I was having a discussion on historical romances with a good friend of mine (yes, another writer!), and said friend is very particular about the style of romance that she enjoys.
I think most people would call it "Bodice Ripper." Ahh, the good old bodice ripper. The man comes on so strong that the woman can't help herself, and it absolves her of any bad girl qualities. I'm being overdramatic here, but I'm also talking about old school bodice rippers; most have been toned down, as today's woman doesn't consider enjoying sex to be solely a bad girl activity. ;-)
So my friend, I'll call her K, says that today's historicals have heroines that are too plucky, too modern. It's not historically plausible to see a woman stand up to her hero, even if he needs it. Actually, I don't know if that's really accurate, as I have come across some interesting research while reading up for the historical portion of Immortal Reveries; I found a law that stated that a man may only hit his wife in self-defense! Granted, that was in the 17th century American colonies, but it's still an interesting social commentary.
So, it's Guilty Pleasures time, and I must admit that I enjoy a good bodice ripper; in fact I was tickled to see in February's RT mag that Bertrice Small is going to self-publish Adora, which was the first romance novel I ever read and loved. My previous experience had been with Harlequins, which is what my mom loves, but then, she loves contempo, and contempo's not my cuppa. I think I'm going to order it and see how it reads to my now-adult eyes, as I think it definitely qualifies as an old school bodice ripper. I'd like to compare it to Virginia Henley's Seduced, which I read as an adult and adore. Seduced involves a heroine disguising herself as a man, and when her guardian comes and sees her, thinks he needs to toughen the lad up!
I have to admit that I love historicals with plucky heroines. Speaking of Seduced, Jo Beverley does a great gender-bending turn with My Lady Notorious, another novel I doubt my dear K would much enjoy, but I certainly did, immensely. Again, the heroine disguises herself as a man in order to protect what she holds dear, and I think it's a fun way to work around the constrictions women had to deal with in the past. Of course, the ultimate gender-bending heroine is certainly Virginia Woolf's Orlando, but that's a whole post in and of itself.
So the question remains, is the bodice ripper dead, or merely mutated?
2 comments:
I'm still a fan of bodice ripper's. I read them and I try to write some of that old style into my own books. I think it's a feminists fear, if she likes a dominant male, she can no longer be a dominant female. So wrong. The man may be a rogue through a story, but look at who has him tamed in the end. BrendaWilliamson.com
By societal norms, the bodice ripper is entirely obsolete I think. It's a very sexual act, and the barriers for THAT are basically non existent anymore.
They're fun as hell to write, though.
Post a Comment