(originally published on November 28, 2008)
Last week, I talked to two stunningly attractive men. There I was, happily married and all, just talking to them, and came out with my toes tingling and a broad smile on my face because that’s how hot they were. Because this happened within two days, it got me thinking about what made these men so very attractive. One is a colleague, and admittedly he is tall and dark, but he is definitely balding and deals with this by shaving his head. The Jean-Luc Picard look, if you want. So he is passably good-looking, if you like that style, yet what makes him breathtaking is not his looks, but the way he deals with you. His gift is true attention to people. He enjoys talking to you, and smiling at you, and while he does so his expression tells you he really values and likes you. And it’s not on the surface: He remembers what you spoke about weeks later, and comments on it. He is genuinely interested in people, not afraid of showing it, and shares his own opinions and experiences openly. Talking to him always cheers me up, because he gives me the present of his concentration and approval.
The second man I talked to, a college student, used to be an awkward adolescent, but when I met him last week I could only think how much he’s grown into himself. He is not at all conventionally attractive: He is of middle height, stockily built, just a tad overweight, with features too pronounced to be considered handsome. Yet he stood there, and glowed with energy just beneath the surface, with good humor and with self-confidence. He knows who he is and is happy where he is, and when you see him, you get the impression this energy he has may lead you into a great adventure. (If you wonder about my enthusiasm: My second boyfriend had the same sort of attractiveness, so I know what it feels to be fascinated by a man like that.) Add to that the courtesy and generosity that stems from true self-assurance, and he becomes nigh irresistible.
I am positive these two men get a lot of female attention – I know my colleague does. Yet you won’t find many men like them between the covers of a romance novel. Partly I think this is due to marketing pressures, partly because – pardon me, authors! – they are far more difficult to write. Because it is far easier to insert “tall”, “dark”, “handsome”/”rugged”, “brooding” than actually take the time to develop a character who has the gift of true attentiveness, as my colleague, or that of joyful energy, as the college student.
Thinking about these men (and very pleasant that was!) made me consider romantic movies I’ve watched recently. I haven’t been to the cinema lately, because none of the romantic comedies that were on really attracted my interest. Instead I watched a number of DVDs, often together with my husband. Romantic movies that stuck to my mind are: Sideways, with Paul Giamatti; Garden State, with Zach Braff; Punch-Drunk Love, with Adam Sandler; and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, with Jim Carrey. None of these actors has the kind of looks that are celebrated again and again in romances. None has the kind of (screen) personality, either. Yet I found these films delightfully romantic and loved the male leads, with all their no-more-than-average looks and their foibles and eccentricities. I do not particularly care if an actor is physically perfect to enjoy his performance. I have been known to watch a film just because it stars Mark Ruffalo, whereas I avoid anything with Matthew McConaughey in it. So where are the Zach Braffs and Paul Giamattis in romances? Are there any?
If you are looking for unconventional heroes, AAR offers three Special Title Listings: one about Beta Heroes, one about plain and ugly heroes and heroines (Beauty Is in the Eye …) and one that includes heroes and heroines with a physical defect (Less Than Perfect). On the second list, heroines by far outnumber heroes, whereas on the third, numbers are about equal. So it appears that a physical defect is acceptable in both romance heroes and heroines, whereas plainness or actual ugliness in a hero is not tolerated easily. Even writing a blond or red-haired hero, a short or a stocky hero seems to be a risk not many authors are prepared to take. Are we readers really so single-minded, so bound by convention that we insist on tall, dark & handsome, no matter what?
Getting back to the two men who impress me so much, can I come up with romances that feature heroes with their kind of attractiveness? An attractiveness, which, when I encounter it in real life, makes my toes curl and thus should be equally appealing when I read about it in a romance?
The joie de vivre and energy exuded by the college student are comparatively easy to find, if still rare. Rupert Carsington from Loretta Chase’s Mr. Impossible comes to mind instantly, as does Tristan, Duke of St. Raven, in Jo Beverley’s St. Raven. Yet these men are still described as extremely handsome, with the usual dark good looks and a tall, muscular physique. Where’s my stocky, medium-sized hero that has the same sort of charm?
I am hard pushed to discover an example of my colleague’s brand of attractiveness in a romance. The one character I can come up with is Gervase, Earl of St. Erth, in Georgette Heyer’s The Quiet Gentleman. He wins over his hostile family by listening to them and by getting to know them, and he is extremely good at paying attention to the heroine’s concerns. And he has this smile. He is as good-looking as most heroes, but at least he’s blond. I’ve liked him a lot since I first read the novel at age fourteen.
So, fellow-readers, what real-life characteristic in a man make your toes curl, and are there romances you can recommend that feature a hero of this kind? Do you know of any other heroes of the sort I describe here? And authors, if you read this blog: Have you written about unconventional heroes, and what have the audience’s reactions been to them? Can we encourage you to write more of these heroes? Please?
-Rike Horstmann
I enjoy spending as much time as I can between the covers of a book, traveling through time and around the world. When I'm not having adventures with fictional characters, I'm an attorney in Virginia and I love just hanging out with my husband, little man, and the cat who rules our house.
Another Georgette Heyer hero who is not classically handsome is Freddy in Cotillion. I know there are many Heyer fans out there, but as a reminder, in this story Kitty is required by her uncle’s will to wed one of her cousins in order to inherit his fortune. One cousin, Jack, is gorgeous, charming, etc. The other, Freddy, is not bad looking but can’t compete with Jack in the looks department. Yet he is kind and thoughtful, loyal and liked by all. Wealthy in his own right, he doesn’t need Kitty’s money, he just wants her to be happy and will do all he can to make that happen. The story is funny and delightful, one of my favorite Heyers. I think so many types of heroes can be made attractive by a good personality, a good heart, a sense of humor, loyalty, integrity, etc. Looks are only one of many factors. Although they don’t hurt, either!
There was a time when I pictured Daniel Day Lewis every time a hero was dark haired. Sean Bean was my image of many blond heroes, especially if they tended to be a bit rough around the edges. Both actors were intelligent, intense and focused, and (Bean especially) stunningly good looking from some angles but almost unattractive from others. My current standard for movie star good looks is James Norton, but again it is because he can play the tortured hero (“Grantchester”, “War & Peace”) or the barely verbal sociopath (“Happy Valley”) and is not simply another pretty face. As for Brad Pitt, he was quite beautiful when young but I think he’s actually more attractive now that his face has more character.
In books, Carla Kelly often has heroes who aren’t traditionally handsome.
So true of CK’s heroes and that makes them very attractive for me. Sean Bean has not aged well, IMO. His recent appearance in the prison 3 parter, Time, really showed that. Adored him as Sharpe ;-)
Susan/DC, Thanks for that Carla Kelly reminder. Her heroes are wonderful yet not outstandingly handsome. She’s one of my favorite writers.
Kelly’s heroes are almost uniformly beta, but to my mind they are often more masculine and strong (and have a better sense of humor) than the so-called alpha heroes of other authors.
I also think sexy is different than attractive. My sense of what sexy is different than my general category of attractive men.
One thing that really got me hooked on Suzanne Brockmann in the early days was her description of Joe Paoletti in The Unsung Hero when the heroine looks at him (and his receding hairline) and thinks in a few years he’s going to be the best looking bald guy on the planet. It was so charming and unexpected and it was clear the heroine thought he was hands down the sexiest guy. He also wears reading glasses he pulls off when he sees her and the idea of the big SEAL with the reading glasses he’s hiding is pretty adorable as well.
I think the fun of reading about a new hero is learning the quirks and unique features he has. Redheaded heroes were barely a thing before Gabaldon made Jamie the gold standard of romance heroes. I think I read one romance novel before Outlander came out that had a genuinely redheaded guy as the hero (not auburn or even russet, but red).
The best authors can make any traits or features attractive, and for me there is something charming about the odd or quirky guy. Although certainly considered attractive like all his siblings, Cletus in “Beard Science” is kind of the overlooked Winston brother but he’s (like many others’) my absolute favorite of the series. Much more than the charmers or stunners.
I’ve always fallen for the “ugly-cute” variety. I like little flaws and don’t get excited by perfection. A very beautiful man would scare the hell out of me though perhaps they suffer from the same issues that very beautiful women have: “Is it just my face/boobs/hair/lips, etc?” I have to confess that the most attractive man in our village (other than the DH, of course!!!) is a gay man in a very happy long-term civil partnership. He is a very senior surgeon and not so young any more but I adore him, as do most of the women around here. If I had to have a gynecologist getting me up in the stirrups of old, then he is the one I would be happy to lie back and think of England for. He’s approachable, huggable, funny, interesting, listens, has a paunch these days but is terrific fun and popular with everyone – men and women. I am occasionally envious of his partner!
He sounds just like the heroine’s ex in Kristan Higgins’ The Best Man.
I tend to read quite a few Harlequin HRs, Harlequin Intrigues, and a few Harlequin Romantic Suspense titles and have noticed there is a rather narrow stock type for what their heroes look like. Almost all of them are over six feet tall- even if they live in an era in which that would have been statistically unlikely. Or, if the author doesn’t want to play too fast and loose with history, lo and behold! He is still the tallest man in the room. Or, in the case of miniseries with brothers each getting their own romance, the leads are always within an inch of each other’s heights so- heaven forbid!- no heroine has to end up with a guy of average height.
Plus, there is a preponderance of inexplicable washboard abs. Okay, sure. This often makes sense in the Intrigues and RS where the heroes are former Navy SEALS or Marines or something. (Never mind that Drew Carey is a former marine reserve and certainly doesn’t have the expected former marine physique.) But in HR where a titled hero’s most likely form of physical exertion would have been horseback riding? Riiight…
In a way, I get it. Romance publishers don’t go broke catering to the majority of their readers who are perfectly content reading about Mr. Six-and-a-Half-Feet-Tall-Washboard-Abs who might be allowed to get away with bearing scars if they derive from some badass activity like war. On the other hand, it gets kind of formulaic and dull for readers who want a little more variety- or for whom the typical romance hero doesn’t hold much appeal.
I routinely write heroes who vary in personality, backgrounds, and physical appearances. So far, I haven’t had any complaints on those grounds. Then again, I’m writing erotica, so, the few comments I get don’t focus on what the characters look like.
Jayne Ann Krentz is one author I can think of that doesn’t exclusively have to have the tallest guy in the room be the hero. She is also the only author (before Outlander was published in the early 90’s) that wrote a true redheaded hero in one of her early books.
I love Lord Carew’s Bride by Mary Balogh and the hero is described as average looking and of middling height. In a way, it allowed his gentle personality to shine though and I thought him extremely attractive.
I have always been attracted to men who have fine features and are thin without so much muscle, in my university I always used to look at a boy who had a really cute face but my friends considered that he “has a doll face” or that they would never have a boyfriend that it is literally “cuter than you” to me those things do not matter to me hahaha simply a “cute” aesthetic calls my attention instead of “dark, muscular and manly”.
Anyway, although we have traits that attract us, you finally fall in love with the personality, in the end that is what makes you see someone really beautiful, unfortunately I have not read many romantic heroes that are not quite … typical in appearance just like heroines, I admit that I lack experience in reading because I started in my 20s to be a reader of romance and I have only a few years more.
But one of my favorite romance tropes are those stories where the hero or heroine find the other “ugly” or “simple” the first time they see him but once they fall in love they begin to see their partner as “the most common person. attractive / beautiful that I have seen as I did not realize before “.
I confess that I rarely pay much attention to the author’s physical description of either the hero or the heroine. I build up my own pictures based on the way they behave. I often wonder if this is true for other readers as well. And then I wonder if I’m wasting my time when I try to describe my own characters.
I always think of the way characters are described—particularly the de rigueur washboard abs, but also the amazing eye colors & personal fragrances, gorgeous hair (that never seems to need any maintenance) on the heroine, or athletic bodies that are seemingly genetic gifts with no regular exercise required—as being “markers” for the attractiveness of the characters: the author is simply using the contemporary currency to let us know the hero & heroine are attractive people. I too generally go into my own imagination when visualizing how the h&h look. The other day I was surprised when halfway through a book there was a reference to the hero’s blond hair and I realized I’d been seeing him in my head completely differently from the way he’d been described throughout the book! I have noticed in some recent books—Katee Robert’s BRODERICK and Rachel Reid’s TOUGH GUY, for example—there have been passages that specifically say the hero does NOT have washboard abs—not that it helped in the case of TOUGH GUY, the cover model is rocking an eight-pack.
Personally, I find six-pack abs kind of off-putting, freakish actually. A guy who can open a jar is strong enough forme.
I’m not keen on those covers where the man’s abdominal/pelvic muscles stand out in obvious, V-shaped definition. To me, those always look like he has no body fat, which makes me concerned for his health. His jeans sliding off his bony hips don’t help there.
when i hear the name Anthony Hopkins, i always tought of the movie Meet Joe Black.“.
Anthony Hopkins is one of the veteran actors in Hollywood that should be given a lifetime acheivement award.””;’
All I can say is thanks for posting the picture of Mark Ruffalo!
MaryK, thanks for reminding me of Race de Vere! He is actually my favorite Beverley hero, but had completely slipped my mind when I wrote the text about Attractive Men.
Race de Vere from Jo Beverley’s Hazard is one of my favorite heroes. He’s described as the “”slender blond man with the fine-boned features and laughing blue eyes”” and the heroine thinks he’s “”too … slight. Slight in build and slight in manner. Slight in substance, too.””
I find that attractiveness has little to do with looks in the long run. Men of honor, integrity and character come in all looks. And often a very handsome appearance can hide a very ugly interior.
However, I think that we are drawn to certain outward appearances. I had a friend once who thought that overweight men with beards were the ultimate in sexiness. She said, “”they are just so huggable!””
Interesting! I also think attractiveness has nothing to do with handsomeness. I also don’t find Matthew McConaughey attractive at all, give me Josh Lucas – a bit similar – anyday.
Personally, I do not have a problem with the ‘tall, dark and handsome’. My imagination always takes over, I often even forget the hair colour etc. and automatically start picturing guys like Richard Armitage, Sean Bean, Josh Lucas, David Boreanaz, Billy Zane, Russell Crowe, Jeff Goldblum, Bruce Willis or even Robert Carlyle in my mind – based on the character.
I’ve just read a book “”To Seduce a Sinner”” by Elizabeth Hoyt where the hero wasn’t at all physically attractive. He’s described as ‘wrinkled’ and ‘long faced’ and even ‘horsey’. He did have a very attractive personality – the sort that appeals to men and women – in that he could laugh and joke and was generally the life and soul of the party. Of course all that laughter hid a scarred and tragic past but he wouldn’t be a hero if that wasn’t the case!
I love Jasper–that’s one of my favorite early Hoyt’s!
Mine as well. But I immediately thought of Donald Sutherland with that description. With the head thrown back in laughter. Not at all a conventional male beauty either in the story or in real life. A lot of times it’s the huge personalities of these men that makes them attractive. Self confidence and a sense of humor or wit are – to me- key.
Well, Rike, my personal favorite historical romance War and Peace features just such a hero in Pierre. In fact, the tall, dark and handsome one Prince Andre engages in just a little too much navel-gazing at inopportune historical moments so that really one gets just the teeniest bit exhausted with him and then, of course, one feels guilty because karma catches up with him.
There is BBC series made from this book that seems to go on forever (go figure!) but features the very young, very sincere, and slightly overweight Anthony Hopkins in spectacles. I know he must have been playing Richard the Lionheart in Lion in Winter at about the same time but for me Pierre is the heart throb. Probably because he actually has a heart that he works on developing despite heartbreak. Not for him the sissy way out, swearing off women because he has been hurt. Oh, no, he is right back in the game more vulnerable than ever. A real hero.
Seems like some authors might take a look at that prototype. To the best of my knowledge, Pierre has never been out of print.
Rike, I have always found interesting looking men to be more attractive than pretty ones. Particularly ones with sort of overlarge noses and glasses. Sexy glasses, that is. Not big plastic Soviet ones.
Sometimes it’s what they radiate too. I have never found Brad Pitt particularly attractive, although he is objectively good looking. In comparison John Krasinski is not precisely handsome – he’s a little boyish, a little bumpy-nosed and bushy-eyebrowed, a bit long-faced. But I’ve lost count of the amount of times I’ve sighed over him on The Office. A couple of episodes ago, coming out of the building and seeing Pam was back – he glowed. He was GOLDEN.
I also think Matthew McConaughey is completely overrated. I would like to know WHERE was Richard Armitage on People’s Sexiest Men list? He’s just my type of beaky-nosed, thin-lipped gorgeousness. If he would don thin-rimmed spectacles, it would probably be too much for me!