![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
megwritesI was cruising the f-list and came across this short entry that ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
irysangel had in reference to this article here. The article in question was a writer of the paranormal romance genre, Alexis Morgan, describing how she creates heroes and heroines and the difference in the two when she creates them.
irysangel then posited that the difference between Paranormal Romance and Urban Fantasy was that one was the hero's story and the other was the heroine's story.
I am clearly far and away more a fan of Urban Fantasy than Paranormal Romance. Both genres have their good, bad, and uglies to be sure, but my tastes and sensibilities tend run to Urban Fantasy.
And I think the fact that Urban Fantasy is, generally, the heroine's story is part of that.
Before I continue, the usual warning: I do not know this author, nor do I make any claims to know her thought processes, her writing processes, her inner self or anything else. I speculate only to the words written and their meaning and nothing else. Nor do I mean any disrespect in what I say to this author, and I would like to extend the courtesy and respect and professionalism I'd extend to any fellow author.
Also, I haven't read the book in question (I actually might), so I make no statements on it, its quality, or anything like that.
That said:
What struck me most is that it is specifically stated: "I almost always see the hero much clearer than the heroine from the very beginning. It’s only once I have him firmly fixed in my mind that I can start figuring out who would be the perfect woman for him.
My one rule: she has to play to both his strengths and his weaknesses, maybe especially his weaknesses."
The last phrase in particular really whacked me upside the head.
The heroine has to PLAY to HIS strengths and HIS weaknesses. The heroine, the female, is created and designed to serve the hero. It's Adam's Rib all over again. The woman is created from the man, and is an accompanying harmony rather than a standalone song.
Which is why I think that I enjoy Urban Fantasy much, much more. The fact is, I grow very tired of stories, movies, etc which tend to make any and all female characters play second banana, whether they deserve to or not. I grow tired of movies and stories in which a woman with a fascinating tale is backgrounded to tell the same, bland male-centric story I've been hearing all my life.
The same is true of race, age, beauty. Characters that aren't good looking white guys tend to be relegated to singing in the chorus, despite the fact that their voices are just as beautiful and if you gave them a solo, they'd break your heart and make you beg for more.
It especially annoys me, particularly in movies, when the heroine is obviously only relevant as "the love interest". The creators can dress the character up and make her super strong, super fast, super smart - they can try to appease my feminist sensibilities all they like. I can still smell a rat.
The number of movies I could list, analyze, and shred to pieces for this is nearly infinite.
Which is why Urban Fantasy especially the kind I enjoy, staunchly makes it clear that this is the heroine's story and that the heroine is there to service no story but her own.
In fact, this goes beyond genre. Just about every single book I've really, really connected with has shared the trait of having women that aren't just strong - but has women that stand on their own in the structure and meta of the story. Women who could exist and support a story without anyone else around.
If I were to examine my own writing process in the same way Alexis Morgan has, I would have to say that I don't design characters around each other as rule. Whether romance gets involved or not.
For example, the novel I *just* finished has a tinge of romance between the hero and heroine of the story. And very consciously, my formula went like this.
Heroine has these traits, this personality. Hero has these other traits, this other personality. When they get together, what will make them come into conflict and what events would have to happen to get them out of conflict and into harmony. At no time do I say "oh, well, the hero likes the color blue, so maybe the heroine should too. They can bond over this."
In my formula I'd say, "Well, the hero likes the color blue - the heroine prefers red. If there were something that had both in it, they might decide they both like it. Or they might fight over which color is better until they both decide that they equally hate the color green."
These characters came to me separately and equally. I never once adjusted the heroine to make her fit in with the hero or vice versa. This is not to say that my formula is better than Ms. Morgan's. Ms. Morgan is, as you'll see, published. I am not. I'm not even close. So take that as you will.
Still, there is something that itches at me, when a female character is molded to suit the male character. I think perhaps because it touches a personal nerve in me, and that nerve is the one that knows that for eons and eons, women have been beaten and stoned and oppressed into conforming themselves to suit male tastes - to their detriment.
I think that's why the best stories are like the best songs. They manage to make every part interesting, beautiful, and important and meld those together. Instead of having someone singing lead with the girls in the back, looking pretty and not doing much more than adding the occasional "ooh".
irysangel had in reference to this article here. The article in question was a writer of the paranormal romance genre, Alexis Morgan, describing how she creates heroes and heroines and the difference in the two when she creates them. irysangel then posited that the difference between Paranormal Romance and Urban Fantasy was that one was the hero's story and the other was the heroine's story. I am clearly far and away more a fan of Urban Fantasy than Paranormal Romance. Both genres have their good, bad, and uglies to be sure, but my tastes and sensibilities tend run to Urban Fantasy.
And I think the fact that Urban Fantasy is, generally, the heroine's story is part of that.
Before I continue, the usual warning: I do not know this author, nor do I make any claims to know her thought processes, her writing processes, her inner self or anything else. I speculate only to the words written and their meaning and nothing else. Nor do I mean any disrespect in what I say to this author, and I would like to extend the courtesy and respect and professionalism I'd extend to any fellow author.
Also, I haven't read the book in question (I actually might), so I make no statements on it, its quality, or anything like that.
That said:
What struck me most is that it is specifically stated: "I almost always see the hero much clearer than the heroine from the very beginning. It’s only once I have him firmly fixed in my mind that I can start figuring out who would be the perfect woman for him.
My one rule: she has to play to both his strengths and his weaknesses, maybe especially his weaknesses."
The last phrase in particular really whacked me upside the head.
The heroine has to PLAY to HIS strengths and HIS weaknesses. The heroine, the female, is created and designed to serve the hero. It's Adam's Rib all over again. The woman is created from the man, and is an accompanying harmony rather than a standalone song.
Which is why I think that I enjoy Urban Fantasy much, much more. The fact is, I grow very tired of stories, movies, etc which tend to make any and all female characters play second banana, whether they deserve to or not. I grow tired of movies and stories in which a woman with a fascinating tale is backgrounded to tell the same, bland male-centric story I've been hearing all my life.
The same is true of race, age, beauty. Characters that aren't good looking white guys tend to be relegated to singing in the chorus, despite the fact that their voices are just as beautiful and if you gave them a solo, they'd break your heart and make you beg for more.
It especially annoys me, particularly in movies, when the heroine is obviously only relevant as "the love interest". The creators can dress the character up and make her super strong, super fast, super smart - they can try to appease my feminist sensibilities all they like. I can still smell a rat.
The number of movies I could list, analyze, and shred to pieces for this is nearly infinite.
Which is why Urban Fantasy especially the kind I enjoy, staunchly makes it clear that this is the heroine's story and that the heroine is there to service no story but her own.
In fact, this goes beyond genre. Just about every single book I've really, really connected with has shared the trait of having women that aren't just strong - but has women that stand on their own in the structure and meta of the story. Women who could exist and support a story without anyone else around.
If I were to examine my own writing process in the same way Alexis Morgan has, I would have to say that I don't design characters around each other as rule. Whether romance gets involved or not.
For example, the novel I *just* finished has a tinge of romance between the hero and heroine of the story. And very consciously, my formula went like this.
Heroine has these traits, this personality. Hero has these other traits, this other personality. When they get together, what will make them come into conflict and what events would have to happen to get them out of conflict and into harmony. At no time do I say "oh, well, the hero likes the color blue, so maybe the heroine should too. They can bond over this."
In my formula I'd say, "Well, the hero likes the color blue - the heroine prefers red. If there were something that had both in it, they might decide they both like it. Or they might fight over which color is better until they both decide that they equally hate the color green."
These characters came to me separately and equally. I never once adjusted the heroine to make her fit in with the hero or vice versa. This is not to say that my formula is better than Ms. Morgan's. Ms. Morgan is, as you'll see, published. I am not. I'm not even close. So take that as you will.
Still, there is something that itches at me, when a female character is molded to suit the male character. I think perhaps because it touches a personal nerve in me, and that nerve is the one that knows that for eons and eons, women have been beaten and stoned and oppressed into conforming themselves to suit male tastes - to their detriment.
I think that's why the best stories are like the best songs. They manage to make every part interesting, beautiful, and important and meld those together. Instead of having someone singing lead with the girls in the back, looking pretty and not doing much more than adding the occasional "ooh".
no subject
Date: 2007-08-20 08:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-08-21 12:52 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-08-21 12:05 pm (UTC)>It’s only once I have him firmly fixed in my mind that I can start figuring out who would be the perfect woman for him.
Then I dribbled through most of the next paragraph and wandered away. She may write perfectly good books, but someone whose main requirement for the female lead is "perfect woman for [the hero]" is not someone who's going to tell me anything about writing that I can use.
no subject
Date: 2007-08-21 01:39 pm (UTC)Ah. I held out 'til the next paragraph before the scales tipped. I guess I'm mellowing in my old age.
Still, it's perfectly understandable. And you're right about not getting any good advice. I didn't get anything directly from her telling me about her process that felt useful to me. And I don't know that this type of writer would ever be able to TELL me something that I'd take to heart. No insult to the writer, I just think we're coming from such different angles that it wouldn't be feasible.
But I always feel like examining other writers, even if they completely bore, disgust, anger, or confuse me is helpful. If for nothing else than to learn from somebody else's mistakes, or to really force yourself to justify why you do what you do.
no subject
Date: 2007-08-21 01:52 pm (UTC)I think this is true, and I do a fair bit of it. Just been seeing a little too much of this particular thing, lately.