Trouble With Heroes

I'm wrestling with a hero at the moment. "Half your luck," you say, and yes, he is tall, dark and gorgeous, but he's also fictional. But for a man who currently lives only in my imagination it's somewhat of an irony that he just will not behave. Characters — mainly heroes — nearly always give me a hard time.

Who is he? What's his problem?  

I can draw up a character outline — he's this kind of person, he's that, he has this backstory, he wants this but really he needs that, and his main problem is this, which is really causing him that. And it will all look fabulous —  in note form. And then I start writing and he shows up on the page and he's nothing like the man I planned, around whom the whole plot was supposed to revolve. So then I have to write on and find out who this irritating fellow is, and what his problem is! And he will only reveal things in his own good time. Which is one of the reasons pre-plotting rarely works for me.

But frustrating and inefficient as this might seem, I would rather wrestle with a difficult, slippery, recalcitrant hero than have an obedient chap who does exactly what I want him to. Why? Because the difficult ones are already three-dimensional, even if I can't see all those dimensions yet, and at some stage in the story they'll do something unexpected that will completely surprise me. And if a character surprises me, they'll certainly surprise the reader, and that's a good thing. 

An example of this was my hero for my first Berkley book (The Perfect Rake.) I'd planned the hero to be one of those classic alpha types, a dark and dangerous brooding rake. Instead onto the page strolled Gideon; flippant and funny, charming and completely out of my control. I wrestled with him for ages, trying to turn him back into the dark, angsty brooder. He utterly refused, so in the end I gave up and let him be who he was. He's still one of my most popular heroes. (And Berkley have just given him a new cover.)

Then there was Harry (in His Captive Lady), who was taciturn to the point of rudeness, communicating with a few mmmphs and the occasional grunt. What do you do with a hero like that?  He just would not speak. Stubborn. Worse, he was paired with a minor character, a charming Irishman who was in danger of out-heroing the hero. I was so worried readers wouldn't connect with Harry, but I couldn't make him any different — each time I tried, his dialogue just rang false. I had to be true to who Harry really was, show him deep but silent and let his actions speak for him. It worked. (You can read an except here and see how taciturn he is.) But silent or not, readers adored Harry. And I used Ethan, the charming Irishman, as the foil.

But then, because I knew readers would want Ethan's story, (as did I) I gave him a romance in a subplot that got so interesting and involved but irrelevant to the central story that it ended up being played out over two books. Trouble!

Minor characters give me trouble, too; feisty old ladies, a stray kid, the hero's friend, even a walk on and off character can spring up, wanting to dominate the story, trailing enticing shreds of intrigue wherever they go. But minor characters should only exist to serve the story, so no matter how interesting or engaging they are, I have to prune them back and squash them. Readers still write wanting their stories.

I'm learning that when a character gives me trouble, it's usually a good thing for the book, if not for my peace of mind. A tame character who does everything I want runs the danger of being bland, ordinary, predictable. Which is death to fiction.

It's a big turn-off for me as a reader, the too convenient character, or the puppet character, who will act as the plot requires it, or the kind who turns out to have acquired — somehow — a skill for every crisis. It's the knots and hollows, the secrets and  scars —the unpredictable elements that make a character of most interest to me.

So now I'm wrestling with a twisty, devious rogue of a hero who apparently has no intention of behaving the way I'd planned him to, and I have to say I'm equal parts frustrated and enjoying it. I do like the element of surprise, but it would certainly make the writing easier if I had a clearer idea of where we were going. All I can do, however, is to write forward and keep digging around in his psyche, asking questions like "What does he want — and why?" What does he want now? Why would he say that? What does that show me about his past? And so on.

I comfort myself with the reflection that part of the pleasure in reading is getting to know a character well, that it's more fun and interesting if we have to work at it than having them all neatly laid out for us, with each quirk and facet documented and explained. After all, trying to pin down a gorgeous, headstrong, uncontrollable hero is all part of the fun — isn't it?

So what about you — does any of this surprise you? And do you have any all-time favorite characters? Especially heroes? Let's share.

Comments

[Sophie Weston]

Oh, I remember darling Gideon so well. Absolutely his own man. So glad you gave up trying to make him to behave.

[Mary T]

Of all the characters you have created, Harry and Nell are two of my favorites. And I can't for the life me say exactly why. I'm a romance junkie. I love me a love story. So I love all sorts of heroes (and heroines). The main thing is that they are well suited for each other - and you guys do that so well.

I guess my all time favorite hero is Wulfric from Mary Balogh's SLIGHTLY DANGEROUS. I think that is because she did such a good job of building interest in him in the previous novels in the series, that by the time she got to his story, I was quite ready to see him get his comeuppance.

Great post. I love when you guys share your creative process.

[Jeanne Behnke]

Well - I certainly love the picture of Cary Grant! Lol. His looks stand up to the test of time. I think my favorite hero is Brand Malloren from Jo Beverley’s Secrets of the Night. Just as your heroes have minds of their own, it’s funny how different heroes catch on with different readers.

[Quantum]

I don't really have favorite characters, just favorite authors. Something about a writing style can hit a chord and I will start exploring that author's books in detail, until a new author strikes a new chord. The most recent example is Janet Dailey with her Calder Saga. It involves cattle ranching in Montana with strong characters both good and bad and with strong romantic themes. I was a bit surprised to hear that your characters are out of control when writing ... I had rather assumed that characters were slaves to an author's whims! It makes me wonder whether authors should pair up with one writing the hero and the other writing the heroine, though on reflection I can see that the authors as well as the characters might come to blows!
Thanks for these fascinating insights.

[Anne Gracie]

Thanks so much, Sophie — and yes, I'm very glad I let him be himself. Not that I had much choice.

[Anne Gracie]

Thank you, Mary. Yes I'm very fond of Harry and Nell too — I think sometimes the more a character asserts himself the better he is. In the case of His Captive Lady, I think Harry and Nell were both wounded souls who needed each other.

And Wulfric is a favorite of mine as well. I agree, that the way she build anticipation — who will Wilfric's heroine be? — built anticipation wonderfully.
Glad you enjoyed the post. Thanks.

[Anne Gracie]

Thanks, Jeanne — yes, Cary Grant's looks and the mischievous expression. . . I can never resist. And that's very true — some heroes I have really liked I've seen readers go "Meh" about. Which is another reason why I think it's best to let a difficult-to-control hero be himself. If we all tried to write the same kind of hero, how boring would that be?

[Anne Gracie]

Slaves to an author's whims, Quantum? Hah! Not at all. But I think that ends up being a good thing in the end. Wrestling with an imaginary character makes me delve deeper into who he is and why he might be like that, and I get a more rounded and dimensional character

Your idea of getting authors pair up made me laugh. I know some writers do that, but I'm not sure how well that works. Such small things can change the direction of a plot — a comment, an action, a thought or realization, and the also the way they ping in an author's imagination. We wenches are mostly "I'll do it my way thanks." We managed to write an anthology of connected stories together, but even then, they didn't all connect that well.

[Kareni]

Thank you for your post, Anne; it interests me to learn what happens before the finished product shows up in my hand or on my Kindle.

One of my favorite characters is Maia from Katherine Addison's The Goblin Emperor because he is such a genuinely good person (more accurately such a genuinely good half elf/half goblin). While the book is fantasy rather than romance, he does find a wonderful partner.

[Maree]

Well, if I am choosing one of your heroes, I do love so many! But Nicholas Blacklock from
The Perfect Stranger is a good one! So stoic, so resigned to his fate. And I love the side characters. If I’m going for another author’s hero, I’m going to your compatriot Mary Jo Putney’s Reggie Davenport. “The Rake”. Such a good damaged hero! Love that story!!

[Julie Sorokurs Hart]

Maree, I agree about Reggie Davenport. He was so different from the general Regency heroes I was seeing at that time. It’s still one of the Regencies I go back to most often.

And Anne Gracie, Gideon was so not what I was expecting when I started reading The Perfect Rake. Unexpected and mischievous and charming. Now, I have to go back and do a re-read! Thanks!

[Anne Gracie]

Thanks, Kareni — I haven't read The Goblin Emperor. Might have to pick it up. I like fantasy, and he sounds interesting.

[Anne Gracie]

Thanks, Maree. Yes Nicholas Blacklock is another fave of mine, and he was a perfect match for Faith too, I think. And Mary Jo's Reggie is a wonderful hero, I agree — in both his incarnations.

[Anne Gracie]

Julie, I expect we could form quite a Reggie fan club here. And yes, he was far from the typical Regency hero at the time. Freddie, Mary Balogh's hero in Dancing with Clara also comes to mind. He was almost villainous in the previous book — Courting Julia, but redeemed himself beautifully (if reluctantly) in Dancing with Clara.

[Binnie Syril Braunstein]

Anne-I've always loved Gideon in The Perfect Rake. To me, he is the essence of an unexpected hero. Definitely not typical . Refuses to be stuffed into a typical box of expectations. I think the inimitable Cary Grant in many of his roles, is a worthy example of the unforgettable Gideon. In addition, the opening set-up of The Perfect Rake is one of the best I've ever read.

[Annette N]

I fell in love with Gideon. I believe he simply made me smile all the time and that is what got me.

I do not want characters who have everything perfectly fall into place. I don't believe that life is normally like that and too much perfection is just not even close to realistic. Yes, I am aware the romances I read are not real, but I want the events to be at least within the realm of life as it actually is.

My favorite hero...so many heroes so little time. I already admitted I love Gideon. I love Elizabeth Peters' Radcliffe Emerson from the Amelia Peabody series. If I am honest, I love many heroes who are smart and funny and brave. Amanda Quick's most recent series about California in the 1930's has several heroic men who I really like.

As I say, there ae quite a few heroes who make wonderful book boyfriends for me.

[Anne Gracie]

Thanks, Binnie Syril. It's interesting that you liked the opening of The Perfect Rake — at the time I got a few comments criticizing it because it was a dramatic start to what was essentially a romantic comedy, and they thought that was a no-no. Oh well. Can't please everyone.

And yes, Cary Grant was superb in almost every role. I can't think of a favorite — there are too many I like.

[Anne Gracie]

Thanks. Annette, I loved Emerson too, so gruff and grumpy and adorable. I think a hero who makes us smile is wonderful — and a sense of humor always sucks me in. Amanda Quick usually creates excellent heroes. Heroines too.

[Sweetapple, Lyn]

My husband put my mom's best friend in a novel and all of a sudden she took on a whole life. She became integral to the plot. Sometimes it is best to let them run. The entire concept of Outlander came about because Gabaldon couldn't get Claire to behave. I like that there are heroes from the witty, silly, to brooding spectrum. It keeps the stories from all being Wuthering Heights (which I thoroughly dislike).

[Anne Gracie]

That's so funny, Lyn — I've never been able to put a real person into any of my books — they just stiffen up and somehow refuse to work. The only time I managed it was in a short story that was a tale my dad told us about an incident from his childhood, but even then the characters were not exactly the real ones.

And I'm with you on Heathcliff. I've sometimes pondered on how he might be redeemed. . .

[Jenna]

I love Gideon! He’s easily a favourite. The opening of The Perfect Rake is the most memorable of the many romances I’ve read. You are without doubt my favourite romance author. I can’t wait for each new story. Thank you for sharing them with us!

[Anne Gracie]

Aw, thank you so much for that lovely comment. I really appreciate it.
The 3rd book in the Bellaire Gardens series won't be out until May 2024!
At the moment I'm very close to uploading a Scottish story (not connected with any of my other books) and I've just got my rights back to a Christmas novella that was initially published though Harlequin, so at least I'll have something out this year.