Tags: , , , ,

lawbooks.jpgTo wrap up (maybe) our discussion questions for today, an inspiration has come from Lisa’s wonderful heroes. Yes, we’re back to heroes, but let’s face it ladies, without men in our lives things could get rather boring. Boring is not a word ever used to describe a Kleypas hero. Why is that do you suppose? Hmm. . .

I’ve heard Lisa say she doesn’t like writing the “traditional” historical hero. What would be a traditional hero? Is he wealthy, titled, a rake and redeemed only by the heroine’s true love? In many historical romances those things can usually be used to describe a hero. Not that I don’t enjoy those heroes myself, but should that be the norm?

Or can you have, say, a gypsy? A self made man? A man who has his problems but redeems himself on his own before he meets his heroine? Couldn’t he be a traditional hero as well? Complexities and complications make a hero what he is, deep down. Perhaps it’s more realistic to have those “different” sort of heroes to root for, to admire, and to wonder about rather than the titled rake who reforms for his lady love.

Book CoverSeduce Me at Sunrise has Merripen, a gypsy, an orphan and someone who has made himself what he is. Not that different from Cam Rohan. But neither of these heroes is the same sort as St. Vincent, a titled man who is redeemed by Evie. Or Westcliff, a peer who is very well respected, and very opinionated but balance by Lillian.

Where would this then put Leo? He’s going to get a book eventually, at least that’s the hope. What kind of hero would he be after Mine ’til Midnight? After the Seduce Me at Sunrise even, though I haven’t read it yet . . .

It’s more than the hero then, isn’t it? It’s not that he’s traditional or different, but perhaps his heroine is there to. . .that’s where it all falls on you. . .

What is it about these heroes that make them tick? Traditional or otherwise. . .