The Redemption of Antiheros

RIPE FOR PLEASURE (book one; The League of Second Sons)

by Isobel Carr

Available Now!


I’m going to be popping around the blogosphere all month with RIPE FOR PLEASURE. I did an interview on Risky Regencies last week that had some wonderful questions, and I’ve written blogs about dogs and food and clothing, topics that I don’t want to repeat here.

What I’d love to do today is talk about antiheroes. Specifically, I’m going to talk about the possibility of antiheroes as romantic heroes. I happen to love a good antihero (I’m totally team Solo!). I love their complexity. I love their depth. I love watching them grind and twist as their gut responses and their morals collide. I love discovering what motivates them, and where they draw the line. I love watching them grow.

When I was thinking about who my younger sons are, what drives them, what motivates them, I was also watching a lot of television that centers around antiheroes: Seth Bullock/Al Swearengen, Dexter Morgan, Raylan Givens/Boyd Crowder, Lucius Vorenus/Titus Pullo, Malcolm Reynolds/Jayne Cobb, Michael Westen/Sam Axe. These kind of characters abound at the moment and people love them. I find myself most strongly drawn to the ones that are just barely on the hero side of the line, but there’s a twinkle about Jayne Cobb and a secret depth to Al Swearengen that I can’t dismiss (for example, I was undone in season two of Deadwood when you discover just how attached to Jewel Al really is).

These men are complex, conflicted, driven, and often—let’s admit it—fucked up. Some are more salvageable than others. Some of them have the potential to step up and become actual heroes. And the romance writer in me can’t help but think the right girl might be a big part of that . . .

Clearly my predilection for this kind of entertainment leaked over into my series. Lord Leonidas Vaughn, younger son of a duke and hero of RIPE FOR PLEASURE certainly starts out in this vein. If the Thicky Prince and Bertie Wooster are “of the linage of Turnip”, then Leo (and many of the other League members) are “of the linage of Bullock” (funny how the farm references just seem to be ruling the day). Leo’s after a lost treasure. He knows where it might be, he knows that the person sitting on top of it is unaware of its existence, and he’s has no intention of sharing it. He’s not a bad man. He won’t hurt people to get what he wants. But he has no problem using them, lying to them, charming them, deceiving them (in other words, doing all the things younger siblings often do to get their way, at least in my experience as the eldest who was always on the receiving end of my siblings’ machinations).

Where it gets sticky is the redemption of all this bad boy behavior. How much groveling does he have to do? What lengths does he have to go to in order to make it right? It’s tricky. Will all readers buy into the redemption of an antihero? I don’t know. But two things make me believe they will. First, there has always been a willingness in large parts of the romance community to forgive a hero almost anything (even up to and including forced seduction/rape), and second, I bet that at least one of the boys on my list of antiheroes is the kind of scoundrel you’d forgive almost anything.

So what do you all think? Can such a thing as an antihero-hero exist?


Future Blogs:
May 4th: Romantic Times Blog (Mastiffs: history and talking about mine)
May 18th: Borders Blog (Hands-on Research: Lemon Cheesecakes)
May 26th: Unusual Historicals (Interview)