOST without warning. I HAD NO CLUE he existed. Chaz, sly cat, never told me. He grew during the story, fighting every whim I had to make him into Mr. (Stereotypical) Nasty.
He showed up again in SHADES OF DARK, revealing more of what made him tick, but perversely because he had lost all that he'd valued. And he was a minor character in SHADES. So what he was in GABRIEL'S changed in SHADES--logically so, but changed. FOLLY was the book he demanded and I complied.
I have no idea if he's Beta or Alpha or I'll have fries with that. He's Philip.
I know archetypes and labeling can be useful writing tools. They tend to hamper me more than help, which is probably why I'm not a Vogler fan (but my crit partner is, so go figure). It WORKS for HER, all those labels. It confuzzles me and I lose the essence of the character which is always very fluid.
I think if the romance genre has been damned for being formulaic, it's because of those kinds of "must have alpha hero" belief systems.
Susan Grant did a great workshop with Cindy Dees (at Nationa a few years back, I think) where she addressed the fact that alpha HEROINES were now becoming formulaic and trite.
Food for thought. ~Linnea
Me, I want to see the Epsilon males. Where are the Epsilon males?! Always Alpha, that damned letter. It's a case of discrimination against the other Greek letters. It's lettrism!
I think characters should feel like real people (good or bad). And real people don't come with labels and pre-determined sets of behaviours. And it's not just romance, although it does seem as if there's a lot of that in this genre (the labels). When I head people talk about characters and discuss a story, and they call the main male protagonist "the alpha"...it makes my inner Chihuahua want to gnaw her paw off.
Perhaps the equality of the protagonists IS the reason for SFR's niche
Good point. Which leads me to ask, will it stay a niche because of the equality angle? Are certain romance traditions so entrenched that they will shape stories for years to come? Not just in SFR but in other romance subgenres as well. Dear Author has been on a "Save the Contemporary" campaign--does that subgenre need more Alpha heroes to increase sales, too? I sure hope not, but authors have to make a living.
Here's where we get back to selling those characters,
I was perusing some titles at an epublisher recently, and was struck by how frequently the phrase "Alpha" appeared as a selling point. I'm guessing it's being used as shorthand to alert readers who like these heroes, but I do wonder if it puts stories with other types of heroes at a disadvantage, marketing wise.
to how the pov works in a romance novel
Interesting observation. Catherine Asaro's ALPHA is told entirely from the POV of the hero, but the story is clearly more about the heroine and her character arc. I'd venture to say it was a reversal of the hero-centric story as told through the eyes of the heroine. I loved it, I think it's an example of great SFR, but I can also see how the rules that are bent/broken might shake things up too much for many readers. I'd love to be proven wrong, heh heh.
Athena, thanks for that insight. Fascinating.
Domineering and assholeness as SO often associated to alpha status
Is this what happens when the demand for such heroes reaches epic proportions? I also wonder if it's a matter of execution, because as you and BevBB pointed out, Alpha heroes are not always jerks. And even if an author intends for the domineering, assholeness traits to be part of the hero's character arc, to me it seems to go too far at times.
Kimber An, lol!
I don't sit down to write and say, Oh, now I'm going to create an alpha male or a beta male or an alpha female.
Does any author, except at the behest of a publisher/agent? When an author's preference for certain types of characters matches what's selling, cool. Just don't tell me if a book was written because that's what's hot. I prefer not to know, because otherwise I start wondering about what I missed out on had the author been able to follow her Muse.
I've read comments by editors who say they like Alpha heroes, which is fine, but it's difficult to know if that's solely because of the editor's personal preference or because the market is so strong for them. So as an author, do you develop an Alpha hero to increase your chances with such an editor, or write what you want? Challenging decision, I'm sure.
Heather, I think a corrollary to this would be "sex sells." IMHO "sex sells" is just the flipside of "alpha." It's an ingredient many houses believe is a necessary part of a romance, and many readers say they demand in a romance novel. But I don't know if readers want "sex sells" truly or they want it because marketing has convinced them that's what they want. I'll go out on a limb and ask you to check and see if that epublisher with Alpha all over the back copy also has highly "sex sells" plots in the books.
I get annoyed when Bantam "sexes up" my back cover copy. Most times they'll tone it down when I ask. Some times they don't. They keep wanting to call my books "sexy." I read that as "mindless." Annoys the crap out of me.
But to me, it's hand in hand with Alpha. I'm just not sure how much we really want of that, and how much we buy into it because we're told this is the new black. ~Linnea
Linnea said- "I don't sit down to write and say, Oh, now I'm going to create an alpha male or a beta male or an alpha female. I sit down to write because the character has come into my head with all his or her fears and foibles, joys and jitters. I don't label my characters. I find it supremely amusing when I read others have in reviews and blogs. "Oh, Linnea did this or that or meant this or that."'
And that's why we love you, Linnea!
;)
I get so supremely annoyed when I'm told I have to have this kind of character for that kind of story and the Heroine can't be so bold and brash even though a male character in her same position would be applauded for it, and so on and so forth. As a writer, I just want to let the story out. As a reader, I just want to take the story in. I want variety, adventure, and lots of tension. I DON'T like oatmeal for breakfast every dang morning, okay? Once a week, maybe.
I can't claim to be an authority on the matter, but I have the distinct impression that concepts like alpha males work better in literature analysis than in writing. {Smile}
I don't have anything approaching a scientific sample size, but I've seen folks try to deliberately use such archetypes in their writing. In the cases I remember, it turned the characters rather more shallow and wooden than usual for that person. {lop-sided smile}
Anne Elizabeth Baldwin
But I don't know if readers want "sex sells" truly
Good point. I guess the "sex sells" angle contributes to "Alpha hero" being a marketing hook.
I like to think readers want all variety of heat levels, but right now those who have always wished for lots of sizzle (but couldn't get it previously) are running with it. Power to them. Seems to me, though, that publishers know they can only take the "sex sells" so far, otherwise they'd be refusing any submission that didn't drip with sex scenes.
@Anne I love me organically grown characters!
Sorry I was in transit and missed the boat on this one. I'm catching up. Like Linnea, I don't set out to fit a character into a label.
Soren's not alpha, he's not beta, he's not any one archetype. He's a person.
In the review from Dear Author, they mentioned that they think the sequel will fall into a more traditional "alpha male" leading the story format, but they're going to be surprised.
My second hero is not alpha, not beta, not anything but a person. (A highly manipulative and scheming person, but a person all the same.)
I guess I like gentlemen. That's my problem with snarling alphas. They are rarely gentlemen, and more often cavemen.
I do think that romance readers want the characters to be larger than life, and the heroes to be powerful. With paranormals, most of these men have enormous powers over the universe and have to use those powers to save the world, girl.
I think with SFR, as technology takes the place of magic, the hero's power takes a backseat to the power of the technology. Even if the hero is tapping into some ubercool sentient computer system to stop the core of the planet from self destructing, he isn't perceived as having the same power as the vampire who stops the destruction of the earth with the power of his mind.
The technology saves the planet, not the hero.
Where am I going with this? I don't know, I'm tired.
I think to be interesting, all our characters have to be flawed, in some sense tragic (so we can heal them) and heroic in their core.
@Jess Excellent point about the power of technology. Sounds like what you're saying is that your SFR stories are delivering well rounded heroes, not formulas. If you ask me, technology in SFR makes heroes and heroines powerful. It's just a different kind of power from the woo-woo type.
Just found an interesting post entitled "Men: Alpha vs. Sadistic Jerk" over @ http://unusualhistoricals.blogspot.com/2009/08/men-alpha-vs-sadistic-jerk.html
Not exactly sure where it fits in this discussion but it caught my eye and she does reference pirates. Okay, they're not space pirates, but they are pirates. ;)
Thanks for the link, BevBB! I enjoyed the article. The author spoke about what sounds like an SF/space opera remake of the film CAPTAIN BLOOD. I am so there.
I think it's good to remember that Alpha does not always equal being a jerk. Or over the top--I appreciated how Isabel Roman noted that part of the problem with Alpha heroes may be in how they're written. Sometimes they're too much of a jerk; other times they are like Superman--too powerful and practically flawless.
As one commenter observed: "I realise the fantasy aspects are upfront in a lot of books, but personally a men who could do everything wouldn't seem much like he needed me at all!"
Thanks for the link, BevBB! I enjoyed the article. The author spoke about what sounds like an SF/space opera remake of the film CAPTAIN BLOOD. I am so there.
Oh, it did? Wow, I must've zoned out after seeing the mention of alphas because I missed that part. Have to go back and reread it. ;)
And do not get me started on Superman. I'm a big Superman fan but I could write pages and pages on his flaws - and probably should just for the heck of it someday. :D Particularly the way the various incarnations portray him. The thing is, right there with him and Batman you have too iconic "alphas" who are as different as night and day in the way they approach everything. Quite literally. Intentionally so. I mean that's the way they were created and that's the way they've evolved.
But seriously, is alpha something most people think when they think Clark Kent? See what I mean?
I think one of the biggest flaws about Superman is that he's so...super. What can a writer do with that? I enjoyed SMALLVILLE a lot, especially the first couple of seasons, but the most interesting thing about it was Lex Luthor and some of the other supporting characters.
With Batman, there's more to work with. More character development.
The "alpha" obsession is odd, consider various Heyer characters such as Freddy can't-remember-his-last-name in book-I-can't-remember-the-name-of (the plot involves a rich miser uncle of multiple nephews, who announces that he's going to make whichever nephew his ward decides to marry, his heir). Freddy isn't the brightest bulb in his world, he's not stupid, but he's no genius, he's not a brilliant fellow, but he is sensible, reliable, considerate, etc. He is the male lead of the book, especially as compared to the fellow that the heroine originally is in love with.
Then there's the fellow that Sophia Stanton-Lacy's cousin Cecelia is supposed to get engaged to in The Grand Sophy. He had the misfortune to come down with some childhood disease at a critical point in the courtship rites, and so Cecelia became enamored of a Poet instead--someone full of romantic gestures and attitudes, but lacking in any sort of reasonable depth. See Sophy stick her hand in and straighten that mess out... (the Poet is NOT good husband material, at all!)
The substantially Bad Boy Heyer male leads share the characteristics that they change over the course of the book they are the male lead in-- Avon in These Old Shades, starts out as a depraved decadent sort with the title of the first chapter of the book something like, "His Grave of Avon Buys a Soul." His reason for buying Leon is revenge upon someone who had him horsewhipped for having long before had the temerity to want to marry the fellow's sister, Leon and the Comte de St-Vire both share the same shade of red hair, and Avon is scheming. The heroine of the book is young, and a mix of naivetie, cynicism, and desire-for-experience/adventure with whimsy and a degree of zest in life. She comes into Avon's life and he changes because of her, into someone more caring and much less selfish.
Devil's Cub has Avon's disreputable heir as male lead. He's at least as selfish at the start of the book as his father was at the start of These Old Shades, but nowhere near as crafty, subtle, or concerned with appearance (in the form of social reputation). Mary Challoner, the female lead, is a quite different person than the female lead in These Old Shades--she's a few years old, much more self-possessed, and has a younger sister she's trying to prevent from "ruining herself" --her younger sister having attracted Avon's son and thinking she's going to be able to trap him into marriage. He changes over the course of the book because he start viewing Mary's opinion of him as important--changing to act in ways which she sees as the way a responsible worthwhile person should act--not only to her, but to others, also.
I think that that is a key issue about contemporary jackass male leads versus the Heyer bad boy leads, the Heyer bad boys fell into two categories, those who take up dubiou at best professions for survival--Jack in (bah, another book I can't remember the title of at the moment! He's a highwayman at the start of the book, and the female lead shoots him when he holds up the coach she's in, if I recall correctly), or those like Avon and his son who change into more socially responsible and much better husband material sorts over the course of the book. They aren't of the nature of "putty in hand of female lead, asshole to everyone else" that so many current male leads are.
Heyer's an influence on a number of SF/F writers, including Lois McMaster Bujold, Sharon Lee and Steve Miller, Larry Niven, and Alexei Panshin who developed writer's block nd stopped writing fiction long ago. (some of the influence on Lee & Miller is obvious, one of their characters is a regular at M/a/n/t/o/n/'s an establishment where people go to engage in shooting, and an expert marksman.
Regarding SF/F male leads, Catherine Asaro pulled an interesting reversal with e.g. The Moon's Shadow, with a very young idealistic Jabriol and the woman he chooses as consort being VERY much older and steeped in plotting (and quite decadent in many ways) than he. For that matter, Sauscony in Primary Inversion is very much older than the male lead; she's a veteran warbird pilot and warrior, he's young and spent his life mostly secluded and sheltered and locked up.
C.J. Cherryh's series which started with Gate of Ivrel, is another very much older female protagonist, with a very much younger male lead--he, though, is angry and rebellious, while she is on a dire mission of which she seems to be the last surviving member.
Cherryh also has Legacy of Chanur, in which young wants-to-be-helpful Hallan Meras, whose driving force in his life is being a spacer--in a species and culture where the womenfolk are the ones who boldly go out into the universe and the male are considered dangerous and unstable and unsuitable for interspecies contact, at the start of the book is sitting locked up in the station detainment center at Meetpoint (a station run by a xenophobic species, the stsho) and abandoned there by the ship and crew he had been part of. The Captain of the Chanur ship Legacy of Chanur finds herself having Hallan Meras' "attractive" person dumped onto her ship to deal with (along with a stsho Excellency in a fiendishly convoluted contract) when she does NOT want a male of her own species on her ship, particularly not a good-looking trying-to-be-helpful-eager-to-be-a-full-crewmember one--and especially not with the rest of the crew finding him attractive, too!
There are male leads who are jackass alphas in straight SF, particularly the abominable novels by Edmund Cooper of the 1960s and 1970s in which the start of the books, the world had become run by women, and the alpha male lead, was the man through whom proper male supremacy was going to be regained...
Hmmm, just curious and I should know this because Teach Me Tonight just did a post on Heyer, but when was she actively writing? Cause I'm thinking about the way the movies of the early part of the 20th century--like during the 30s and 40s in particular-had such, um, fiesty and independent female leads and then we had the 60s & 70s...
See, this is one of the things that echoes from Superman. The original Lois Lane was created as an amalgram of some of the top movie characters of the 30s. She was not a push-over by any means, I don't care how many times she had to be rescued by the big guy. She was still out there getting the story, while essentially he was flying around saving the "world" whatever that happened to mean. But in the seventies? Oh, my god. She was almost unrecognizable. It wasn't until almost the 1990s when she got back to those strong roots.
So, we talk about the changes the decades have wraught in the roles of both males and females in all kinds of popular "fiction" we have to keep in mind how things have echoed back and forth. What was the mood of the country and the world at that time? So, it doesn't matter when they were set--when did Heyer write her books?
Post a Comment