…these are not. This picture is of some of the Prince Regent’s friends, several of whom are dukes and proof that “Duke=Hawt” is an invention of Romancelandia.
I’m thinking about this in the wake of all the good discussions we’ve had related to whether historical romance, especially Regency historical romance, is dead or deserves to be. If you missed any of this conversation, here are the links:
“Sick of the Regency?” by Diane
“In the Regency but not wholly of the Regency” by Susanna
My question is: do we need more variety in our heroes?
We’ve discussed dukes and their prevalence in the genre before: “Duking it Out” (by me) and more recently, a couple of posts from Carolyn: “The Case Against Dukes” and In Defense of Dukes”.
The hero who’s a wealthy and powerful lord is an immensely popular trope in historical romance, with dukes being the epitome of that trope. A while ago, I even heard of an editor telling an author her hero must be a duke. It makes me think of Georgette Heyer’s Frederica, in which the heroine’s little brother decides it’s OK for her to marry the hero, a marquess, even if he is a “second best nobleman.” Sheesh.
Anyway, at its weakest, this trope is about the fantasy of being cared for and living a life of leisure. But don’t we want heroines who are strong women, useful rather than merely decorative?
One of Carolyn’s posts on dukes provided a good answer:
The hero is powerful in all the things that will offer a heroine safety during a time when women were dependent on men for their safety. He’s Prince Charming and his heroine is going to democratize him (emphasis mine).
The ending in which she can be a partner to him and help him use all that wealth and power wisely makes this trope satisfying, for me at least. Bring on the dukes, just write them well. But I’m very happy when writers tackle stories about different heroes, such as younger sons who have a different set of challenges.
Then there are heroes not born into the aristocracy. Rare but they exist. I know at least some of us find that type attractive.
I’m especially intrigued by Janet’s recent excerpt and by Susanna’s description of her upcoming release A Dream Defiant. Unless I’ve missed something (admittedly I haven’t read everything out there) writing black heroes is ground-breaking for the genre.
More variety in heroes ought to strengthen the genre. Not that I think anyone should force herself to write something just to be different, just that she shouldn’t feel constrained by the popular tropes if she wants to do something different.
The publishing environment supports greater variety now than ever, although that comes with other issues. The stories you want to read may be out there, but finding them can still be a challenge. Certainly we will talk about some of them here.
What do you think? Are there types of “risky” heroes would you like to see more of?
I don’t know much about publishing, but I’ve seen a flood of regency/historical romance from a buyer’s perspective, despite all the attention on contemporary/erotic romance…give me a historical anyday…contemporary is EVERYWHERE, historical romance is escapism for me…they don’t make enough Masterpiece Classics to satisfy my need for them.
Now in response to Elena’s post….
I must admit that I’ve been rather limiting in cutting my swath through the massive genre that is romance. I like regencies, so that’s what I read. I don’t often venture off into contemporary, erotic, western, or paranormal. That being said, I do like my hero’s to be Dukes, Marquess, Viscounts, Earls, even “younger sons” etc… That is something I’m not willing to let go of… However, I have recently discovered more beta heroes and I think the Beta-hero dukes(etc) can be vastly interesting in a sea of predictable alpha-hero dukes. So my vote is for more risky beta heroes…Peter Parker/Clark Kent types who seem nerdy and week, but underneath, are men of steel and ingenuity. Bravo to the Risky Ladies who write them! They are complex and everything in their world does not go their way, they often have personal issues or external issues and have to solve problems in ways that don’t necessarily require money or muscles. They make me care about them. (Just read a certain non-risky and I could not believe the Alpha-ness of the hero…I truly could not care less about him.)
Lesley, that’s a really good insight regarding the Alpha/Beta heroes. I’ve read some Alphas who weren’t just born leaders, they were abusive.
I think the Alpha vs Beta definition is too limiting though. It seems to equate Alpha with strong and Beta with weak. There are so many more archetypes. I like heroes who can take whatever role is needed. That’s another kind of strength: to step up and lead if necessary or work as part of a team/partnership if that suits the situation better. The latter gives him a chance to show respect for the heroine’s intelligence and abilities. In that case, though, the conflict has to come from a different source than the heroine teaching the arrogant hero to respect her.
Unless I’ve missed something (admittedly I haven’t read everything out there) writing black heroes is ground-breaking for the genre.
Beverly Jenkins, who has been writing African-American historical romance since the mid 1990s! In her wake, a handful of other AA historicals have been published–“Sunshine and Shadows” & “Moonrise” by Roberta Gayle, “Shadows on the Bayou” and “Murmur of Rain” by Patricia Vaughn, “Passion’s Furies” by Altonya Washington, “Nowhere to Run” by Gay G. Gunn, “The Black Pearl” by Francine Craft–to name a few sitting on my shelves.
Now, if you mean black heroes are rare in books marketed to mainstream romance readers, instead of the “African-American” romance niche, then you are correct. Just like the only historical romances with Asian heroes marketed to mainstream readers have consistently been written by just two authors: Jade Lee and Jeannie Lin (“Gold Mountain” by Sharon Cullars has a Chinese hero and a black heroine).
I’m featuring a post written by the new editorial director at Entangled Scandalous, and hopefully her call for multicultural and non-aristocratic protagonists bears fruit in quality submissions!
Yes, I did mean books marketed to mainstream romance readers and possibly with interracial couples.
I specifically asked about heroes because I think there tends to be more variety in heroines in terms of social status. But as for race…I’ve read a few historical romances where the heroine was part-something, but fewer with the heroes. Of course, when writing Regency romance set in England there’s nothing wrong with going with what was most common. It’s just nice to have the door open for the exceptions, too.
That is very interesting news about Entangled.
I would love to see more non artistocratic heroes in Regency, some of the rich industrialists sons marrying non wealthy aristocratic brides abd vice versa. None of Jane Austen’s heroes have a title, although many of them come from wealthy families. I’d love to see a situation such as occured with Jane Austen’s brother where he was adopted by a childless couple. I do remember an Elizabeth Mansfield novel that I loved where the heroine fell in love with her male secretary.