The Whole Duty of A Heroine

Michelle Buonfiglio: What do you like most about "Lessons of Desire?"

Madeline Hunter: I like the characters, Phaedra and Elliot, and how their relationship makes them both rethink their lives and priorities, and even their pasts. They both change and grow and deepen. When they meet, they are very sure they have the other's number, so they have fun poking each other's preconceptions. They also come together from the beginning as two mature, confident individuals who are not coy or retreating.

They engage in a contest of wills and passion, but at each step the cards are face up on the table. Other than "Stealing Heaven," I have not written another book where both characters were so frank, and so accepting, of their desire for each other from the get-go.

Michelle: Who or what inspired "Lessons of Desire?"

Madeline: The book was inspired by a single line in its predecessor, "The Rules of Seduction." That heroine went shopping with her friend, so I had to introduce the friend. For reasons I do not know---it was not a planned character but spur of the moment----I decided to make her this unusual outsider who dressed in black and let her long hair flow.

The first lines describing her wrote themselves: If Phaedra Blair did not possess both style and beauty, the world would consider her merely strange. Since nature had blessed her with both qualities, society thought her almost interesting.

I knew at once that I had the heroine for another book. I also knew her very well, very thoroughly, in that instant. I also knew that she would NOT be Christian's match. He was the older brother of "Rules'" hero. He is eccentric too, and I figured if I put them together they would just end up trying to outdo each other in being odd.

Later in "Rules," Phaedra attends a wedding. Elliot looks at her---and looks again. I had my hero.

Michelle: Please tell us a little about your heroine, Phaedra. How did women like her manage to thrive during that period in history? And how were they like or unlike women today?

Madeline: They were considered peculiar, comical, scandalous, or even dangerous to society. In making their case to the world regarding their beliefs, it was an uphill battle where they gained little ground. The arguments were basically disregarded even though they might be discussed. Elliot's initial dismissal of Phaedra's philosophy-reasoned and respectful, but still a dismissal--- was as good a reaction as she was ever likely to get outside of the radical and artistic subculture in which she lived and in which her philosophy was popular.

However, they were not necessarily totally ostracized. If a woman with those beliefs had great talent, accomplishment or beauty, she achieved some acceptability. Phaedra's mother was a better example of that than Phaedra. Her mother was a writer and noted scholar and she entertained an illustrious group of artists, intellectuals, and politicians. Members of the ton would come to her house to enjoy this stimulating circle. They would not, however, invite her into their own drawing rooms in turn.

Phaedra has chosen not to attempt even that level of acceptability. She lives as she pleases among her artists and intellectuals, and she expects good society to leave her alone. She is not interested in recruiting other women or in changing any minds. She has no desire, when she meets Elliot, to explain herself or try to get him to understand her. "You go your way and I'll go mine now, but thanks for the help" is pretty much her attitude, even if she finds him very attractive.

These pioneers had a much harder situation than any woman does today, or even fifty years ago. There was little tradition to back them up, and some of their ideas were too scandalous to get a hearing. Even the early feminists of the later 19th century had it easier.

Michelle: There seems to be a trend in historical romances that affords heroines "modern sensibilities" that appeal to contemporary readers. Yet these heroines wouldn't have existed in their own time in history.

How do you create a heroine who moves within mores and strictures of her time period, yet who also appeals to today's romance reader?

Madeline: I don't think we need to give our heroines careers and early feminist ideas in order to appeal to readers. I do think we have to make them intelligent.

I like heroines who have given some thought to their lives and futures, and made some choices no matter what the choices might be. I have written heroines who chose conventionality, even clung to it. They could still be interesting characters within those strictures. It is not the mores and strictures that will lose a reader. Shallow characterization will, though.

The whole modern sensibility trend is not only about appealing to readers' preferences for characters who think like we do now, however. That "modern" mentality and character orientation provides grist for the story. It gives the heroine something to do besides shopping and fretting about her social invitations.

Both writers and readers want these ladies to be doing something. Unfortunately, in many historical time periods ladies of the aristocracy who lived traditional lives did not do enough to sustain a novel. So if a heroine is going to conform to society's mores, she still needs to have a life rich in experiences and interests, and probably some achievements that set her apart from the average woman of the day.

On the other hand, not all women toed the line the way we often think. Some of them did have "modern sensibilities" and chafed at the restrictions. Some of them "worked the system" to have more freedom. Some of them removed themselves from polite society and thrived in other circles, those of the arts for example, where other ideas about women were more welcome. There have always been nonconformists.

Using a character who does not conform requires anchoring her unconventional ideas in the context of the time period. If a writer doesn't then it appears anachronistic and contrived.

I think that the character has to acknowledge the mores and strictures and respect the power that they have in her world. I think that she has to experience the penalties of violating the social rules. The other characters can't act like it is no big deal either. I believe it helps if she does not live in a contrary way for frivolous reasons, or take stupid risks and do silly things just because she is in a pique of rebellion.

Michelle: "Lessons of Desire" addresses some complex issues women experience in examining their feminism, as well as the balance of power in male/female romantic/sexual relationships. Why is this an important part of the novel?

Madeline: I have always been fascinated by the language of sexuality (before it deteriorated into only four letter words.) A woman "gives herself" to a man, or "yields" to him. A man "takes" or "possesses" a woman. The language indicates a contest or battle, which is reflecting the power dynamics at work. It also alludes to issues of dominance and submission in all areas of the relationship. The sexual act becomes an allegory.

So in this book I tried to explore that. Both characters are aware of the way questions of dominance and submission are affecting their evolving relationship, both in emotional and physical ways. And the emotional and physical play off each other, one affecting the other.

Their awareness of all of this derives from Phaedra's freethinking, nonconformist philosophy---what we might call "proto-feminist" views. Her decision to live free and independent of all men's dominance, even a father's, means their contest plays out on different ground than normal.

It is definitely not a field on which Elliot has battled before. A woman who believes in free love does not "give herself" or "yield". As he puts it, none of the normal labels applies to what develops between them.

Phaedra realizes that she can only control the balance if she remains emotionally distanced, which she is not able to do. Love demands compromises, or, as Elliot tells her, there is no such thing as free love because love does not leave one free at all. So, she is faced with hard choices involving her sense of identity, what she really wants and believes, and what love is worth.

I think that today woman face similar choices and similar questions. What are we willing to give up for love? In a world where a woman can do anything and be anything, "giving up" might mean doing and being something other than what one had planned. That can make it a hard question.

***

Friday: Madeline dishes about neo old-school heroes, her fantasy romance, and the state of the "modern" historical romance.

Posted in: love, romance novels, feminism, authors, heroines, madeline hunter, lessons of desire, michellebuonfiglio, romancebuythebook

E-mail | Permalink | Print