8 Responses to “The HEA - Myth and Reality”

1. Jill Sorenson Posted: Jun 13th, 2008 at 9:01 pm

   1 For me an HEA is more like a suspended moment in time. I don’t extend it in my imagination to “growing old together,” whether I’m reading or writing. I also get kind of weirded out when an author revisits characters in a series, and the hero and heroine are 20 or 30 years older or whatever. I want them to stay the same hot guy and sexy girl, not turn into my parents. Not sure if this is on topic. Am very tired.

2. Jackie Posted: Jun 14th, 2008 at 3:22 am

   2 Isn’t that the name of a book? I NEVER PROMISED YOU AN HEA… Sorry, bad joke. Serious topic. Yeah, real life isn’t what we read about when we pick up a romance (or a fantasy) — BUT those stories should still be grounded in reality so that we can relate to, and cheer for, the characters. There’s a catharsis going on when those characters fall in love and, against the odds, stay in love, or when they fight the Big Bad Evil and win. Their victories allow us, momentarily, to be victorious too. And damned if that isn’t part of the joy of a great story.

3. azteclady Posted: Jun 14th, 2008 at 7:50 am

   3 I have found that as I grow older (or more experienced, take your pick) I am more critical of romance novels endings–I don’t only want the rose colored glasses, high on hormones and fairy tales, HEA. Now I want to be able to think these people have a chance at staying together through thick and thin. The books I’ll keep and read again are those where I can see these characters continuing to grow together. Great post, Darlene! (and I’m so borrowing the “you’re starting to bore me” bit! *chuckling*)

4. Shiloh Walker Posted: Jun 14th, 2008 at 8:20 am

   4 BUT those stories should still be grounded in reality so that we can relate to, and cheer for, the characters. Ditto this. I want my HEA when I read romance. I don’t want to close it and start thinking… it will never last. Which means to me, did the author establishing the emotional connection? It has to be a deep one, something that’s going to abide through all the changes life throws at you.

5. Evangeline Posted: Jun 14th, 2008 at 11:16 am

   5 You know what? I’ve never read a women’s fiction/chick lit where the female protagonist left her husband because she was bored. Marian Keyes did it in Angels. But most books are about women whose husbands up and leave them in the lurch and follows their path to ta-da, discovery! I’d like to see a book explore what would make a woman leave a very long-term relationship. I’m sure women have midlife crises! But I digress. I want the HEA, but it doesn’t have to be a lifetime committment. For instance, I remember really liking the end of Sharon Cullars’s Again because it ended with the h/h starting their courtship over from scratch after the woo-woo stuff that overtook their interactions with one another. I didn’t necessarily think they were going to leap into marriage after the first date, but I felt they would make it. The trouble with the HEA is that it has come to equal marriage and babies, and if neither of those things are shown in some sappy prologue, readers panic and think the couple broke up–as though falling in love equals immediate marriage (not to say it doesn’t, but we’re talking about the genre). But perhaps this need for the couple to show lifelong commitment is why we have so many superficial conflicts, and why there continues to exist the notion of the woman giving up her high-powered job to move to the little town to be with the hometown hero. Boy this genre can really enforce very conservative values…

6. Darlene Marshall Posted: Jun 14th, 2008 at 4:07 pm

   6 Thanks, everyone, for chiming in with your thoughts! This is something that interests me as a writer and as a person in a long term relationship, so I appreciate the feedback.

7. SweetNSourGirl Posted: Jun 16th, 2008 at 7:21 am

   7 Long term relationships are tricky things. From what I’ve seen it’s difficult and some people aren’t capable of it. And even then sometimes it’s just an acceptance and really apathy (If he dies, I’d be okay, if we grow old together that’d be okay too.) In romance novels I don’t like that attitude, call me naive but I want them to have red-hot passion until the hero and heroine kick the bucket. Now the question is: is that realisitic?

8. deemer Posted: Jun 18th, 2008 at 10:20 am

   8 I love this post. I’m sorry I’m so late in the game, but I just had to respond. About ten years ago, I went to school abroad for a year. I had no money, and thus did not own a tv. The first time I watched a movie in that year was on my flight home. The film was “Fools Rush In”, with Salma Hayek and Matthew Perry. Television and movies expect suspended belief, and it’s my theory that the more you watch, the more of your own belief you’re willing to suspend. It’s my only explanation for that piece of crap movie. I have no understanding why on earth movies pair two very good looking actors, throw them together with wildly different cultures, beliefs, opinions, personalities, and families, and expect the audience to believe that they have a HEA simply because the woman gets pregnant. The same with some romances. They spend the entire book fighting, fighting, fighting. They barely have a civil conversation with each other. Perhaps they’re each dwelling on their own BIG MIS, or sometimes they just despise the hero’s “arrogance” or the heroine’s “stubborn nature”. Yet, great sex and all is well? They’ll survive the seven year mark? And it’s no coincidence that when I got married was around the time that I became much more particular with my book selection.