Action Heroine Fans discussion

Should we encourage group members to bring to the group's attention books with action heroines that may be labeled, either primarily, or as a secondary attribute, as 'romance'? If yes, is there anything beyond "I know it when I see it" to include / exclude a book if the romantic content outweighs the action content?

There is a thread in this group about including young heroines from young adult (YA) books in the "action heroine" class. A common example is the book The Hunger Games. I agree that YA books should be considered by group members. Obviously, each of us chooses what to read and we do not yet have 'group reads', so there should be little controversy. Or is there?

There are very clear (to me) action heroines in paranormal books. Patricia Briggs' Mercedes Thompson series stars a female shape-shifter who is all about action. The first book in the series, Moon Called, has more than 5000 GR reviews and 4.18 stars. During the series she is romanced by, and eventually marries, an Alpha werewolf. Should the books drop out of the 'action heroine' category if romance becomes active?

If not, what about active women who are clearly using weapons, acting with thought, and aren't above kicking ass, who appear in novels that are tagged 'romance' immediately, among other tags?

Fellow moderator Danielle responded to my quoting her review of the book Warrior's Woman as follows:

Jon wrote: "While looking at a friend's bookshelf [Danielle], I saw this book: Warrior's Woman (Ly-San-Ter, #1) by Johanna Lindsey. A quick click to GR found a review by my fellow moderato..."

Danielle responded: It's more of a romance with a butt-kicking heroine. I don't think it would appeal to readers who aren't in it for the romance. And it's definitely more of a bodice ripper with some un-PC elements, since the hero is a bit of a Stone Age type.

I'm willing to admit (shush) having read books tagged romance when what I see and read is a story about a woman with agency; the "romance" may add to the story but for me it is secondary. Even "erotic romances" when the content features kick-ass heroine.

Comments?

Hey ye all! Long time no hear from me *sorry!* but back on now.

So, I wrote a series of espionage thrillers that have kick-ass action heroines in them...but there's also a romance in the backdrop, so they're technically romantic suspense/thrillers. A while ago when the first book came out with a publisher, it was featured on here.

Personally, I would definitely read an action heroine book with or without romance, but I'm curious what others will say...

(oh, and btw, if you want to check out my books, here they are

I don't see why we shouldn't include romance novels. That means that a chunk of our group members are going to be left out if that's the case. :)

There are plenty of romance novels that include lots of action and action heroines. Action and romantic suspense are a huge sub-genre in romance. And a lot of non-romance books have romantic elements besides. The question about Warrior's Woman is a very specific situation and that particular book isn't what I would consider heavy on the action,

Of course, it's very fair to clarify why we add a book to the list, which I always do when I add them here.

Since I'm not the author (or connected to her in anyway), it is fair I think for me to mention that group author Zee's first book in a series, Walking The Edge is currently free on Kindle. I've just downloaded it.

I appreciate the feedback about action heroines + romance, but hope to hear from more group members.

Short answer is hellz yeah there's action heroines in romance! I nominate , the first book in Ann Aguirre's sci-fi romance Sirantha Jax series. I've only read the first two books, but own the rest of the series and can't wait to finish it.

Akaria: I'd like to include kick-ass heroines who happen to live in a romance book. However, I'm a newbie (about 9 months in the group) so I don't want to get afoul of the "spirit" of the group.

Grimspace looks good; the kindle price doesn't. It is within a few pennies of the paperback price. I'll put it on my watch list. Thanks for the recommendation.

Jon wrote, "...we do not yet have 'group reads....'"

Actually, Jon, we've done an annual common read every year for three years, starting in 2013, though the most recent one was done before you joined us. You can check out those discussion threads, and the one where we kick around ideas about what to read, in the "Common reads" folder, but it currently doesn't show when you first bring up the group page; you have to click on "More discussions." The next common read is scheduled for May 2016.

Zee, it's great to hear from you again! I've had Walking the Edge on my to-read shelf ever since Danielle gave it such a good review when it was first published, and I'm glad to have the chance to try it out for free before buying a copy. Like Jon, I've just downloaded it to my Kindle app, though heaven only knows when I'll get to it (I don't read electronically as regularly as I do in print, and there are three short e-stories ahead of it in the queue). But whenever I finish it, I'll review it; and if I like it, I promise that I'll buy a print copy!

Personally, I definitely think there are action heroines in romance novels (bounty huntress Cody Jamison in Lady Deception and Isabella Goodrich in All the Tea in China come to mind). Books in the romance genre may have less or more fighting action, depending on the writer; but this is true of other genres (SF, supernatural, mysteries, historical fiction, etc.) as well. I'd be strongly against treating action heroines as second class if they happen to appear in a romance book, and against discouraging any of their fans from mentioning them! If individual members don't care for that genre, that's fine; not every member would necessarily like every book that gets mentioned or shelved here, and it's not necessary for them to. What we have is an inclusive group open to everyone with a basic common interest, where we can all feel free to post about and discuss (and maybe sometimes disagree over) our reactions to any book that features a heroine who engages in challenging physical action. (At least, that's my take on the question!)

Thanks Jon and Werner!

Werner, it's awesome to be back. I missed the group and the interactions, but hopefully, I'm here to stay now that I have a more reliable Internet connection.

Oh, and Walking The Edge, and the whole trilogy actually, is not yet out in print but I'm hoping this can happen sometime this year. I've moved to being indie now so things have more leeway around them to allow me options :)

Zee wrote: "Thanks Jon and Werner!

Werner, it's awesome to be back. I missed the group and the interactions, but hopefully, I'm here to stay now that I have a more reliable Internet connection.

Oh, and Walki..."

That's great news, Zee!

Werner wrote: "Zee wrote: "Thanks Jon and Werner!

Werner, it's awesome to be back. I missed the group and the interactions, but hopefully, I'm here to stay now that I have a more reliable Internet connection.

O..."

:)

Personally, in my Jane Gould novels, I've taken the line that a young, attractive and fun-loving woman such as Jane is going to attract male attention whatever happens. Particularly when she is working undercover, spying on a commercial organisation that Space Fleet suspects is a front for a terrorist group. She is trying to be "The new girl in the office" and considers going out with one of the young engineers to be part of her cover. She's not immune to romantic attraction, but the degree to which she is focussed on the operation leaves little room for anything else in her life.

(Spoiler)

The problem is that the romance becomes too real, and he follows her onto another planet, where the terrorist group is active, with tragic consequences.

Now she has to come to terms with what has happened, and go on with her career. At the moment she's trying to keep romance at arm's length, but is the man who can reach her waiting in the wings?

‘Luke,’ she said, ‘there's one thing I've got to show you, right now.’ She held out her left hand.’
‘A wedding ring? You're married?’
‘If only.’ For a moment there was intense, bottomless pain in her eyes. ‘It's an Arcturian widow's ring. I don't want to load my problems on you, but it's easier if you know. Alan came fifty light years to find me and ask me to marry him. He turned up in the middle of a very messy operation. There was a sniper looking for me, but in the dark he hit Alan instead. I killed the sniper, and tried to patch Alan up, but he died in my arms twenty-five minutes later.’
‘So--What about the ring?’
‘Arcturian tradition. One black band means I'm widowed and looking for a new partner, two I might be interested if the right person comes along.’
‘But that's got three.’
‘I don’t think I have to tell you, do I?’
‘Three bands. Does it mean you’re telling me to keep my distance?’
‘Yes, I’m sorry but it does. We can eat together, work together and be friends, but that's as far as it goes. I don't want what happened to Alan to happen to anyone else, ever.’

I totally agree about Mercy as an 'action heroine' although I don't think that series is classified as a 'romance' or paranormal romance (PNR) but as Urban Fantasy. Patricia Briggs' Alpha and Omega is definitely PNR, but I like it for 'action heroine' because Anna surprises by how tough she can be.

In a similar vein, I'm a total fan of the Hollows series by . Rachel Morgan is definitely and action heroine and the romance is secondary.

I'm having trouble coming up with action heroines/romance that aren't Scifi or UF, but that may simply be my reading habits. ;D

Yes: Liaison between coalition of world and new world Sadie is an action heroine in what is described as an "Alien Romance."

Annie Nicholas' Boarded: Alien Romance

I am thinking about strong females in romance novels. I have to agree that there is a lot in the paranormal books, even murder or mystery with romance, but then if you look at Jane Austen. pure romance Lizzy was pretty tough and out spoken for her day, in Pride and Prejudice . Some of the classics such as Little Women still had that one rebellious character, that did not follow the normal constructions of the day.

Pamela wrote: "I am thinking about strong females in romance novels. I have to agree that there is a lot in the paranormal books, even murder or mystery with romance, but then if you look at Jane Austen. pure rom..."

If you are going there, you could add in my personal favorite - Jane Eyre. She was smart, resilient and held to strong moral compass. She risked her life to flee from a situation that would have compromised her morals.

But truly, I think it's a stretch. An action hero is all about defeating the challenge including overcoming physical threats and often defying death.

True, E.G.; an action heroine is one whose heroic qualities are manifested at least partly in challenging physical action, most often (though not always) in combat situations. These ladies are a special sub-set in the strong female category, with a certain appeal and mystique that's peculiarly theirs.

Your comment and Pamela's, though, do bring out the very real fact that a lady doesn't have to have physical prowess in order to be strong inside, possessed of a tough moral fiber and resilience, the courage of her convictions, and a deep capacity for enduring hardship and putting herself and her wants on the line for others --all of which are heroic qualities that command admiration. Totally agree about Lizzie Bennett, Jo March, and Jane Eyre! Literature (and real life) abounds with heroines like this. (One of my personal favorites is Jamie in A Walk to Remember.)

Pamela writes: if you look at Jane Austen. pure romance Lizzy was pretty tough and out spoken for her day, in Pride and Prejudice .

I have just finished, as part of a BOTM for another group, P & P. This is the first time I've ever read it.

Elizabeth is a strong woman with a backbone, but she is not an action heroine in my opinion. The most she does in terms of action is stand up to Lady Catherine when the Lady comes to Elizabeth. Be clear: Elizabeth does not seek out the Lady. And then when Darcy comes to the house with Mr. Bingley, but remains silent, Elizabeth does not break the silence. In modern terms, Elizabeth lacks agency.

Elizabeth does not make things happen. Instead, she observes
more astutely than others (other women) and doesn't follow the herd (as much) as other women. She has her pride and her prejudices. As does Mr. Darcy. If Mr. Darcy hadn't responded to her rejection of his first proposal by taking action (delivering the letter to Elizabeth while she was out trying to avoid him) then they never would have gotten back together.

True, Jon, Lizzie isn't an action heroine in our group's sense of the word. She becomes one in Pride and Prejudice and Zombies (though I haven't read that book, and don't have any plans to!); but I suspect that particular treatment would leave Miss Austen scratching her head bemusedly. :-)

Of course, not all women with "agency," as you and I use the term, are action heroines as such either. Lady Catherine has agency (though she uses it meanly and selfishly) because she's a widow with a ton of money; but I imagine her response to a physical challenge would be to cower and screech for her male servants to come and rescue her.

Lizzie's society doesn't accord her much agency, in the modern sense. She's legally under the authority of her father, and expects to graduate from that to the authority of her husband. She accepts the convention (which still holds sway with a huge percentage of the population, both male and female), that women don't speak first in matters of the heart. And she doesn't seek out and confront Lady Catherine, partly because she has no reason to, and partly because she has too much class to go around picking fights. (But as you noted, when confrontation comes to her, she stands up to it --though with impeccable politeness.)

A Regency heroine like Madeleine E. Robins' Sarah Tolerance (though that's a mystery series, not a romance) can exhibit much more agency than Lizzie does because of the great difference in their social situations; she doesn't have the same constraints, because she's a single woman disowned by (most of) her family and with her own way to make in the world, and being deemed a "fallen woman" anyway, she doesn't have any artificial respectability to lose. (Such respect as she gets --from people with discerning heads on their shoulders-- she has to earn from the content of her character, not from her social status.) The differences between her and Lizzie tell us as much about their society as it does about them as persons. As persons, if they ever met and got genuinely acquainted over a few cups of tea, I think they'd probably like each other. (Maybe that can be an idea for a future book in the series.... :-) )

Despite finding Pride and Prejudice less than I'd expected, the experience has lead me to start reading Persuasion and to download Jane Eyre. I've never heard of Madeleine Robins or the Sarah Tolerance, so I will have a bit of research to do. Thanks, Werner.

Jon wrote: "Despite finding Pride and Prejudice less than I'd expected, the experience has lead me to start reading Persuasion and to download Jane Eyre. I've never heard of Madeleine Robins or the Sarah Toler..."

P&P is not my favorite. Sense and Sensibility is much better. Jane Eyre rocks.

Actually, Jon, you do have the first Sarah Tolerance novel, Point of Honour, on your to-read shelf (I double-checked to make sure). I recalled that you'd added it a while back, when I mentioned her over on the "Tough female detectives" thread. (But when one has as many "to-read books" as you and I do, it's easy to forget one of them!)

I'm one of the world's few male Janeites, having discovered Austen in high school --though I've still only read three of her six completed novels. Those happen to be the three mentioned above, though! P & P and S & S are the only two I've reviewed so far, but I gave them both five stars. And I agree that Jane Eyre (both the book and the title character!) rocks; but of course it's written by Charlotte Bronte, not by Austen.

Jane Eyre is my all time favorite heroine.

Werner wrote: "True, E.G.; an action heroine is one whose heroic qualities are manifested at least partly in challenging physical action, most often (though not always) in combat situations. These ladies are a sp..."

This is further complicated in SF where psi abilities or skill with a blaster can substitute for physical strength. The demand for internal strength, the ability to keep going against the odds, is the same, but an ounce of pressure on the trigger contact is where it all ends:

The door opened, and Duncan Kelso stepped into the room, right hand in a pocket. Jane lined him up in the sights. ‘You are under arrest for kidnapping and attempted murder. Take that hand out of your pocket. Then turn around slowly, keeping your hands where I can see them.’ She flicked the safety ring. The emitter clicked twice as it set itself live.
Kelso's face curled into a sneer as he turned. ‘Little girl, you couldn't do it, you couldn't pull that trigger. Now, you're going to put that toy down, and I'm going to walk out of here.’ His right hand was suddenly holding a revolver.
Jane snapped into the routine. ‘This is your only warning under the rules of engagement, stop what you're doing and surrender, or you may be stopped by deadly force!’
‘Silly little girl, you couldn't-’ he began to raise the revolver to aim at her.
There was a blinding blue flash and a stinging crack from Jane's energy weapon.
Duncan Kelso began to say, ‘What...?’ but he was dead before he finished falling.
‘Oh yes I bloody well could,’ she said, turning the safety ring back to OFF. ‘If it's him or me, then I'm sorry, it's him.’

R. wrote: "The demand for internal strength, the ability to keep going against the odds, is the same...."

Yes, R., that's absolutely true; any heroine who's engaging in combat with all of its risks is an action heroine, even if the outcome is settled with a projectile weapon rather than a test of muscle strength. (Few life or death combat situations are resolved by arm wrestling!) Even when a lady has to combat an adversary with her bare hands, she very often gains the victory by superior skill and speed (indeed, martial arts are really all about these), rather than superior upper body strength. Cynthia Rothrock in her prime was far from being very brawny, but I wouldn't have dared to take her on in a fight.

Werner wrote: "she very often gains the victory by superior skill and speed"

And, in Jane's case, by very dirty fighting when it comes down to hand-to-hand. The one character who tries it with her is still in hospital at the end of the book.

This is one of the scenes that led to my invention of Jane. It's Wendy Padbury playing Zoe in Dr. Who:

http://45.media.tumblr.com/0f05cea3a5...

Werner wrote: "Actually, Jon, you do have the first Sarah Tolerance novel, Point of Honour, on your to-read shelf (I double-checked to make sure). I recalled that you'd added it a while back, when I..."

Point of Honor looks really good. Added to my TBR.

I gave it five stars, E.G. Hope you enjoy it as much as I did!

Werner, are you making fun of my senior moments now? Can I sic Jane Eyre on you?

Jon wrote: "Werner, are you making fun of my senior moments now? Can I sic Jane Eyre on you?"

Nah, Jon, if I made fun of yours, I'd have to make fun of my own. (But if you really want to sic a fictional heroine on someone, I'd say that the protagonist of Jane Slayre: The Literary Classic with a Blood-Sucking Twist would probably be more formidable. :-) )

Werner wrote: "Jon wrote: "the protagonist of Jane Slayre: The Literary Classic with a Blood-Sucking Twist would probably be more formidable..."

Jane Slayre? Really? That's just wrong.

E.G., I've come to feel, too, that the trend of taking classics and mashing them up with supernatural or weird fiction premises is "just wrong" in some important ways. (If I wrote a general fiction book, and some later writer re-worked it with themes I never intended, I suspect I'd feel more offended than flattered!) And I've never read any of those books myself. But I couldn't resist having a little fun with Jon's Jane Eyre comment. :-)

I've got nothing against well done fan fiction (as long as it doesn't violate copyright). I though The Seven Precent Solution was a great 'addition' to the Holmes lexicon. Sherlock and Watson as Vampire Slayers? Not so much.

Messing with Jane Eyre ? Now we're moving into what I consider sacrilege. And since the story is long out of copyright - there's no remedy.

There is of course

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6...

Yes, E.G., I like well-done fan fiction and pastiches, too (those are in a bit different category from things like the Jane Slayre book). I have The Seven-Per-Cent Solution in one of my numerous physical TBR piles (I hope I get to it one of these years!).

The word "zombie" makes me flip channels to a new bookcase with the shortest pause I can manage. Just my prejudice, which I'm going to put at the bottom of my to do list of bad habits to work on.

Why I'm willing to read about were-creatures and vampires is irrational, but there it is. My best guess is that the first examples of those creatures in books came without their being named in the titles and by the time I got to them (and realized I was reading something "I didn't like"), the quality of the writing had enchanted (in the magically sense) me. I harbor the belief, whether or not true, that Patricia Briggs' Moon Called, may have been an early one.

I'll admit to prejudices myself. I won't read werewolf, vampire or zombie books. My interest in those things in nil. I suppose I am simply too rooted in reality to forgo the 'leap of disbelief' such things take...yet I will inexplicably accept the world of Katniss or Mad Max as perfectly reasonable.

Different strokes?

R. wrote: "There is of course

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6..."

Lovely. That's right up there with 'Abe Lincoln Vampire Slayer' - a movie every bit as bad as I expected it to be.

Jon wrote: "The word "zombie" makes me flip channels to a new bookcase with the shortest pause I can manage. Just my prejudice, which I'm going to put at the bottom of my to do list of bad habits to work on.

..."

Christopher Lee totally sucked me into all things vampire (as cheesy as some of those movies are.) Patricia Briggs is totally responsible for werewolves.

Zombies? Big no to that. *Night of the Living Dead gave me nightmares for months*

David wrote: "I'll admit to prejudices myself. I won't read werewolf, vampire or zombie books. My interest in those things in nil. I suppose I am simply too rooted in reality to forgo the 'leap of disbelief' suc..."

Oddly, I find Mercy Thompson more believable than Katniss - so yes to 'different strokes'.

*Warning - Rant ahead: Hunger games pushes a serious button for me. My novels must carry 'adult content' warnings because of consensual acts between adults. Children murdering each other is considered 'family fare.' End rant zone*

Follow up rant If a child kills a child in the US, they get juvenile detention, usually only until 18.

If a 19 year-old has consensual sex with a 16 year old, he or she (the 19 year old) gets a life sentence with the words "sex offender" always on her/his public record. If she gets pregnant ...

Family values at work.

E.G., The Hunger Games was the first book this group picked as a common read, back in 2013. That discussion thread is here: www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1152143-... , and may (or may not) be of interest. I was initially dubious about reading it for the same reason you mentioned --that kind of story-line is NOT appealing! But I ultimately gave both it and Catching Fire five stars (though I'm one of many fans who felt Collins flubbed up badly in the third book) --and my views about the immorality of minors being forced to murder each other didn't change. For whatever it's worth, my review of the first book is here: www.goodreads.com/review/show/297275418 .

For me, the fiction of the supernatural is an enormous draw, and has been ever since I was a kid (and if it happens to have a kick-butt heroine, so much the better!). But I don't like the whole "zombie apocalypse" trope in any respect, and avoid it like the plague (which isn't a bad analogy, IMO!). I like the rare literary use of actual zombie folklore in fiction (Voodoo Moon is one example, featuring TV's Charmed Ones, who are kick-butt supernatural heroines if any gals ever were!); but the bizarre "zombie apocalypse" trend has little or no relation to that tradition.

Werner wrote: "E.G., The Hunger Games was the first book this group picked as a common read, back in 2013. That discussion thread is here: www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1152143-...-..."

I don't question the quality of Ms. Collins' writing - only the oddity of US society that considers compelled violence acceptable 'family' content and not consensual sex.

*I've enjoyed the movies - or at least the first two. I didn't think the third one was quite as good.*

In terms of the actual 'romance' in this topic - I have rather liked the role reversal where Katniss is the 'alpha hero' and 'Peta' is the one needing rescue.

Yes, it is nice to experience fiction or drama where the girl gets to rescue the "guy in distress." It reflects the reality that in actual life, jeopardies and the ability to rescue aren't gender-specific.

E.G. wrote: In terms of the actual 'romance' in this topic - I have rather liked the role reversal where Katniss is the 'alpha hero' and 'Peta' is the one needing rescue.

How true, E.G. While there have been action heroines around for a long time, in very few stories is the role reversal so clear. Particularly for younger heroines.

Werner wrote: "Yes, it is nice to experience fiction or drama where the girl gets to rescue the "guy in distress." It reflects the reality that in actual life, jeopardies and the ability to rescue aren't gender-s..."

This is true, but I've tried to take it one stage further by writing a female slant on the emotional response to what has happened. I have a scene in the second Jane novel where Jane and Ian are facing a gunman. While Ian is deciding what to do she's fired and the opponent is dead.

However there is some history between Jane and the gunman, andshe then feels an emotional backlash because she's killed someone she knew (and disliked) as a person.

Romantic love plays an important role in human life for most people; and since all fiction imitates real life to some degree, it's natural that this will play an important part in some fictional tales, including those that have heroines who function in action roles. How central a role it plays, and what proportionate importance it has in relation to action scenes, will vary depending on the kind of story the author wants to tell in that particular work. But a romantic component (even if it's central to the story) for me personally doesn't diminish the appeal of an action-oriented heroine.

Short stories, of course, aren't "novels," as referenced in the topic title above; but the principle involved is the same. In my "girls with guns" short fiction, the focus is on the heroines in situations that call for using a gun in some way (not always lethally). But in some storylines, a romantic element will play an important role, because it fits naturally into the tale, and I'm writing about each heroine as a fully-developed person with the same range of feelings and interests.as any woman in her situation would have --not just confining the story to a narrative of strictly physical action.