Clean Romances discussion

Hello, Everyone

We are all familiar with heroes in romance novels who are very handsome, have bodies to die for, and rich. Now as a romance author, I admit that my heroes always fit this category; and while my heroines are successful women, they are not size 2's and model material. (I feel we average girls need true love, too)

I know most of you will say it's the inside that counts; but my question is: Would you find the hero attractive in a romance novel if he was not very good looking? Could you get into it if he was overweight? Bald? Lived from paycheck to paycheck? Old enough to be your father with wrinkles? (there's nothing wrong with these traits. I'm just asking if you would find it appealing)

Or, like me, do you already have someone in mind when you read, so it really doesn't matter how he's described in the story?

In my trilogy, the male protagonist is good looking, I'll give you that. But I'm quite capable of reading and loving a story where he is not. One of my favourite books of all time is Jane Eyre, and Jane makes it abundantly clear that Mr Rochester is not good looking. He is certainly charismatic and attractive in that way, but he's not great to look at.

A hero who is not handsome is actually more appealing to me. I am always suspicious of really good-looking men; they have too many enticements to stray . . .

I can respect that. And that's why I love writing fantasies. My heroes may be handsome on the outside, but their inner beauty is twice as powerful and that's what I make sure is more prominent, along with the fact that he's very romantic and passionate. And of course, in a perfect world of fantasy, he would never stray.

Oh, the beauty of creative writing:)

Hehe!

I like to imagine gorgeous heroes, because I find that the drop dead gorgeous males in real life seem to always be anything but heroes. So in my imagination they have it all, for without the character traits that make a hero, there really isn't a hero! :)

Exactly, Melody. Those kind of heroes are fantasy perfect. Wouldn't it be nice if the drop dead gorgeous males in real life were just as drop dead gorgeous inside? OH-MY!

The romantic heroes I love most are Rochester, Freddy from Cotillion and Lord Peter Wimsey and none of them are traditionally good looking. You have to admire writing that allows you to fall in love with a man's character, sense of humour, intelligence etc. mind you, all three of them are rich and upper class so it's not like they don't have any traditional romantic hero material in them :)

Your comment, Emily, suggests an interesting challenge to me: would it be possible to write a man’s character, sense of humor, intelligence, etc. in such a beguiling way that the reader bought into wanting the hero and heroine to get together even if he wasn’t rich and/or upper-class?

I suppose Jane Austen tried something of the kind with Edmund Bertram and Edward Ferrars—with perhaps not the best results. It raises the question: does the romance lie in the heroine getting a life she fantasizes about or in the heroine getting to spend her days with a person she deeply esteems, even if that comes with struggles or even hardship?

For me, I’d say, the fantasy life is a self-centered wish, and the “esteem track” is the path to true lasting happiness. Maybe that’s why, like you, I prefer the less handsome (and in the case of Freddy and Wimsey) less dashing heroes.

This is a very interesting conversation. I can say that in my actual life, I have loved deeply those who were not loved by everybody because of their looks. I think that if a man has a good heart & is kind; who's intelligence is high, he is enough to be a hero. Heroes are those who can put others above themselves & always look to help somebody else. While I like the classically handsome hero as much as the next girl, I think that a handsome heart is much more important.

I may not understand what is meant by "the fantasy life is a self-centered wish", but I feel that while we all place more importance on the beauty of a person on the inside, we are all, also, attracted to a certain type on the outside. That was the meaning of my question: Would you still read the novel if he was outside your attraction zone?

For instance, I'm 5'9" and I prefer men my height or shorter. I'm not attracted to tall men with big muscles; I'm also not attracted to overweight men. Now some women aren't attracted to short, lean men, but they are to tall, overweight, maybe even toothless:) So while he has to be more beautiful on the inside than out, there are still certain features that attract me. When I write my romances, I leave most of the description up to the readers; they know what kind of man they're attracted to; I dwell more on what type of person they are inside--how they treat others, loyalty to the heroine, etc..

Not all of us, especially me, are likely to find our dream man outside of a romance novel. So reading our fantasies brings them to life, wouldn't you say?

Abigail wrote: "Your comment, Emily, suggests an interesting challenge to me: would it be possible to write a man’s character, sense of humor, intelligence, etc. in such a beguiling way that the reader bought into..."

I think there are any number of books where the protagonists are just normal people. The Anne of Green Gables series springs to mind. Gilbert Blythe, while good looking, was neither rich nor upper class. I have another author friend named Carol Preston who has written romances based on her family history, and most of her ancestors were convicts or poor settlers in colonial Australia. I don't doubt there would be many similar books around.

Groovy wrote: "Would you still read the novel if he was outside your attraction zone?"

Actually, the heroes I mentioned that I loved (Rochester, Freddy, Lord Peter) are none of them at all the type (looks wise) that I would sketch as my ideal. I like tall men, with brown hair and blue eyes (I know, very specific, but I'm an idiot that way, bear with me) - Lord Peter Wimsey had fair hair, and is described as being rather slight. Rochester is not very tall and rather broad, and has a big forehead, if I remember correctly. Also outside of what I would usually find attractive.

Abigail wrote: "would it be possible to write a man’s character, sense of humor, intelligence, etc. in such a beguiling way that the reader bought into wanting the hero and heroine to get together even if he wasn’t rich and/or upper-class?"

To be honest, wealth and title have never been anything I particularly cared about (when I met my husband he was in debt, and I fell head over heels for him). I think, in fact, we need more heroes who are poor or working class. For one, it would be an interesting dramatic conflict, for another, since there are fewer of them around, this would give a writer more scope to write something new and exciting!

I always think that in the end it doesn't really matter so much what he looks like or what he does, the most important thing is that he has all the chemistry with the heroine.

It’s definitely an interesting question.

I don’t think I ever picture them in detail so unless an author kept making a point of saying they’re ugly or overweight, my impression of them would probably be formed by the way they act. In my opinion, what it really comes down to though is the writer’s ability to make them appealing, however they chose to style them… romance isn’t about looks.

Having said that, I think if you want escapist fantasy reading (which I do if I’m reading romance)… then my first instinct is to say yes I want them to be good looking, because it’s about an ideal and not expectations of reality… although of course it’s really only their love interest that needs to find them attractive.

As for rich… I think it only matters in historical novels, there’s nothing romantic about being a peasant, whereas two people struggling together to make their lives better in a modern setting (where it's actually possible) does hold a certain attraction.

@Emily… Freddy from Cotillion is a great example of someone who is not the typical hero being the male lead, in fact by the end of it I’d say that the reader is encouraged to like all the other potential romantic leads (despite their obvious flaws) better than Jack, who is every school girl’s idea of a hero. An example of brilliant writing.

@Abigail – I’m not sure I totally agree with the idea that Edmund Bertram and Edward Ferrars are an attempt to write personality over looks and station and that it makes them less appealing if that’s what you meant? I actually have the impression of them both being reasonably good looking and at least well born if not entirely well off in their own rights… it’s their personalities I find less appealing (though both have very good qualities when push comes to shove). However I agree that the two people involved need to esteem each other to make a lasting relationship work.

@Groovy – “Would you still read the novel if he was outside your attraction zone?” … another good question… I think I would. I read a lot of fantasy and they have all sorts of love interests, and as I said above I don’t need to be attracted to the guy to find it romantic… I’m more likely to be put off by certain behaviour than by looks.

One thing that might affect my choice to buy it over another one though would be that if the author has made a point of saying this person is unattractive, are they going to spend half the book agonising over it? I wouldn’t necessarily find that appealing as a storyline.

In Juliet's Journey, which I'm about to publish on Amazon - next week in fact - my hero is forty two and he has grey hair. So not your average Mr SixPack. I was told by a best selling romance author that the hero must ALWAYS be dark-haired and around thirty. Apparently even blond is out of the question!
Anyway it's Juliet's story so it's up to her to find him attractive.

LOL I think your author friend is taking it too far!

For forty two and with grey hair I'd probably be picturing Mark Harmon (though he's actually in his 60's) or Sean Connery... both very attractive long past 30.

Exactly!

Thank you, Louise Sparrow, for your detailed response. I appreciate everyone's interaction here.

Back when romance novels were new on into the eighties, the hero's had to be sexually appealing and rich! But times have changed and I see that expectations about romance heroes have changed, too.

All of the answers here helps me to think about how I'll view and create future heroes. Will they still be fine? Oh yeah. There may be a small, apparent reality here and there, but still attractive enough to catch the heroine's attention. Will they be filthy rich? From the answers I've been getting, maybe not always. It seems that's not as important anymore.

The characters living in my head are what they are. So far, the men all like being rich:)

Honestly I don't care what the hero looks like. The only thing I actually care about is if he's physically fit or not. But even then it's not a huge deal. If the author can spin the tale in a way that you fall in love with the male lead then that's all that matters. I've read books where the male lead was 40 with gray hair and the female was 20 and I loved the story. And of course there is an entire group of people (myself included) who loves a man who's scarred. So for me it really doesn't matter what the hero looks like or even if he's rich.

Caitlin, is that mentally scarred or physically? I know of readers that love novels about a wounded hero who learns and overcomes his scars by the end of the story.

Either physical or emotional scars work for me. Normally if there are physical scars there are often emotional ones to go with it. Also I find if the male lead is damaged in some way but is wealthy it is even more believable that the lead female can nab him. Especially if the female wasn't perfect herself like most of us are. It allows for me to connect with the story easier.

Not really. I like to have a general description: Is he tall or short? Facial hair or no? Maybe hair color. Beyond that, the way the hero acts and speaks tends to help develop the character in my mind's eye anyway.

As a somewhat infrequent romance reader, I've got to chip in with my two cents.

Groovy wrote: "That was the meaning of my question: Would you still read the novel if he was outside your attraction zone?"

I was actually forming a very different reply before I saw this comment. The fact is that for me, nearly every time I read a romance novel, the answer is yes. If you take a look at nearly any mainstream romance novel (as well as the erotica ones) that has a picture of a guy - usually shirtless - on the cover, you'll see they're all a certain type. Buff, ripped, all muscular-y and Greek god-like. (I know we're talking about clean books here, but the sole difference is that clean books don't usually have shirtless guys on the cover. They're usually described the same in the book.) Those guys? I'm not attracted to them. Guys that are so muscular and might even be considered a pretty-boy, don't do anything for me. Sure, I've read the books and sometimes even like the guys but…the guys I find most attractive in books are seldom the hero. I like the guys that might not be the best looking of the group, but more than makes up for it in personality. In truth, I've gotten very tired of seeing the same type of hero in romances. I'd love to get some guys that don't look like models as the hero!

I agree. Although it is fun sometimes to know that the hero is good looking, I personally fall for the geeky types. The ones that are cute in their own way, they do not need to be "hot" as some people say.

Which to me would fall in to the category of, "It really doesn't matter what he looks like, I already have a certain type in mind." Or "Good-looking model types don't turn me on. I'm more attractive to a certain type that does not fit the cover."

Like I mentioned, I do describe the hero in basic terms, but I leave most of it up to the reader. Do I put good-looking men on my covers? Uh--yeah. It draws attention good or negative. But my hope is the blurb will take over and interest the reader, then she'll realize that no matter what type she's attracted to, she likes the hero she just read about in my books--heroes that are good-looking (and I make no apologies for that) but are all different in ways that the reader will have her own idea of what he looks like. (I hope that makes sense:)

When I was a teenager (a million years ago), I read a romance that had a short, somewhat overweight, balding hero in it. It was a clean Harlequin; that's all I remember. I've forgotten the name of the author and the title, but that guy always stuck with me.

He gave me pause for thought. In the beginning I thought it was disappointing and wasn't going to be a good read because I just couldn't see what was so great about him. But by the end I was rooting for him because I loved his personality.

I think this is the reality of life. Most women aren't actually picky about the way their men look - but we are picky about who they are.

Good looks are a short cut in both life and books.

So many of today's readers are impatient with slow beginnings and slow building stories. They want to be hooked in the first sentence and don't want to wait it out to see if something gets good. Pretty much everyone I know gives up after the first chapter if they don't feel completely immersed by the end of it. "I just couldn't get into it," is what I'm always hearing.

It seems to me, and maybe I'm wrong here (and please correct me if I am - I want to be wrong in this case), it would be risky for an author of romance novels to have homely looking main characters.

An established romance author could do it. Another genre with heavy romance in it could do it (i.e. fantasy, sci fi, action, mystery, etc.) but plain romance with nothing else mixed in? I don't see readers having the patience for it.

It seems it would take the author time to show what is so appealing about these less than perfect main characters because they couldn't cheat and make them physically appealing.

The writer would have to take the time to develop the characters without relying on the plausibility that comes with beauty (and why is that?) and I'm not so sure today's readers would go for it unless there's lots of action going on or something else to hook them while the characters unfold.

Although, if you think about it, most of the classics we love have slow starts - deep books tend to have slow starts too - look at Chaim Potok.

Having said all that, that balding guy? He was one of my favorites.

Groovy wrote: "Which to me would fall in to the category of, "It really doesn't matter what he looks like, I already have a certain type in mind." Or "Good-looking model types don't turn me on. I'm more attractiv..."

So...Did I misunderstand what you're asking? Unless I'm mistaken (yet again) you're wondering if us readers would read a book even with a guy that isn't 'classically good looking'? If so, my answer is: the only thing I'd really have a problem with is if he's a slob. (But that might be more personality based, anyway.) A guy that's balding or overweight can still take good care of himself and look nice. (But I can't imagine any author would want to write a slob as the hero.)

My earlier answer still holds though, because those Greek god types ARE outside my attraction zone. (I know muscular guys on the cover sell. I don't expect any different, but…it's not always limited to the cover. I've not read many romance books where the heroine isn't marveling over the hero's muscles if she takes his arm or they dance or what-have-you.) And, I would like to see more types of heroes. If the book sounds good to me, I'd read it no matter what the hero looks like - and in fact, I'm probably more likely to give a book a go if the hero sounds different than what I usually come across. (This is both about looks AND personality.)

Great comment, Rebecca. I agree that most authors create good-looking main characters. But I think it varies. Beta heroes (the guy-next-door or nerdy types) are more likely than alpha heroes to be less than gorgeous. In my own books, I mix it up, with some hunks and some more ordinary guys.

No, Amy. There's no right or wrong answer. I understand exactly what you're saying. I'm getting from a lot of readers out there that the fantasy Adonis needs to share the spotlight with other types of heroes now-a-days. Times have changed, and I think that's good. I get a lot of responses like yours--to see different types of heroes.

I know what kind of person they are on the inside matters so much more than the out. That's why my question was specific only about the outside appearance. Because no romance novel is successful if the hero is a thoughtless, self-centered, s.o.b. on the inside, good-looking or not, right? We get enough of that in real life. I certainly wouldn't present that to my readers. All of my heroes are beautiful on the inside so that's why I only asked about the outward appearance.

I really do appreciate all of these responses. They help me to understand so much. That's why I'm going to continue to dwell less on the outside and more on the inner. I always say, "Readers have good imaginations, let them use it."

Thank-you, Amy:)

I am definitely attracted to personality before looks. I love strength of character, leadership, and humor. Then I notice twinkling eyes and a great smile or smirk.