Realist or idealist?

• Posted in About Books, On Writing

Jane has an interesting post over at Dear Author today about realism vs. idealism in romance novels, especially in the Bob Mayer-Jenny Cruise book, Don’t Look Down.

The post talks about a male character sleeping with someone other than the heroine during the course of the book and whether that was realistic or not. I read the book. The scene in question didn’t bother me.

But Jane’s post made me think about something else that’s not so realistic in romance novels — the perfectly ripped guy with fantastic hair, obscene wealth, and a killer smile. My significant other brought this up a few days ago, asking me why most guys in romances (and especially on the book covers) are the male model of perfection, when most guys in real life, well, aren’t.

And I didn’t know how to answer him.

I have to admit that I’m guilty of writing the perfect guy in my books, while I tend to make the heroine more relatable (or at least with a more realistic body type). But I give the hero quirks too — a shy personality, guilt over a friend’s death, a desire for revenge that threatens the romance with the heroine.

But Jane’s post also struck me as funny because I’m working on Bigtime 4 now — and the hero isn’t the perfect guy when it comes to looks. Oh, he’s wealthy and witty, but he’s more of a mortal superhero — one without any superpowers. Which means his body is covered with scars from all his battles, his nose is crooked from being broken, etc. I’m making an effort to make him more of a normal guy (in the looks department anyway).

Of course, the heroine thinks the hero is handsome — after she gets to know him. I think that’s just part of the process of falling in love — learning to appreciate what’s beautiful about your partner. The more you love someone, the more you overlook their thinning hair or poochy stomach or thunder thighs in favor of what’s great about them (their smile, their laugh, their smoking eyes).

Which do you prefer? Gorgeous, chiseled heroes? Or more realistic guys when it comes to looks? Inquiring minds want to know …

6 Responses to “Realist or idealist?”

  1. celeber says:

    I definitely prefer the realistic guy. I think the gorgeous chiseled hero is fun, but I always preferred Clark Kent over Superman.
    Too good to be true syndrome I suppose.

  2. Jennifer Estep says:

    The gorgeous hero is fun and really just a modern version of old Prince Charming, I suppose.
    Although now, whenever I think about Prince Charming, I always think of the obnoxious guy from the “Shrek” movies! 😆

  3. Edie says:

    I’ve blogged about this same thing before. In my 2nd from last book, my hero was thin–and I don’t think I mentioned a hard, muscled body once, lol. In my last book, one of the male protagonists (I have three main women characters; the men are secondary), is in his fifties, and I gave him a gut to go with his age. I think it’s fun to have a hero that’s not boringly perfect, just as it is for our heroines not to be perfect.

    I like the sound of your newest hero. 🙂

  5. Amalia says:

    I don’t read romance novels because I want to see more reality. Romance novels are escape for me – why do I want to read about a guy with back hair and a spare tire? He doesn’t need to be an adonis (and I am not one of those women in the Fabio Fan Club), but he should be physically attractive.

    I will say, though, that the men in romance novels are mostly between 6’0″ and 6’4″. Maybe some more varied heights could be instituted?

    ~Amalia~

  6. Jennifer Estep says:

    I don’t necessarily want to read about spare tires, but I like heroes I think could exist in the real world.

    Most romance guys are pretty tall. I don’t think I’ve ever read a Sherrilyn Kenyon book where the hero was under 6’2″.

    Maybe I’ll write about leprechauns in my next book, just to get some different heights in there. Maybe not. 😀

Back to Top