I don't know how this happens. I really don't. It's just my karma, apparently, to get the oddest blogging days. Like Super Bowl Sunday and Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday. And today--Presidents Day. I mean, yesterday was Valentine's Day--great post, Nicole!--and tomorrow is Mardi Gras, which holds some sexy promise. Even the Chinese New Year started yesterday, which is very exciting, but I can't really post about the Chinese New Year on Presidents Day, now can I?
Don't get me wrong. I like Presidents Day and MLK day, and I loved Super Bowl Sunday (let's just say that no matter won, I got the prize...tee hee hee). These are very important days in American culture, but they're just difficult to connect to anything sexy and/or romantic.
Yes, there's romance in politics, and I'm not refering to sex scandals. George and Laura Bush, Barack and Michelle Obama, Jimmy and Rosalyn Carter, John and Abigail Adams, George and Martha Washington--all these couples have carried an aura of romance throughout their tenure as first couples.
However, we also have JFK and Jackie, Bill and Hillary, and other couples whose relationships have been tabloid fodder for years. Needless to say, having a relationship in politics looks anything but easy...or sexy.Throughout the ages, we've had politicians whom many considered attractive or blessed with sex appeal, including our last and current presidents, some governors (Sarah Palin and Arnold Schwarznegger), even some senators (check out the photo of Scott Brown in Cosmo). However, I think if we did a poll, most people would probably say they like to think of a politician, especially a president, as focused on leading the country and working for his/her constituents as opposed to being like the hero/heroine of a romance or erotic novel. Therein lies my problem.
As I bemoaned when I posted about the Super Bowl, there aren't too many heroes in romances who are athletes, and there are even fewer who are politicians, if any. Most of the time, politicians are the bad guys, or, even if they're the good guys, the hero is usually working to serve and protect him/her (like a bodyguard or secret agent). While intellectual power is sexy and physical power is sexy, a man with both intellect and physical power is even sexier.
For some reason, romance and politics just don't mesh. That's not too say that politicians can't or don't have good marriages or love relationships; they just have realistic ones. Real relationships are tough gigs and take a lot of work, even when two people are desperately in love. While that can be subtext in a romance, I think many readers, like me, don't want it to be blatant.
As ever, writing this post got me to thinking. Besides politicians and athletes, who else should I probably not use as a hero in a novel?
1. Cannibals (whether fine and young or not)--Big no-no. While the potential for conflict here is exciting--should I propose or make her into a nice souffle?--I don't think this would be believable.
2. Zombies--While vampires sucking your blood during an encounter can be tre sexy, having a zombie chomping your fingertips off instead of kissing them would just kill the mood.
3. Writers--I just added this to see if anyone was reading, but now that I think about it...
4. Lemur shape-shifters--I do have a lemur shifter who appears in one book, Disappear, but he's not the lead. The lead shifter was a tiger...grrrr! Happy Chinese New Year!
That's all I can think of right now. It seemed for every idea I came up with, my Muse kept challenging me with a "Yeah, I bet you could it." So I'm off to see if I can, indeed, turn a neurosurgeon with a nervous twitch into a romantic lead. Feel free to share any heroes you would never, ever write. Until next time, which will probably be the Anniversary of the First Ball Bearing...
I am Cameo Brown, and I approve of this blog post.