July 10, 2013

Heroine Week, Day 3 – Giving the Heroine a Second Chance: A Hero-Centric Reader’s Journey Toward the Middle by Kaetrin



Kaetrin is one of my favorite Internet people (she’s also a regular person, but she’s in Australia, so I like to pretend that she lives in my computer). If she were to become a Romance heroine, her book would probably be Her Outback Rescuer, except that this time she would be the rescuer.

*****
Giving the Heroine a Second Chance: A Hero-Centric Reader’s Journey Toward the Middle by Kaetrin from Kaetrin's Musings

People who know me and my reading tastes might think “what are YOU doing posting for Heroine Week?”.  It would be a fair question.  I tend to be all about the hero.  But, recently, I re-read (or listened actually) to a book which had me changing my tune about a heroine with whom I’d previously had problems. And, I think I know why.


Flowers From the Storm by Laura Kinsale
In Flowers From the Storm by Laura Kinsale, we meet Quaker Maddy Timms.  She’s been brought up to believe in the charity, austerity and plain speech. Even though she secretly loves pretty things, she despises the excesses of the rich and this is pretty much embodied in Christian Langland, the Duke of Jervaulx.  He’s filthy rich, he’s a ladies man (at the start of the book he’s unashamedly having an affair with a married woman who is pregnant with his child) and he duels.   He’s also very handsome and charming but Maddy is not taken in by him.

When Jervaulx has a stroke, he is placed in an asylum by his family and it is there Maddy encounters him again.  He is not what he was.  Aphasia and confusion mean that he doesn’t talk much and when he does, it is a struggle for him to be understood.  Maddy feels an “opening” which is a religious calling to help Jervaulx and it is because of this opening that she stands strongly against her cousin Edward (who runs the asylum) in order to become Jervaulx’s nurse.

By the end of the book Jervaulx is a changed (again) man.  He has largely recovered from the effects of the stroke but he will never be the same as he was.  (What took him a minute before, now takes him two, as Maddy says).  But he has also changed internally.  He loves Maddy unequivocally and would do anything for her. He despises the rake he once was and is ashamed of his previous wasteful ways.  He is determined to do better, be better.  But, in the end, Maddy leaves him and he is alone.  When I first read the book, I thought Maddy was a big meanie.  Here was this amazing, brilliant, handsome man adoring her and she walked away?  I thought she was being needlessly cruel.  Looking back, I think I was so very caught up in the difficulties of Jervaulx’s situation, that I felt so strongly that Maddy was his only bulwark against the ravening horde, that for her to leave him was the ultimate betrayal and all things considered, unjustified.

I listened to the audiobook recently.  Now, I can’t for the life of me work out why I thought as I did.

This time, Jervaulx was, for me the same amazing wonderful brilliant man and I absolutely wanted them together, but this time Maddy also shone in a way she hadn’t before.  I felt her struggle to reconcile her love for Jervaulx and the tenets of her faith.  I felt her grief for the loss of her community, from which she would be permanently exiled if she were to choose Jervaulx and this time, I felt that, while she should totally toss the Quakers, that it wasn’t the easy decision I had previously thought.  This time, it was hard.  (And, her choice of Jervaulx had more meaning because it was hard.)

This time, I appreciated the significance of Jervaulx’s betrayal.  The betrayal which came first and to which Maddy responded by leaving.  This time, I felt the slap in the face Maddy had when confronted with Jervaulx’s bastard child – with the reminder that he will do whatever he wants for his own reasons and she just has to live with them.  Maddy had kept all of her commitments.  It was Jervaulx who, even genuinely loving her, acted out of selfish need and desire without any real thought for Maddy.  This time, as much as I continued to adore him, I turned my squinty-eyed gaze on Jervaulx and waited for him to shape up.
There are other readers who have always felt this way about Maddy. (I think though, that I wasn’t entirely alone – conversations on Twitter indicate there seem to be a fair few people who agreed with the old me.)  But for me, this was a bit of a revelation.  I think it shows in part how a second reading can reveal things one might miss on the first go round.

But, I think it also indicates how far toward the middle on the scale of “hero-centric” to “heroine-centric” I am becoming in my reading.

Not all that very many years ago, female agency was a term which confused me because it had nothing to do with the post office (and also I didn't see why an agency had a gender). Through reading posts at such events as Heroine Week and interaction with some smart and amazing people (mostly women) in Romancelandia, my horizons have been expanded and not only do I understand what “female agency” means, I notice it when it is absent or when it is celebrated.  I admit to liking domineering heroes (to be fair, I like all sorts of heroes) – but usually only when they are paired with a woman who won’t let him get away with too much.  (For example, for me to enjoy Curran (and I do), I need Kate.)  I dislike books where the heroine has no power or agency or is only “allowed” it via the hero.  I wouldn’t have understood that last sentence a few years ago.

No doubt I have a long way to go but just in revisiting Flowers From the Storm, I can see how far I have come.

To be completely honest, I think I will always lean at least slightly toward the hero – the fascination of “other” I believe is, for me, what is at its core, but my appreciation of the heroine continues to grow and grow and grow.

*****
Connect with Kaetrin:

19 comments:

  1. This post makes me so happy because I adore Maddy and I'm always glad to see more love for her - she makes an appearance in my Heroine Week post too. I really like that insight into how reading can become so biassed in favour of one perspective that it fails to notice the other. I think that is definitely one reason (among many) why readers can respond in such wildly different ways to the same book.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think readers bring a lot of their own "stuff" to a book and reading a book again, I found I had different "stuff". The audiobook format made a difference to I think - as Laura Kinsale says below, one can't skim on audio so you're kind of "forced" to listen to everything. (in this case, a good way).

      Delete
  2. Romancelandia of late has really thrown open some of my doors too. And Maddy is an astounding heroine. Great post!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. You bring up such great points here. I remember feeling so relieved when I learned that my children were boys, and feeling like such a bad feminist because of that. But to me, boys are like little aliens. They don't remind me of myself, or make me question my own choices or bring up any lingering mother-daughter issues I might have. They're just so different from me that I find their behaviors fascinating rather than challenging to my own sense of myself as a person and woman.

    I think it's the same with heroes -- that sense of otherness that you describe. They're just easier to deal with because they're so strange. Dealing with heroines requires a certain degree of self-examination. That's problematic if you're going to a romance novel for escape, if what you want is to just sink into the story and not have your sense of self challenged. I definitely do want that sometimes, and there's nothing wrong with that. But I think it's also good to be open to a bit of challenge. There's a lot of opportunity in romance to stretch our perceptions about what it means to be a woman (or a man) and to broaden our definition of love, sex, romance and gender. Reading twice, as you suggest, is one great way to get the best of both worlds. The first read just for fun/emotional impact, the second for fun + analysis.

    What do you think?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't do a lot of re-reading - I'm much more likely to read then listen or vice versa. But I think you're on to something about the hero and not having to do any self-examination.

      Delete
  4. Oh, I just found out aobut "Heroine Week" and I love it. What a great idea. Heroines need much more appreciation in romance.

    I love this post too. Thank you Kaetrin for writing it. I'm so glad you listened to the audiobook. I think that listening can reveal things about the text that aren't so obvious in reading. While reading, you can skim, and most of us do including me. But when listening, you are much closer to the text, for better or worse. And of course, Nick's amazing narration brings out the best. I wept for her myself when listening, because her real struggle and fear is so clear. I suppose that seems strange to say, when I wrote the book--but I wrote it many years ago, and listening to it as an audiobook was like a new experience for me too.

    LK

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're so right about not being able to skim making a difference Laura :) For some audiobooks this is a bad thing because certain writing tics become terribly obvious but here it was a definite advantage as I was able to savour every word. (I think AJH at Dear Author said that Nick Boulton has the sexiest voice ever and I think he's right - he could make a fortune selling little voice snippets for people to download as alarm ringtones. I think I'd wake up in a lot better mood every morning if instead of loud obnoxious music I had him saying, in dulcet tones, "wake up darling, it's time to get up.")
      On a more serious note, Boulton "got" the characterisation perfectly so this, combined with the changes in *me* made the book a completely different experience, even though both times I loved it.

      Delete
    2. Your heroines definitely need more appreciation!!

      When I first read FFTS, gosh only like 6-7 mos ago, I cried and cried for Maddy...and for Christian! It is just strange to me that anyone would think she was mean or selfish or judgmental. She does so much for Christian, she loves him so much, but she can't see a way for them to be together in their present state, the gulf between them too immense. Her struggle to reconcile her feelings and her actions was tragic and utterly heartbreaking. And she suffers it alone, that's what kills me; Christian is never able to help her. He is too busy dragging them both to shore to notice she is quietly drowning behind him.

      Delete
    3. One of the wonderful things about books is that they can be read so many different ways. Even by the same person, just at a different time :)

      Delete
    4. Oh, I agree. I think it is so personal, that is why most writers can't really say what they meant for their book to mean. Your state of mind, maybe your current situation, certainly colors how a book affects you. I'm impressed you were open to re-evaluating your perception, so many people won't and don't.

      Delete
  5. I think I'm a heroine centric reader because boys aren't the other--I have two brothers, I'm the only female cousin on my dad's side of the family, my female cousins on my mom's side are much younger than I am, and my family moved around a lot, so I couldn't put down roots to have the lifelong girlfriends that everyone else seems to have. So, lol, women are strange to me, and heroine-centric romances give me a glimpse of what it might be like to have sisters or a BFF of 20+ years.

    To get back on topic, I never warmed up to FFTS because I've always felt that Maddy gave up too much to be with Jervaulx, whereas he sacrificed nothing. Despite his stroke and placement in an asylum, he's still a duke and a man in early 19th century England, with all of the power, agency, and privilege inherent. The external power imbalance--society and rank--loomed too largely for me to believe it would not end up smothering Maddy, no matter how much Jervaulx loved her.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, I'm obviously biased! :) that was pretty much the woman's lot in 19thC England though wasn't it - to do all the sacrificing while the blokes had all the power?

      I was however impressed with Maddy's inherent strength and conviction of self/morals etc so I don't think he will ever ride roughshod over her.

      Delete
  6. I actually set aside Flowers from the Storm last year down due, in large part, to Maddy. I found her to be too harsh, however, had the genders been reversed I would have felt the same way about the hero. I think, like you, I may have once been a bit more hero-centric in my romance reading. These days though, I tend to measure both heroines and heroes by the same yardstick and I find that I can't truly enjoy a book without strong and likable main characters of either gender.

    I've been intending to purchase the FFTS audiobook recently, so I'm glad to hear that it helped change your mind about the novel.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you decide to listen, I'd love to know what you think :)

      Delete
  7. Maybe because I am new to reading the romance genre, it always amazed me that Maddy was judged with totally different criteria than the hero. FFTS was only the 3rd historical romance I read, and I was lucky to get to it, the first 2 almost sent me away from the genre forever. The novel -Maddy and Christian, their struggles - just blew me away and I felt kind of shell-shocked for days after reading it. Reading it, I kept wondering…do romance novels have guaranteed HEAs?? because I just never believed these two characters could have one, not until the very end. And that is what is missing from this genre in my opinion, something that LK captures beautifully in most of her novels, the true sense that 2 people who should be together maybe won’t find their way. Shouldn’t that tension drive all romance?

    So Maddy- She has to change, not just her ways and her outer appearance to be with Christian, she has to change her existential vision of herself. She has to give up her community, her values, and the anchors that ground her in a stormy and volatile world. And most readers just expect her to be happy to do that…for what? Christian never makes a decision that is Maddy-centric. He tricks and manipulates and pushes and pulls, all for his own ends. Sure he loves her, and this story works for me because I believe with all my heart that he loves her, but he never understands or makes allowances for her pain and fear and her sacrifices. God, it is painful to read! Maddy is the one that ultimately makes their happiness together work. She has this moment in the novel at the end, when Christian commits to his bastard daughter, that justifies and reinforces her love for him ultimately, the scene in the meeting house…one of the most beautiful love scenes ever written, in any novel.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The HEA (or at least a Happy For Now) ending is a requirement in the genre. You know, if you pick up a romance, that the central couple will get together by the end. But it's the author's job to make you doubt that and feel the tension along with the characters (who DON'T know that they are guaranteed a happy ending!)

      Delete
    2. Haven't really found another author besides LK who does create that tension...granted, I haven't read tons of romance. Obviously Pride and Prejudice is the best example I can think of where it is done masterfully and sets the standard.

      Delete
    3. I know what you mean about that tension in FFTS. I felt it viscerally when I first read it.

      Obviously, I agree with you more about Maddy now as oppoesd to when when I first read it :) but I think there is some balance at the end when Christian is inspired to be a better man because of Maddy. I did feel that he went through some significant changes and that they would work together to do good things with all his/their wealth and privilege - more than he would have done on his own pre-stroke (even though he was always interested in business etc and supporting innovation). But I agree, Maddy made the greater sacrifices.

      Delete

Blogger likes to eat comments, so I suggest copying it before hitting "publish" just in case it doesn't go through the first time. This is a pain, I know, but it's the only solution/prevision I can think of, and it will save you the frustration of losing a comment. Also, thanks for visiting!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

FTC Disclaimer

The books reviewed here were purchased by us. If the book was provided by the author or publisher for review, it will be noted on the post. We do not get any type of monetary compensation from publishers or authors.