A couple of weeks ago, I blogged about “Literary Deal-Breakers”–plot elements or types of characters or settings that make one not try a book, not matter how well-recommended, or put a book down unfinished. On a more positive note, I though I’d talk about “Literary Deal-Makers”–types of stories or characters or settings that will cause one to actively seek out a book.
I know there are certain story elements that appeal to me across genres. I’ve always loved stories about married couples whether in mysteries, romances, classics, historical fiction, or plays. The Scarlet Pimpernel, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, The Spiral Path, The Real Thing, Laurie King’s Mary Russell series, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, Busman’s Honeymoon, Len Deighton’s Bernard Samson books, An Ideal Husband. Modern setting or historical, happy ending, tragic ending, or something in between. If I hear a book or play or movie described as an examination of a marriage, I’m likely to seek it out.
I also like stories about ex-spouses or lovers reuniting. The Philadelphia Story. Persuasion. Much Ado About Nothing. Bath Tange. Raiders of the Lost Ark.
And I’ve always had a weakness for spy stories. Whether it’s the moral ambiguity of John Le Carré or Len Deighton, an espionage-laced historical romance like Mary Jo Putney’s Petals on the Wind, a play filled with double-crosses like Tom Stoppard’s Hapgood, or a television series like Spooks/MI-5, if I hear “spies” or “espionage,” my attention is caught.
It’s not surprising that these interests mesh in the Charles & Mélanie books. They also continue to influence the type of books (and movies, plays, and tv shows) I seek out.
What about you? What type of plot premise or character or setting makes you seek out a book? Do your “deal-makers” work across genres and eras?
Be sure to check out the Fraser Correspondence. I’ve just posted a letter from Simon Tanner to his actress friend Cecily Summers, which catches up on what happens with Manon after Cecily helps her escape the Tavistock Theatre early in Beneath a Silent Moon.
June 9, 2008 at 8:44 am
The flipside – this one is trickier, as it’s easier to identify negatives! Superficially, covers and titles attract me – I love creative or intriguing packaging, and that leads me to read the blurb on the back of the book. Plot-wise, ‘historical’ fiction acts as a magnet, from the 1790s to the 1960s! I admire first-person narratives if done well – characters with distinct ‘voices’, and not just an exercise in point of view. On a tangent from the Scarlet Pimpernel series, reading about actresses, particularly in the eighteenth/nineteenth centuries, fascinates me – fact or fiction! And like Tracy, I also find relationships, more than romances, are a draw – the highs and lows of being with somebody; ‘Deserving Cinderella meets wealthy but misunderstood nobleman’ just bores me silly, as it’s been done to death.
June 9, 2008 at 6:08 pm
I like books about actresses, too, Sarah–in fact, I like books about the theater in general. A theatrical setting is something else that can get me to try a book in a variety of genres. I love the wide range of eras you enjoy reading about! How do other people feel about first person narration? Some of my favorite books employ it (the Mary Russell series ofr instance) but in general I prefer a broader range of povs.
June 10, 2008 at 3:20 am
Sarah’s right, it is easier to define negatives!
I like:
Non-virginal (and not ashamed of it) heroines.
I like romances with estranged married couples (assuming it’s not the usual “hero commits adultery while heroine ties her legs together” bit).
I like Dark Heroines; but they are very hard to find. Most authors chicken out.
I like to see ordinary heroines finding their strength in extraordinary circumstances. (Also very rare)
I like heroines who are strong *without* being damaged. Not that damaged heroines aren’t fun (Lily Bard!) but too often, it’s as if the author has to find an *excuse* for the heroine to be anything other than sweet and gentle. “She had an Unhappy Childhood, that’s why she…”
June 10, 2008 at 6:56 am
Negstives may be easier to define, but you’ve both done a great job of defining positives! I almost included “convention-breaking, non=virginal, dark heorines” in my list, but it got too hard to define. I think I should have broken the category up as you did. There’s Sophy in “The Grand Sophy” who cheerfully and ruthlessly defies convention but isn’t dark or tormented (one of the great things about her is that she’s very secure in herself) and presumably is a virgin. There’s Barbara Childe in “An Infamous Army” who also breaks rules but is distinctly tormented and morally ambiguous. My mom once called Barbara “an unhappy Sophy.” I think it’s an apt comparison–Sophy meddles in people’s lives and solves their problems. Barbara is more likely to create problems. There’s Harriet Vane, who is unconventional and damaged but who I wouldn’t call dark. There’s…well, another problem I ran into was I couldn’t think of enough examples.
June 11, 2008 at 4:25 am
I don’t hate ALL virgins, Tracy!
I just hate it when the heroine’s virginity defines her entire character. Frankly, it’s too often a lazy shortcut that authors use to show the reader and the hero how Good and Noble the heroine is.
“She can’t be a murderer/spy for Napoleon/golddigger/etc, she has a hymen!”
Not to mention, it’s used as a substitute for the heroine’s personality. “Here is my heroine. She’s a virgin. That’s all you need to know.”
June 11, 2008 at 6:57 am
I didn’t mean to imply that you hated virginal heroines, JMM! I don’t either. A lot of my favorite heroines–from Sophy Stanton-Lacy to Venetia Lanyon to Elizabeth Bennet–are presumably virgins. But they’re complex, interesting people, and their virginity isn’t portrayed as something that defines them (well, in Venetia’s case it’s more of an issue, but it certainly isn’t the sum of her character). Like you, I get frustrated when the heroine being a virgin is used as a shorthanded for characterization or proof of her innate goodness. I think one of the reasons I like books with experienced heroines is because the heroine not being a virgin subverts so many literary tropes.