A few thoughts on age and romance novels

I’ve been reading an excellent sci-fi romance by Jessie Mihalik. Polaris Rising (2019) is set in the far distant future. Humankind has spread across the galaxy but remains deeply capitalist. A small number of rich families live like the aristocrats of old, their actions affecting the lives of millions of people.

The lead female character, Ada, is a younger daughter of one of these aristocratic families. When the story begins, she’s on the run from her father and determined to avoid an arranged marriage. She meets Loch, an outlaw with a very dangerous reputation. From the point of view of any romance reader, he’s a very attractive person. He’s capable, knowledgeable, strong, and thoughtful.

However, one thing makes it difficult for me to picture Loch in the way that I would like. And that’s what I want to talk about in this blog post today. It’s his age. The story specifically states that he’s in his mid-twenties.

This specificity made Loch’s character less romantically appealing to me as an older reader. For much of the book, I was able to pretend that he and Ada were somewhere vaguely in their thirties. (It’s reasonable to assume that people might live a lot longer in a space-faring civilisation, meaning that adulthood starts later.)

As soon as Loch’s age was specified, he became someone young enough to be my son. He’s still capable, knowledgeable, strong, and thoughtful, of course. But from my position as an older reader, he’s no longer the same. He’s nowhere near my stage of life, so I can’t see him in “that way.”

In most genres of fiction, the age of the main characters is not that important. It doesn’t matter to me how old the detective is in a crime novel. But romance is different, particularly when the love interest’s immediate physical appeal is integral to the other main character’s motivations. (It isn’t Loch’s mind that first attracts Ada.) In this kind of romance, the love interest should ideally be someone the reader doesn’t feel too distanced from. Otherwise, we can’t immerse ourselves in the other character’s feelings toward them.

Being able to identify with the character who is in love is another important part of the reading experience. Their feelings need to be understandable to us in a visceral way.

In romances where the characters’ ages are not specified too heavily, the reader can imagine them as slightly older than the author perhaps originally intended. When the ages are clearly specified, it cements the characters into a particular life stage and risks distancing readers who are in a very different period of life.

Supernatural romances tend to avoid this problem. When the love interest is many centuries old, it places them outside the usual flow of human life. Readers of all ages can imagine themselves swooning over a 1,000-year-old vampire without the worry of “he’s too young / too old for me.”

All this brings me to two conclusions. Firstly, in romances about adult couples, a little vagueness about age is not a bad thing. Secondly, it’s important that we have romances about adult characters at all life stages.

For me, the issue with Loch isn’t that he’s different to me. I’m not an adventurer in space and he’s not a 21st-century Englishwoman. The issue is that life stages are an important aspect of how humans relate to each other. He’s literally not in the same train carriage as me.

Writing historical fiction that appeals to modern views

I really enjoyed the first season of Belgravia: The Next Chapter. It’s about a young couple’s first year together. There are also very strong subplots about their siblings, their neighbours, and their staff.

The show got me thinking about how historical fiction can stay true to the past and yet appeal to modern tastes.

It’s set in the 1870s and touches on some features of that time, most notably the severe difficulties faced by gay men, unmarried mothers, and disabled children. We all know that a lot has changed for all three groups over the last 50 years. Our modern sensibilities are very different to those of the 1870s.

What I liked about the show is that some of the characters voiced the views that were mainstream at the time. This helps us to understand why people thought as they did.

I was impressed by how the writers balanced this historical accuracy with modern sensibilities. The characters’ conversations reflected the 1870s, but the action of the plot led to outcomes that appeal to 2020s thinking.

Belgravia: The Next Chapter demonstrates that it’s possible to stay true to history while still appealing to current social values. The solution isn’t to make the characters say modern things. It’s to help them overcome the worst aspects of their time in a way that pleases us today.

Of course, there are other ways to accurately reflect history within the parameters of present-day tastes. Belgravia: The Next Chapter is designed to be cosy evening TV. Naturally, its approach is relatively cheerful.

I’ve been watching season one of a supernatural horror called The Terror. It’s a fictionalised account of a real British expedition that went missing in the Arctic in the 1840s.

To me, The Terror feels very authentically historical, but it has two elements that appeal to modern sensibilities while staying in keeping with the time.

Firstly, the characters are well written. We can relate to them as human beings who have the same weaknesses and vulnerabilities as us. They struggle with the same human emotions that affect us today.

Secondly, the supernatural element, although well integrated into the story, can be interpreted by viewers as a modern comment on British colonialism. The British characters are literally blundering into an indigenous spirit that does not want them there.

The lesson to be learned from both shows is that it’s not necessary to make characters say modern things to create historical fiction that is suitable for modern readers/viewers.

Dialogue that sounds too modern can be a problem for writers of historical fiction, so this is worth remembering.

The Jane Austen Collection (2020)

I’ve been listening to the complete works of Jane Austen on Audible. I’m using The Jane Austen Collection, released by Audible Originals in 2020.

The main narrators are Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Claire Foy, Billie Piper, Emma Thompson, and Florence Pugh. The dialogue is voiced by a large cast of actors, and there are sound effects.

So far, I’ve listened to Sense and Sensibility. I’m now most of the way through Northanger Abbey.

It’s a lovely audio production. I’d recommend it to anybody. It’s like listening to a really good radio play.

It’s been a while since I last read Jane Austen. Listening to the novels now, I’m struck by how closely she observed human behaviour and how relevant she still is today.

In Northanger Abbey, her descriptions of the young friends in Bath reminded me of my student days. The way they interact and sometimes misunderstand each other feels very true to life. It has some of the awkwardness of the TV show Girls.

Sense and Sensibility includes an account of a disastrous relationship breakup that involves elements of ghosting and gaslighting.

I’m interested in the authors who influenced Jane Austen. So, after Northanger Abbey, I’ll take a break and give Fanny Burney or Ann Radcliffe a go.

Idealised romantic heroes

Last night, I watched a Christmas comedy-romance about a medieval knight who travels from England to modern-day Ohio in America. He has a quest to fulfil to become “a true knight.” Along the way, he finds a friend in Brooke, a school teacher who no longer believes in love.

I’m talking, of course, about The Knight Before Christmas (2019), starring Vanessa Hudgens as Brooke and Josh Whitehouse as Sir Cole of Norwich.

If this movie were Christmas food, it’d be a gingerbread house. It’s innocent, cheerful, and almost entirely free from peril. The only dangerous moment is resolved quickly by Sir Cole.

All in all, The Knight Before Christmas is the perfect Christmas movie for people of all ages.

While watching the story unfold, I was puzzled by Sir Cole. He reminded me of another fictional character. But who?

It took me some time to realise that I was thinking of Damon Salvatore from Vampire Diaries (a TV series that is definitely not safe viewing for children).

Despite their significant differences, Sir Cole and the vampire Damon are romantic ideals. They’re steadfast in love, physically strong, and protective of those they care for.

Both knight and vampire also possess a kind of otherworldly wisdom that makes them very attractive. They’re literally from another time and place. So, we can believe they won’t behave like the people we meet in everyday life. This gives them a kind of escapist glamour.

Sir Cole is squeaky clean and as adorable as a Labrador puppy dog. He’s also not very deep. The movie tells us nothing about his flaws. This medieval knight isn’t a real human being; he’s a symbol of the true love that Brooke declares she no longer believes in.

Damon is Sir Cole’s exact opposite. He’s a dangerous predator who can turn off his morality like a switch, yet he still manages to be a romantic hero. Why? Because he isn’t human at all. We can’t judge him by the standards of our world.

Romantic heroes like Damon and Sir Cole work because they’re not real people. We can enjoy them without bringing in our lived experience. Believing in them gives us a chance to enjoy an ideal.

Importantly, they don’t remind us of anyone we know. And this gives the storytelling a chance to transport us away from daily life.