How much is too much?
I used to read plenty of historicals, back in the day.
Most had the same theme, almost all of them featured a hero who pretty forcefully bedded the heroine, who then fell madly in love with him.
*insert eyeroll*
I once thought that was how romance had to be written.
So, how much is too much?
Let me give you a couple of examples –
One of my heroes drugs the heroine with something that gets her pretty darn hot under the collar, chains her naked to the bed, and films her. Then he sends the tape to the guy he thinks is her husband, to torment him. (Along with some pretty dire threats, I might add.)
Too much?
I don’t think so. He’s not forcing her as such, he’s not even touching her.
He also gets his comeuppance at her hands.
She essentially rapes him. (Result of the drug.)
Is that too much?
Another scene/chapter I have (different novel) is one where the hero reduces the heroine from a sassy, snarky, sexy young woman, to a naked, terrified, crying wreck on the bathroom floor.
Sounds awful, doesn’t it?
It’s what happens. There’s nothing he can do to prevent it, he doesn’t want to do it, but the end result is awful.
Still sounds awful, and I hear people go “You always have a choice”.
Yes. He has a choice. The other choice is letting her die.
Although she knows this, what happens to her at his hands is going to make both their lives hell.
So, is it too much?
Should I soften the blow, because reading that chapter is going to make a great many readers cringe? They won’t hate him, he’s doing it for all the right reasons, but it is going to make for a bit of dreadful reading.
I don’t like the old historicals anymore, but I wonder how we will react to some things written today, in ten years time.
You tell me.
How much is too much? Can you justify away everything? Or not?
Does a taboo only apply to physical violence, or is mental torture just as bad?
Is threatening as bad as doing?
What about the role reversal? (She doing it to him, rather than the other way around.)
Related Posts:
6 Comments
Leave a Reply
Our Books!
Interesting post. And as much as I hate to fall back on the old “it’s all in the execution” – I have to in this case.
I think if your emotional involved with the characters – then yes, I what happens to them has impact on how the reader is going to view that scene and if they will ultimately toss the book or not.
If you don’t give a rats ass about the characters, then who cares what torture you put them through – because it hasn’t grabbed you by the throat and made you WANT to care.
I do think that times change and tastes change. I used to love those historicals that now are looked at as nothing more than rape scenes. *sigh* I’ve tried to reread some of my favorites and find I can’t stomach them now.
Right now nothing seems to be off-limits in the entertainment business. Sex, violence, drugs – the more the better. In ten years, society could very well be looking down on those things. Debora(Quote) (Reply)
Sometimes the end justifies the means. I can understand why you need emotional areas like that….the black moment, to prove something to your heroine, etc. I think I’m with debora here. As long as you do it carefully and the other option is even worse, I can understand how it can work!
So hurry it up and get those books of your published so EVERYONE can enjoy them! ;oD Stephanie(Quote) (Reply)
What I hate about some of the old historicals…I’m Native American and many of them portray them as savages. The white woman is kidnapped and held captive and raped. But she falls in love with her captor because of his majestic beauty.
I agree with DD. It’s all in the way you navigate the scene. I think if the reader has seen some insight into the motive of the main character…it will work. Chelle Sandell(Quote) (Reply)
I do believe it’s in the execution. I, however, am very sensitive to physical and emotional abuse/violence. Pretty funny coming from someone who writes about murder, huh?
Some violence doesn’t bother me in the least. Other violence, especially rape, pushes my buttons and not in a good way. The subject is very personal to me and any scene that teeters along those lines will lose me as a reader. Jennifer Bianco(Quote) (Reply)
Chelle, I have to tell you — I loved Dances with Wolves. Not because of thicko Kevin Costner, but because it showed the Sioux as living, breathing, CARING people. People who had children, who cared for their loved ones, who had concerns just like every other human being on the planet, regardless of race, color or creed.
Silke(Quote) (Reply)
The actors were fantastic and I cared a lot about every single one of them. (While Costner may have dropped off the face of the earth, and I wouldn’t have noticed.
When I was little, my dad lent me his precious Karl May books. While they were fiction, and inaccurate, he took a great deal of care with how he portrayed people. His Apaches weren’t savages. They were regular human beings, just like everyone else. They lived and loved, just like everyone else.
These books were WAY ahead of their time, but because of them, you will rarely find a German from my Dad’s and my generation, who views a Native American as a savage.
Karl May (1842-1912) is the very writer who inspired me to want to write.
But to get back to the original topic — yes, that usually annoyed me too, which is why I rarely bought them. It just didn’t ring true, after reading Karl May, you know?
Hard to say, Silke. Would I find those scenes entertaining? Probably not. I’m too much of a Pollyanna type, myself. Are they over the top? Depends on the context and the story, like you said. And everyone’s different. Some people would be more accepting of those scenes. I usually can’t read things like that because I’m too sensitive (ie,wimpy). But some people aren’t bothered a bit.
It’s all subjective.
Cyn(Quote) (Reply)