Sarah e-mailed me this question yesterday as part of a discussion about alpha heroes:
What’s too alpha for you? And what hero crossed the line?
Alpha heroes are tricky beasts, and the term has come to be associated with a whole fuckton of baggage—it has, in fact, become shorthand in a lot of ways, though exactly WHAT that shorthand stands for greatly depends on where you draw your lines when it comes to acceptable hero behavior, and how you distinguish assertiveness from arrogance, and firmness from brutality. The vast majority of asshole heroes in Romancelandia do tend to be alpha heroes, though not all alpha heroes are by any means assholes; it’s just that some authors and many readers seem to conflate “shouty, angry and impatient” with alpha behavior.
I enjoy the antagonism and sparring between alpha types as much as anybody else. One of my all-time favorites is Loretta Chase’s Lord of Scoundrels, for example; Dain and Jessica are both Type A personalities, and it is a true joy to watch them duke it out. The two of them are well-suited to each other; they’re equally strong, and best of all, they’re equally fun to watch.
But frankly, part of the enjoyment is seeing Jessica get the best of Dain despite his machinations. I’m not sure what it says about me, but it makes me deeply uncomfortable when a heroine loses or is the one in the wrong too frequently; a large part of it is related to the way people have dismissed women’s opinions and decisions as being inconsequential and/or wrong for such a very long time, though I can tolerate it as long as it’s treated with sensitivity. Laura Kinsale, for example, is the mistress of creating heroines who, for one damn reason or another, get things wrong and otherwise fuck their shit up, but who don’t trigger my ick response.
But a strong power imbalance can be an emotionally and aesthetically satisfying storytelling tool as well. My favorite example: Devon and Merry from The Windflower by Laura London. Devon puts Merry through hell, and while she grows stronger (literally and metaphorically) throughout the story, Devon is quite clearly in the position of power through much of the book. But again, of key importance is that Merry isn’t in the wrong, and that she doesn’t ever cave on that point. She maintains her innocence, despite all the adversity she’s put through, and when Devon finally realizes what he’s done to her, I feel strangely vindicated in my faith in Merry and even more strangely proud that she managed to hold on to her principles so strongly. Part of what bothered me immensely about Whitney, My Love, for example, is that Whitney breaks down and apologizes to Clayton when I didn’t think she had any particular cause to. Well, that, and the rape.
But back to alpha heroes, and what’s “too alpha.” One of my clearest lines of demarcation—and it’s really not a question of being alpha so much as exhibiting sociopathic tendencies—involves seducing the heroine out of revenge. Once a hero decides to get the heroine in bed (sometimes via blackmail, other times via good old-fashioned deception) to, say, punish her father because her father inadvertently caused the death of the hero’s second cousin’s pet gerbil, except no, we find out he’s actually in love with her despite himself and has been since page 23 when he kisses her punishingly for the first time and accuses her of being a slut—once the hero crosses that line, he’s just not redeemable. Sleeping with somebody out of revenge is, well, so very fucked up on so many levels, I can’t find him redeemable. Not that fucked-up scenarios can’t be hot, and if you get off on that kind of power play, more power to you. It just doesn’t float my boat, is what I’m trying to say here.
Another fairly firm line is rape, though given how much I’ve enjoyed books in which forced seduction—hell, even psychological and sexual torment—play a significant role in the hero and heroine’s early relationship, such as in Only With Your Love by Lisa Kleypas and To Have and to Hold by Patricia Gaffney, I can’t say that heroes who play fast and loose with consent immediately make it into my shit list. A large part of the believability of the hero’s redemption lies with a) how sorry he is for being a rat fucking bastard, b) whether he fully grasps that what he did was pretty damn awful, c) the severity of what he did and d) how frequently he repeats the offence.
A somewhat fuzzier line is the alpha hero who doesn’t trust the heroine for whatever reason and as a consequence is constantly on the heroine’s case because he thinks she’s a filthy liar (and sometimes, an even filthier whore—that is, until he tries to fuck her and his cock encounters her Magical Hymen of Steel That For Some Goddamn Reason is Mysteriously Located Three Inches Up Her Hoo Hoo). When handled wrongly, it can result in a numbing cycle of fighting and distrust; when handled correctly, it can be an excellent source of conflict and romantic tension.
So I want to hear your thoughts. The alpha hero is a topic that’s been hashed out and bashed around a million different times in a million different on-line romance communities, but I want to hear your thoughts about them—especially with regards to power imbalances. Do they bother you? What are your lines, in terms of alpha behavior crossing into asshole territory? What about the heroine being constantly wrong—does that get on your tits, too?
sorry that was so massively long. :/
Further to the comments about Jamie – I don’t think you can allow for an additional 3 or 4 900-page books worth of context in order to judge a scene from the first book. Which is not to say I find the character misogynistic. I find the scene incongruous in the context of the character, who is in all other respects exceptionally tolerant and enlightened for his time.
There’s a scene in Captain Corelli’s Mandolin where a village man asks the doctor for advice about his wife, who is plaguing him now that the doctor has cured his deafness. The doctor casually asks if the man has tried beating her. The answer is ‘no’ or maybe ‘once and never again!’ To which the doctor responds that it’s probably just as well as “they only get at you in more insidious ways – like over-salting the food”. To me, this exemplifies how I imagine the relationships between men and women in a historical context. You’d have to be an idiot to routinely beat your wife, because she’d always find a way to get back at you. Which is why I call bullshit on the historical accuracy justification for beatings.
*Disclaimer: which is not to say nobody beat their wives in ye olde past tymes. Just probably not everyone did.
Magical Hymen of Steel That For Some Goddamn Reason is Mysteriously Located Three Inches Up Her Hoo Hoo. What is up with that? Why is that such a common convention in romance novels? Do the writers not know anatomy?
I decided a while ago that I’d think of this, and various other romance-specific medical problems, as metaphors.
I was thinking about typical alpha behaviour not long ago because Jane wrote a glowing review of a forthcoming novel, Lord of the Fading Lands by C. L. Wilson. It’s a fantasy romance and Jane was praising the world-building for being imaginative and rich in detail.
So I went of to Wilson’s website and read a long (25-page) excerpt and what struck me wasn’t the worldbuilding but the way in which the hero was a type I’d read many times before. He’s the most powerful male in the world, he’s capable of violent rages, he has a very tortured past and he falls in love with an innocent, much younger woman. He’s so possessive he frightens her, and he reacts instantly to any threat (perceived or real) against her: “A Fey Lord reacted violently to even the smallest perceived threat to his mate” (22). Oh, and as if to symbolise/embody the threat/power of this male, he shapeshifts into a massive furred flying creature with fangs and the ability to breathe fire.
The heroine’s an orphan who’s something of an ugly duckling (perceived as ugly by her adoptive culture, coming into her own power), under threat and in need of rescue.
Anyway, it just struck me that while the worldbuilding may be innovative, the dynamic between the alpha hero and the heroine isn’t, at least judging from that excerpt. That’s an observation, not a criticism, though, because obviously lots of people love an alpha hero. I suspect that this is a heroine who’s going to be the strong rather than the weak kind, but I can’t be certain just from reading the excerpt.
Rape is a non-redeemable factor for me. Doesn’t matter what the reasons are or how sorry the alpha hero is afterward, I can’t get past that. I’m glad that trend in romance books seems to have largely disappeared. Give me an alpha hero who will do his damndest to seduce a woman, oh hell yeah. But she has to say yes.
And another unforgivable thing I read once. (Warning – very graphic description ahead) The hero ejaculated in the heroine’s mouth, then SLAPPED HIS HAND over her face and FORCED her to swallow. This was meant to show his “manliness”, yet I almost threw the book across the room! All I can say to that is, where’s Lorena Bobbit when you need her?
Power plays can be very sexy. I don’t have a problem with the man being the one with power when it comes to sex.
I do have a problem, not with heroines who make mistakes (who doesn’t?) but heroines who make STOOPID mistakes. You know, like the old plot of “I know the hero, have known him for several months, but when some gossipy bitch I barely know says he’s with some whore I believe her over him.” I HATE that. That is a stupid mistake. It shows the heroine doesn’t really trust or love the hero, and throws doubt on them having a future together, as it’s likely the next time some skank wants to lie about him, the heroine will believe he’s fathered someone else’s kid and run off and have a stupid fit.
Kassiana – I also hate this device in reverse. Despite knowing the heroine for some time, and (probably) being married to her, our hero still believes some convoluted story about her and some other guy that she barely knows/is related to being secret lovers. Moreover, the story is usually told by some gossip-queen or former mistress of his. Yeah, reliable source. I see why everyone believes this guy has got a razor-sharp intellect.
Michelle—I think the Amanda Quick novel you’re thinking of is “Scandal”. Emily’s father and brothers plan to keep her and her mad bookkeeping skillz forever because she was Ruined by an Unfortunate Incident. Simon of Somethingstone does some seducing and sneaks her right out under their noses. That’s my favorite Quick novel too.
Alpha heroes are fine, but there’s a reason the term “alpha”-whatever is generally applied to animals—it implies complete dominance on the alpha’s part. Sometimes that’s fun to read about, but not to the point of “you’ll do whatever I say because I’m the man and you’ll like it, little lady!” I’m mainly thinking of Catherine Coulter here. In “Night Shadow”, the hero Knight (yeah, that was subtle on her part) treats heroine Lily wonderfully—until he finds out that she is not his cousin’s widow, merely his fiancee and the keeper of his children. The first thing he does upon learning this is rip her a new one, the second is to go to her room in the dead of night and molest her (despite many repeated ‘No!‘s) until she comes despite herself. Which, to his mind, proves his point.
Cue me throwing the book across the room. Who does that? Who would fall in love with someone who does that?
(Hi, longtime SB reader, first-time poster!)
“There is an Amanda Quick book that I am blanking on the name where the hero seduces the heroine into marriage as revenge.(Is it Seduction?) He knows her family is dependent on her financial skills to keep them afloat. It is a really good book and I think it was handled well.”
I think it’s Scandal. She’s a redhead named Emily, he’s Simon (She repeatedly compared him to a dragon.) That story deals with family finances. Seduction (w/ Sophie & Julian) has a similar plot; just no money problems.
Rape is always a deal breaker for me. Even if the hero is repentant in the end – I can’t get over the fact that he actually raped someone. Nothing gets my panties in a twist like rape turned love in romance novels.
I just finished reading Stormfire by Christine Monson. The hero was the mack daddy of all assholes. But for some sick and twisted reason it worked for me in this book. Usually this kind of cruelty is a deal breaker.
<
>
Mandy, Stormfire is one of my all-time favorites. And I totally agree: Sean IS the mack-daddy of all assholes. But like you, it worked for me in this book. Probably because midway through, his devotion to Kit is absolute and there’s absolutely nothing he won’t do to keep her safe. He’s not a nice guy by any stretch of the imagination…but somehow he and Catherine are right for each other.
My favorite alpha is definitely the Duke of Avon, from “These Old Shades.” He rarely relies on force and he isn’t nasty in his relationship with Leonie, although he clearly feels that he knows what’s best for her. (And mostly, he does.)
What makes him the ultimate alpha is just the way he’s always in control of the situation. He is always 3 steps ahead of everyone, eventually even causing his longtime enemy to commit suicide! Crazy! No rape, not even any kissing until the very end.
That’s why I actually don’t regard Vidal from “Devil’s Cub” as a true alpha male. He’s practically NEVER in control of anything, especially not himself. Ref: the scene where Vidal gets stuck dragging his cousin across France and she’s carrying on in a super-bitchy way? Avon would’ve handled her shit in 2 minutes. Vidal was reduced to swearing and praying. NOT a real alpha. Another example of this type of guy: Richard the Werewolf Biology Teacher from LKH. He’s the leader of his Clan—but emotionally he’s no match for a real alpha like, say, Micah. He’s really just a weak, whiny bitch with a huge cock. (And sincere apologies to all you LKH haters out there.)
Nifty & Ann- regarding Jamie in Outlander, I agree with both your points, which is precisely what always gets me about that one.
On the one hand, yes, it is within a certain context of the story (note: not referring to history here, but merely the storyline) and there is a lot of redeeming, especially considering that it’s a long series of books. And I fully agree with Nifty that Jamie is a good example to my mind of an alpha hero done right.
On the other hand, it’s just wrong in all the ways Ann describes. The scene on the one hand does make sense if considering the circumstances in which it happens, but the main trouble I have is that it is at odds with the character of Jamie as he’s laid out. Basically he’s giving in to peer pressure after his travelling companions cut Claire, and in the aftermath she is the one that is redeemed in their eyes, brought back into the fold of society by submitting.
So it seems to me that on the one hand, yes, he does redeem himself with serious grovelling and never doing it again, but at the same time he has established the rules of their relationship, and it’s by his decision, not her right to go physically unharmed that she’s never beaten again. Yes, and I do mean ‘right’, precisely because that’s what appears so at odds with the character of Jamie Fraser, who is a Catholic and does in the course of the books quote from saints etc.
It seems to be one of the defining characteristics, and I find it odd that someone who is defined so would not take into consideration that (I think it was St Paul who said so) husband and wife are to be one, and as they are one flesh the husband should never treat the wife worse than he would treat himself. That’s where it goes haywire for me.
*sigh* so much food for thought, as always on this site, when I should be working… 😉
Wow, color me naive—what a lot of you are describing as ‘alphas’ doesn’t sound at all like hero-material to me. They sound more like sociopaths who should be on watch-lists, if not already locked up for the protection of others.
As for this bit: “…(Warning – very graphic description ahead) The hero ejaculated in the heroine’s mouth, then SLAPPED HIS HAND over her face and FORCED her to swallow. This was meant to show his “manlinessâ€,….”
Finger down the throat, honey. NOW. Spew his preciousness all over him, just give it all back, in a wonderfully symbolic gesture.
I dunno. Maybe you had to grow up cutting your teeth on the rape-filled romances of the seventies, but that stuff just doesn’t bother me that much. After reading the Flame and the Flower at least a hundred times, Whitney, My Love came off pretty tame.
Now, in a contemporary romance it would be a deal-breaker. But so is possessive, brutish, caveman behavior by the hero. It’s like I can suspend my disbelief in a historical because it’s all a fantasy anyway. But in a contemporary, I’m wondering—where’s the court injunction ordering him to stay at least 50 feet from the house?
I definitely think peer pressure had something to do with it. I think he was angry at her for disobeying him for a couple reasons. 1) It did put his life and her life and the lives of the other men in danger, as she got recaptured as a result of her “disobedience” and had to be rescued. And 2) I think he was embarrassed to be perceived as a man who couldn’t control his wife. I do think his pride was at stake, and that was part of what prompted the beating. But I didn’t think it was at odds with his character, not at that point. (If he did it again…and again…and again, then yes, certainly.) By that point in the story, we had gotten to know Jamie a little but that incident was the first in which we were confronted with how Jamie would behave when met with outright rebellion. How do we know how a man is going to react in a situation until he is confronted with that situation? He’s 23 years old. He’s never been married. He’s never had to deal with a woman’s “disobedience”—except for maybe Jenny’s, and we all know how the two of them scrap it up with one another. But he’s watched and seen how other men of his acquaintance deal with their women. Laoghaire’s father had ASKED for her to be publicly beaten for canoodling with a fellow. And when the Scots first meet Claire on the hill near Craigh na Dun, they’re astounded by her cursing and say that her husband should beat her. And while it’s true that Claire’s submitting to the beating brought her back into men’s good graces, it was also apparent (to me at least) that they had respect for her afterwards, and not just mere tolerance (which is what I always perceived from Dougal, say, for his wife). In general I think that it was a highly complex scene. I’m not willing to read the scene, say “Oh! A beating!” and discount the entire character (or book or series) based on one extremely significant (and multidimensional) event. It was no Clayton Westomoreland and the riding crop, I guess I mean. But I admit that I’m a total fangirl when it comes to the Outlander series; I’m definitely biased.
There’s been a lot written about the abusive alpha male, but my favourite is the dominant male who uses the force of his own personality (be it through wit or aloofness) to get his own way, rather than his fists. Mary Balogh and Loretta Chase are especially good at this type of hero – for example, Wulfric Bedwyn and Rupert Carsington are both Alpha males who don’t use physical violence against the heroine. Mind you I do really like Dain in LoS. His complete bewilderment at being bested by Jessica is marvellous.
Nifty, I totally see where you’re coming from and probably should go re-read the scene in question to get it clearer.
But off the top of my head what bugs me, is that it sets a certain framework in which he is redeemed by setting up the rules himself. By that, I mean that he is a product of his circumstances and does make up his own mind, but no matter how strong a woman Claire is and how he respects her, it is within the parameters of his decisions.
I suppose what I’m trying to say is that he is redeemed, but the scene still bugs me, probably because it is precisely such a complex one. But then I probably wouldn’t read the Outlander series if it always were straightforward in black and white.
Nifty, Celine – I get what you’re both saying, and I don’t disagree (with some of it). I just feel that with the beating, and the subsequent sex, Claire very clearly says no, she fights Jamie. She is unable to physically stop him, either from beating her or having sex with her. So if she really, really, didn’t want to have sex, this would be a rape. Is it not a rape, because she enjoyed the sex?
By the way, I don’t read the scene as a rape, because we’re in Claire’s head and know how she feels. But Jamie isn’t in Claire’s head, so how does he know he isn’t raping her? By his own admission, he’s not going to stop.
‘Alpha male’ seems, to me, to have acquired a romance-specific meaning. I’ve always taken it to mean just socially dominant/ natural leader. I know alpha men. In social situations they speak, and everyone shuts up to listen. What they say is given more weight than what someone else says. People automatically defer to them, or assume they know what they’re talking about. It’s very cool—and rather odd, when you notice it happening, because it seems to happen so subconciously.
But it doesn’t seem to me to have much to do with the borderline abuser ‘alpha’ that people keep talking about.
I, too, think the Duke of Avon in These Old Shades is an alpha hero. Because his presence commands instant attention and respect. Because he’s in control—of himself and of others. He’s a natural leader.
However, as it happens, he’s also a brute. He doesn’t rape Leonie, but in the back story he did abduct someone else (Jennifer?)—presumably planning on rape and forced marriage. He plans a vicious revenge against his enemy. His fortune has come from a young man who he beat at cards, and who subsequently killed himself.
I love this book, btw, and there is redemption. And it’s very well done, and Leonie is adorable, so it’s all good.
Anyway, my point is that I don’t see that the arsehole behaviour makes an alpha. The natural dominance makes an alpha. So, for me, the question ‘what is too alpha?’ just doesn’t compute, because it’s like asking ‘can a hero be too capable, too in control of situations?’
A hero who loses his temper, rapes women for revenge or lust or because he thinks they really want it, is violent, is disrespectful—I don’t see him as ‘too alpha’, I see him as damaged and weak.
Personally, I don’t mind heroes who are damaged and weak, because I love a redemptive journey. But I don’t see them as alphas. Oh, did I already say that?
How fascinating, as I just finished a book that actually got PELTED across the room because of it’s jackass uber-alpha, I’ve got the largest balls in the entire universe hero, and the supid ass heroine to go with it. Okay, so I didn’t finish it. I had 20 pages to go and throught I was going to throw up if I had to finish the book.
Anyhow, it’s exactly where I draw the line, and I think Candy put it quite nicely with A large part of the believability of the hero’s redemption lies with a) how sorry he is for being a rat fucking bastard, b) whether he fully grasps that what he did was pretty damn awful, c) the severity of what he did and d) how frequently he repeats the offence..
In the book I just read, neither A, B, nor C made it into the book, and D was PRETTY FUCKING DAMN OFTEN (the offense being mind-control/mind rape). I mean, fuck, the heroine is having to ask him to stop controlling her actions with his mind conrolling mojo and he is actually angry and upset by this, but finally concedes because he wants to get into her panties.
Otherwise, I’m pretty game for most alpha heroes, even with the forced seductions (though I find the revenge by sex plot a bit cheesy). But the herone’s got to hold her own, too. Otherwise, I easily see the alpha hero becoming an emotional and probably physical abuser later on in their HEA.
Like some others, I think the term ‘alpha’ is used in such a broad sense in romancelandia that we’re often not talking about the same thing. I blogged about this a little while back on my research blog, with some rambling thoughts about possible strong hero archetypes in the genre. (I’ll do some more with that at some stage – in the meantime, comments are still welcome!)
My personal number 1 hero requirement is that they are real, with a believable emotional growth. If they’re believable, I’ll cope with a range of behaviours at the beginning of the story. I’ll also accept different behaviours in historical heroes than in contemporary – because I prefer my historicals to be realistic, rather than modern characters in fancy clothes 🙂 So, rapes such as in Claiming the Courtesan and The Flame and the Flower weren’t wallbangers for me, because they were a) portrayed in the context of the times, the characters, and the particular situations; and b) were written as emotionally challenging scenes, not intended to be ‘romantic’ or titillating.
In order for the HEA to have credibility for me, the relationship – from both partners – has to develop respect, honesty, and emotional intimacy. It’s that journey that I want to read, and I want it to be compelling. And while I enjoy the hot scenes, I don’t care how magical the Hymen or the ManRoot are, if that’s all there is to the relationship, it doesn’t work for me as a satisfying HEA.
Well, I guess the alpha hero argument stems from such stories as “The Taming of the Shrew” – where, yeah, Kate gets her man and a new attitude for life, but the dude had to starve, sleep-deprive, and emotionally blackmail her to do it.
Or even “Beauty and the Beast” – dude’s a clawing, rutting, animal – and the lady has to use her feminine wiles to bring him back to humanity.
Hmm, has there a catalogue of romance archetypes ever been inventoried? Cuz alphamale is def 1 of them.
I love SB Sarah’s “humbled-alpha – only to her” like someone else said,“that makes me hot!” Therein, I believe, lies the allure of the alphamale: our desire to tame him to eat from our hand alone.
I also agree with what many of you have said about the fact that an alphamale does not have to be an asshat as well. Stubborn? Sure. Arrogant? A bit. But selfish and pigheaded to the point that it leads to the harm of others? No way.
So, I guess that’s where I draw the line – if his behavior hurts others, if he is willing to walk all over people to get what he wants (and this includes rape, murder, etc) then he doesn’t earn the title “hero.” Not in my book.
Funny that the whole Jamie thing came up, because when I think of a great example of an AM, I think of him. I think DG has done an incredible job creating the characters of Jamie and Claire – they are REAL and have flaws, and are more amazing people for it.
My ideal alphamale hero: a natural leader, a strong man who goes after what he wants but follows a moral code that does not allow him to take the easy road. One who can be blinded by his own stubborn opinion that he is always right…until he meets his match and is (happily, if at first reluctantly) brought to heel by the right woman.
And there, I guess is the answer to Candy’s other question: I can’t stand dumb heroines who are always f-ing it up. A few mistakes thrown into the mix is fine sure, but broads who are TSTL (another archetype, hmmm?) aren’t worth the time, they can have the pansy-assed heroes. Save the alpha men for women who are worth the fight!
Maybe that’s why Kinsale stories appeal to me, they often have AM’s who have been brought low, suffered some sort of blow to their theory of invincibility, and though the basic AM qualities are still there, but has been tempered by circumstance…making a much more interesting character – one worth falling in love with, not just into bed with.
I, personally, have no line in the sand for alpha heroes. However, she said portentiously, heroines that put up with an excess of crap, of any kind, from any hero, really, really make me irate. If the hero, alpha or otherwise, is more obnoxious/misguided/overbearing/crude etc. that I think appropriate, then the heroine either needs to kick him in his goodies until he cries like a little girl, or she needs to walk away. Thus ending the book prematurely, but, hey.
I think this whole deal where the woman suffers in silence because she luuurves the jerk, thinking she’s being steadfast and womanly, well, that just feeds into that whole thing where men in real life treat the women in their life like dirt, be it actual violence or simply destroying their self-esteem (did I say simply?), and the women hang in there. As women, we’re pretty much programmed by upbringing and, let’s face it – romance novels, to believe that any man can be redeemed by love, ours, of course, but it’s not true. And it’s dangerous.
So, being the alarmist that I am, I feel like books that portray women being abused and taking it and coming back for more, they are dangerous. Maybe a touchy subject, but there are at least three romance authors I’ve heard of that were killed by their alpha male husbands. Were they believing their own fantasies to the extent that they couldn’t see the danger signals? You’ve got to be a strong woman to survive an alpha male, and too many of the heroines in books with abusive alpha males behave more like doormats. Bad role models. Hit the wall bad role models.
“Magical Hymen of Steel That For Some Goddamn Reason is Mysteriously Located Three Inches Up Her Hoo Hoo”
Seriously? That deserves a t-shirt.
The only hard line I have is rape. The right author and the right book can make me forgive a lot, but have a rape scene with the so-called hero and I shut off. Does he redeem himself? Does he grovel? Don’t care. Assuming I continue to read the book at all, I have a block of ice in my chest for the rest of it.
As to distinctions, I purpose the following:
Alpha Hero: Strong leader types
Alpha Hole: Abusive assholes and bastards
Who’s with me?
lili, you might be interested in an article on girls’ manga(Japanese comics) called “She Was Asking For It” that discusses the very dangers you bring up, albeit in another genre of fiction.
http://www.sleepisfortheweak.org/articles/shoujodangers.html
I’m a fairly inexperienced romance reader so far, especially compared to the people that post here, so I’m not totally certain I’ve figured out the “alpha male”, but from my own understanding of the term, the author that has nailed it for me is in fantasy rather than romance. Anne Bishop in the Black Jewels books.
I started reading Romance after the 80s rape heyday, so it’s only recently that I have been really bothered by some of the “alpha hero” paradigms put forth by current bestselling authors. Some of these I do think send a dangerous message to those who might already be vulnerable to abuse—young, sexually inexperienced women, for example. I grew up in an era when feminism was seen as not only a positive thing for women but as sort of a no-brainer. You were a woman, so of course you supported the idea that women should have equal rights and equal opportunity, that they could be equal partners in a relationship. The popularity of some recent paradigms that seem to encourage women to seek happiness through submission, by handing their power over to others, not only puzzles me but disturbs me as a woman. I don’t care if the hero exerts control through physical rape, butt-fucking Carpathian rituals, or genetically-enhanced mojo. The effect is to take away the woman’s power to choose. Am I the only woman crazy enough to freak when I read something like that?
But, supernatural or not, historical or contemporary, I think there are really a number of factors that influence how seriously I take the bad behavior of an alpha Romance hero:
* How invested I am in the story and characters
* How nuanced the characterization is
* How convincingly the author explains the behavior
* How convinced I am by the end of the book that the hero will not continue the bad behavior
* How equitable the h/h relationship is otherwise
In general, when an author writes characters who cross the line from bad behavior to serious pathology, warning bells go off for me. Unless the author does a damn good job of convincing me that the hero is not an alpha psychopathic stalker, an alpha sexual predator looking for a vulnerable woman to dominate/abuse, or an alpha sex addict who is unable to express any of his emotions—including negative emotions—except through sex, I’m not only mentally checked out of the story but definitely not up for future installments by that author.
I’ll laugh off some really appallingly bad behavior by alpha heroes when the book has little fictional heft: characters are rather two-dimensional shorthand stereotypes, plot is predictable hundreds of pages in advance, etc. In that case, I don’t respect the book, so I don’t take anything it says too much to heart.
But when the writing is good, and the characterizations more nuanced, I’m much more invested. If the hero fails to be heroic then, it’s awful, because the Romance genre doesn’t offer much in the way of payback for the reader except the HEA. I’m not likely to close such a Romance and think, “Gee, that story was really tragic and horrifying, offering little in the way of redemption for any of its characters, but offered some thought-provoking insights into the human condition that made it ultimately redemptive for me as a reader.” That’s not really what I’m looking for from a Romance. In a Romance, it’s all about the HEA. If I don’t like the h/h relationship, no HEA. This is true for any hero, alpha or otherwise.
I’m going to chime in a voice of agreement to the ladies who cited Jane Austen’s Darcy as the ultimate Alpha Male. Sure, he has his faults, and some of them stem from the alpha personality; he’s hardheaded, and he’s got enough arrogance for a small country. But under all that, he’s essentially a good guy, and definitely worth the time investment to redeem him.
A more modern example of what I think an alpha hero should be is Gabe in Jennifer Crusie’s Fast Women. He’s the kind of guy who comes in and takes charge, but at the same time, he’s dependable. He doesn’t fly into unreasonable rages, and he never tries to hurt anyone (least of all, the heroine).
So I guess what I’m saying is, in my opinion, an alpha hero should fit the part of the “hero” as well as the “alpha.” I need to be able to like him in spite of (or perhaps because of) his faults. I can’t admire someone who just seems to act like a jerk for the sake of being a jerk.
First off, love this site. Second, as an avid romance reader (practically a book a day, thank god for used book stores and libraries) I have found my favorite sort of alpha male. I’ve always liked the kind of heroes that are protective of what is their’s no matter what. I’ve always liked the silent alpha who only loses their temper once in the novel and then apologizes profusely for it. For example, in The Bride, by Julie Garwood, the alpha male hero doesn’t lay a hand on his wife or yell at her, but strives to please her, while denying his love for her at the same time. And yet he is absolutely terrifying to behold, he’s a warrior who will kill, and has killed, to protect those dear and near his heart.
I feel that the alpha male turns from hottie, to complete asshole-jerk when he
a)rapes the heroine
b)hits the heroine(especially this one, i can’t stand it when the hero uses his size against the heroine!)
c)blackmails the heroine into sleeping with him
d)has a mistriss.
Oh, and i always hate it when they make the heroine out to be so stupid and whiney! (I HATE crybaby heroines!!)
Again, the heroine in The Bride, by Julie Garwood, is strong and an alpha herself, and it’s so refreshing seeing that opposed to the weak-rape-victims-who-fall-in-love-with-the-rapists
heroines.
You know, I think I got a bit sidetracked in my rant. Sorry about that. Obviously, the subject hit a nerve.
I just wanted to add here that I think Suzanne Brockman is an example of someone who does a really nice job of balancing the pitfalls of the successful/alpha male personality—which may lead to difficulty in a personal relationship—with the vulnerability of a basically decent guy who sincerely loves the heroine and is willing to do what it takes to make her happy without compromising what makes him a strong, likeable guy. I may not love the whole military/SEAL mythos in her books, but the woman are rarely TSTL. In fact, they often give the guys a run for their money in the kick-ass competence department.
“My favorite alpha is definitely the Duke of Avon, from “These Old Shades.†He rarely relies on force and he isn’t nasty in his relationship with Leonie, although he clearly feels that he knows what’s best for her. (And mostly, he does.)
What makes him the ultimate alpha is just the way he’s always in control of the situation. He is always 3 steps ahead of everyone, eventually even causing his longtime enemy to commit suicide! Crazy! No rape, not even any kissing until the very end.”
And yet in the end it’s Léonie who has to convince Avon that marriage to him is what’s right for her. I love “These Old Shades”, but I don’t think I’d like it nearly as well if Avon was determined to have Léonie instead of nobling trying to give her up (though he doesn’t stand a chance against her :-). I agree, btw, about Vidal rarely being in control. I’m quite fond of him, but while as a teenager I thought he was very romantic, the older I get the more I find myself wanting to tell him to “grow up”.
For the back story in These Old Shades you have to look to The Black Moth. While the characters have different names they are essentially the same characters. Avon in this book is the villain but still entertaining. You can read the full text of the Black Moth on-line at http://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/heyer/moth/moth.html
It was published 1921 so the copyright has expired. It was also Heyer’s first published book I think so it’s less polished than her work done even a few years later.
Yes, I think one of the problems with alpha heroes is that it … isn’t a very realistic situation. I personally wouldn’t fall in love with a ‘tortured’ buffoon who doesn’t trust me/is using me. And in a romance novel- rape is something I can not tolerate at all. And yet some authors can do it. Others can’t.
An example of an unredeemable hero for me was in Jane Feather’s The Diamond Slipper. He might have had all these family problems but treating the heroin badly never helps the situation and this author was not able to sufficiently redeem the hero when it mattered.
The idea of the alpha hero is fairly cliche, it walks hand in hand with this fabulous/vomit worthy genre. But it can get a little dull and in some cases, makes the hero repulsive.
This is my first comment on this site, can I just say that it is absolutely brilliant. You girls are SUCH bitches. And I loves me some snark :p
***MILD SPOILER FOR BROCKMANN’S FON***
I totally agree. I just finished Brockmann’s new one and the whole time I’ve been reading this discussion, it’s been foremost in my thinking. Ric starts out all “Thou Shalt not be a PI ‘cause I say so” and I was rolling my eyes. But by the end of it he’s not only recognised her strength and competance, he’s admitted that she’s better at it all than he is, even without training, and is pointing out that Troubleshooters probably just wants Annie and he’s part of the deal.
P.S. My regular reading partner is out of town. Anyone read FON and want to squee with me over email about it? LorelieLong at gmail dot com
It’s interesting that the two guys listed initially are considered alphas. Dain is a big misunderstood oaf, but not an alpha in the sense I think of the alpha. He did from the get go have a soft spot for Jessica but really didn’t exude raw carnal sex that I put on an alpha. Maybe an alpha-.
Devon I absolutely grew to HATE in Windflower, which to me, while a beautiful book, isn’t a romance. If you lift the ‘romance’ between Merry and Devon you have very very little relationship between them. And even til the very end, Devon forces Merry, even to marry him, and then tricks her. I felt SO sorry for Merry, because from the very start, all her choices were taken from her, and even at the end, Devon, like all the others, was taking her choices away. So I hated the rat bastard. Plus the fact that there was only like 50 pages of actual “romance” in the entire book. Which was extremely disappointing—- because without the rest of the book, the romance was one of the lamest I’ve ever read.
Granted, if there’d been a chapter or two of Devon feeling contrite, realizing how much he’d abused Merry, gave her the right to choose for herself, letting them actually grow as a couple instead of captive/abuser—-I would have grown to like him. But is he alpha?
Erm, only if beta in your world is comatose.
Others have mentioned it, but alphas to me are those written by Susan Brockman, Angela Knight, Linda Howard, Christine Feehan, and oh yeah! Lisa Marie Rice—- and I’ll think of more later.
To me alpha needs to be clearly very masculine, oozing a degree of testosteroni animal magnetism, and like I sad, having an air of raw carnal sexuality. Yeah, the ideal alpha adores the female, feels extremely protective of her and dominates not out of his need to control her, but to keep her out of harm.
And yes, he feels the same raw pull to her. He sees her as his other half, his completion and the emotions he couldn’t express otherwise, she allows him to express them.
Alphas are my favorite males in books. Really good ones are rare and wonderful, but to the authors who write about them, THANK YOU! and more please. 🙂
“Kassiana – I also hate this device in reverse. Despite knowing the heroine for some time, and (probably) being married to her, our hero still believes some convoluted story about her and some other guy that she barely knows/is related to being secret lovers.”
—And people wonder why I hate the Elizabeth Lowell “Only” books. This is why. The heroes treat the heroines like shit based on stupid rumors like the above for most of the book and then don’t usually even apologize for it. Thankfully, I found them at the used bookstore locally so I didn’t pay umpteen dollars for them, but even so…wow. Bad. And Lowell hasn’t gotten much better, either. I had the same reaction to Pearl Cove.
Agreeing that Suzanne Brockmann does a great job with her Alpha male heroes. One thing that makes them work is the women they are paired with. They kick butt all on their own LOL I’ve got me some serious crushes on some of her SEALs! LOL
Sorry Lorelie, I have FON here at home but am not starting it until Friday. The hubby and kids are going camping (without me!!) and I’m going to devour it this weekend!!
Cheri Adair, good alphas.
Cherri Adair, the woman who uses “hoo-hoo” in serious love scenes.
Good alphas are not enough to over come that.