I have had a bit of a brain block for a while about books that are connected through family members or friends. I knew there was something about these books that bothered me and the other day I finally figured it out.
Here's where things are going to get dicey!
Say you read a book about Jack and Diane (or Wesley and Buttercup) and you love their story and at the end you know they will live HEA. At that point, they are usually youngish and have the rest of their lives to live.
Now, you have to read about Jack's brother, Luke who was 5 years younger than Jack in his book. At this point, anywhere from 5 to 10 years could have gone by and suddenly the reader is re-introduced to Jack and Diane and a brood of kids. Everyone seems happy, there is a special smile that Jack gives Diane that Luke wishes he could give to someone else.
Okay. In case you need a clue, this is not about Luke.
I'm sorry but, I left Jack and Diane at their HEA and there were no children and life had possibilities and there was a feeling of a happiness and new found adventure. At that point, I was happy. I had been through some of the worst and best moments of their courtship and that is what I was there for!
Meeting Jack and Diane ten years later does not appeal to me in any way. I'm not sure what it is exactly but I kinda of like having the characters I meet in books, remain the way I leave them. I'm not even horribly fond of an epilogue that happens more than 3 years after the final page.
There are times when an epilogue is needed but sometimes the story can stand on it's own without it.
It was years ago, and someone told me what book it was and I wrote it down but, I have three other author's written down that also may have written the book I am thinking of so I can't be more specific.
I read this book in the late 80's early 90's and I remember really enjoying the story. Basically a woman is kidnapped by group of Indians and is kept by a warrior. I think he even marries her but he tells her all the time, he won't ever let her leave him and he'll always be by her side. She may have tried to escape a few times. The heroine loves him but doesn't not feel free. At the end of the story there is an attack and the heroine is standing alone at one point and can see her husband on horseback across the way. She waits for him to come to her and realizes that in that moment he is freeing her to leave or stay with him. Of course, she runs to him.
Okay, I'm a happy camper.
Epilogue
I'm not thinking it will be any big deal but it begins by talking about how over the years they have many children and then grandchildren and I'm like, huh? and then it goes on to say that when the heroine died the hero kept his promise to never leave her side. He stayed by her grave for the rest of his life and died 2 or 5 years later.
HOLY. SHIT.
Now, I understand by reading a historical the next logical step is to realize these people are now dead. Thing is, I don't take that step. They're not dead because they are in that book over there. The above book killed them right in front of me!!! I guess the author wanted the reader to know that they did live HEA and then they died.
Thanks.
I remember being so floored by this ending and because it was right there it wasn't like I could go back three pages and be back to where I left them. Uh, no. They were dead!
Un. Cool.
Some might say, in most romances that have continuing characters, they don't die. Well, don't even get me started on Sandra Brown's Another Dawn that had the hero from Sunset Embrace die after 20 years in front of his wife and daughter who was the heroine of the book! My lid just about blew off!!
Let's back off the death thing.
I just don't want to get glimpses of a couple that I read about with a passel of brats and a bunch of in-laws and well, it's no longer about them as much as it is about family now.
This is where I have never understood people's fascination with Linda Howard's Mackenzies. In the first story you meet Wolf and Mary and read their love story (which by the way, does not hold up after all these years). I believe I read this book years ago and didn't bother with Linda Howard much at the time. Soon I learned that there were other books by her about Wolf and Mary's kids.
I started to read them but, then you would get the scene where Mary is looking at her husband who still looks good with grey in his hair and still makes her fires burn. Hey, in my head, at the end of their book, I knew they were going to grow old together, I just didn't want to see it!
I have not read Gabaldon yet (down!!) but when I went to the booksigning with my friend she said, Gabaldon didn't have much more room to write more than one or two books because the characters will die. I stood there with my jaw on the floor. 'How are you going to feel about that?' I ask my friend. She said she will sob her heart out because they are like her family.
Now, have you ever read a better reason not to read a book? I fall in love with a bunch of characters and have to be there when they die?
No. Thanks.
So how do you deal with the aging of a hero and heroine from a well loved novel? Do you find the glimpses into the lives to be too rosy. Would you prefer that if this is to be done by an author that the time lapse between the story lines be short? I mean, Quinn has a character whose book is out now that I have not read because I know her family is going to be there and when I first met her I think she was 10!!! Now she is going to have her own romance? Gah.
Just to make your brain hurt, I can handle a couple hundred years separation between family members. That way, yeah the original couple is dead but, I still know they are alive and young in the book I own.
Yeah, I admit it.
I'm weird.
6 comments:
I feel EXACTLY THE SAME WAY. I HATE epilogues, hate connected series (of siblings--friends I can take better), even though I read them, HATE the whole 'see them X years later and they're still mushy for each other' thing. BLECCCHHH. BTW, I think Anne Stuart's epilogues are usually, no always, terrible. Devil's Waltz was no exception. BLECCH.
Good topic!!!!!I am SO with you on this one too. And I know exactly how you feel about the two Sandra Brown books - I read them both and felt the same way. Another incident I remember reading is a few Native American books - yes, I know they are scorned - but they were written by Rosanne Bittner who does a very good job - not Cassie Edwardsitis - thank heavens. Anyway, in one book the hero (half white - half Indian -but not cliched) and the heroine have thier HEA. Then I read another one a few years later about one of their sons. When this book opened, the mother had died soon after giving birth (and she was the heroine of the previous book!!!) and the father (previous hero) had died not to long ago in a farm accident. Why the hell the author had to do that I will never know. I went ahead and read the sons book - but much of it was ruined because his parents were both gone.
I read romance because I KNOW there will be a HEA - so I really felt betrayed that the author had destroyed the HEA for the parents. So for me - the book ends when the book ends and I don't want to read about the same couple years down the road either.
In the first story you meet Wolf and Mary and read their love story (which by the way, does not hold up after all these years).
You are obviously not a Linda Howard fangirl--that book so holds up, but of course, I AM a Linda Howard fangirl--LOL.
I completely understand what your getting at, but I don't mind reading series as long as they don't get out of control and I can take or leave epilogues, though in some cases I like to imagine the long term HEA.
I have a huge issue with Native American romances as long term how happy can these people and families be, the same thing for books set in the mid 1700 Scotland.
Megan - I think she wrote an epilogue this time because there were readers who felt Black Ice ended too soon. She even wrote an epilogue of how she saw there life shaping up. Anne Stuart was the author that taught me that I didn't need an epilogue - some of her contemps end abruptly but I *get* it.
One book called Blue Sage had a wonderful epilogue and it was needed. I loved that book. I may have to re-read it for Tara Marie's 'does the book still work for you' challenge.
Kristie - I actually love Native American books though they are hard to find and they are not created equal. Having a HEA destroyed is creepy. It's like the author didn't like her characters very much so she killed them the next chance she got.
Oh! There was a Diana Palmer book with a single name title (maybe Nora or Lacy) that had the heroine leave the hero because he was an ass. She met another man and I *think* they had sex - the man was totally in love with her but she loved the ass. Finally she goes back to asshat. Epilogue - says they had many great years but then he died. A man (it was the guy - by the way, the first time I ever met a manaconda man! DP does so many things first) showed up a few months later and married the woman. I liked that epilogue because uh, the first guy was an ass ;) Hmm, I've discovered two epilogues that work! I may have to write about that now.
Tara Marie - Oooops, you're right, not a fangirl. I loved Mackenzie's Mountain the first time I read it years ago but I found Mary a bit much 12 years later.
I'm one of those people who like to believe that the characters I read about live to a ripe old age. In my mind, they never get smallpox or are not at the village when it gets wiped out. Luckily for me I don't know everything about Native history so I have this fissure that allows for people to have never had to be put into camps. Not realistic but it isn't something I know enough about so I have this 'could happen' feeling. Same with the movie Dances With Wolves - even though I know their way of life is about to end, I still have this hopeful feeling that the ones who were free remained free. Too sad if I think of it any other way.
1700 Scotland - is that the famine? Bad Cindy.
CindyS
I'll probably post more about this later when my blog is up and running, but I'm running into the same problem: what do do with Anthony and Emily from HOT SPELL novella when her brother's story is two hundred years later. I mean, they're dead...but they are too important to Colin not to mention. Sigh. If I could get away with it, I'd not mention it at all, though -- who wants to read one story only to find out they're dead in the next? Gah.
This ended up being one of my problems in the Nora Roberts's trilogies -- the appearance of the hero/heroine from the previous books. On one hand, it's early enough that it doesn't feel like a sappy epilogue (except that someone always ends up pregnant, but they're actually useful in a story instead of feeling like they're just showing up to say 'hi' to the fans) but...grr. The overwhelming perfectness of past characters always annoys me.
I like connected characters, for the most part -- but usually in a forward-looking way: I see a character and I want to read their story...but yeah, I don't always want to revisit the old couple. Particularly if they now have a brood of children and I get a list of names as if that's supposed to mean something to me.
Sigh. But I'll admit I don't know how to get around it, either: my books are connected, and the previous h/h show up. The best I can do, really, is to make sure the characters' personalities stay intact -- but even then, on one level I'm cringing (thank God no sappiness has shown up (yet, and I'm hardly the best judge)) but inside, evil author voice is yelling: LOVE MY CHARACTERS AND IF YOU HAVEN'T READ THE FIRST BOOK GO BUY IT! LOOK WHAT YOU'RE MISSING OUT ON!! :D
Meljean - okay, it's two hundred years later - good. Don't tell us how old they were or how they died - key point. I know they are dead but if you tell me exactly then re-visiting them in the first story will be weird because all I will be able to think about is how they died. I mean, there is a reason why we don't know the when, where or how of death ;)
You could have their descendants - great-great grandson be a pain in the ass or remind Colin of his sister when she was young. Maybe even relay some of their heroics when they were 'before' kids. That way, they remain young for the reader. Also, no need to tell us how many brats they had, you can just mention how they made sure they spread their genes all over the map of the world - that'll give us a good idea ;)
You're the writer so no worries. Just saying that as long as I don't have to be there when they die then I'm okay. It's like those stories when characters travel back in time but in our time they are dead but, their time still exists. Yeah, mind-bending ;)
CindyS
Post a Comment