This historical heroine isn't modern enough

I struggle with this in both my reading and writing.

To me, there's a difference between historical romance (e.g. Outlander) and romances that take place in different periods of history (e.g. most regency romances). Agents and publishers generally treat them differently as well. In the former, there is an expectation that things be historically correct, including the sensibilities and morals of the time. The latter is allowed to have some anachronisms. Certainly Lord Stuffington, can't whip out his cell phone, but he may unbutton his shirt to open it (rather than pulling it over his head, as would be historically accurate). And Lady Stuffington might have modern views on equality (gender, race) and may perceive the world through a rather modern lens.

To me, this is okay. I don't read romances for the history lesson. In many ways they are akin to fantasy fiction to me. I can completely understand how someone would see it differently though.

But I suspect a truly accurate work wouldn't be nearly as romantic to most readers. When the h inhales the scent of the H and describes the sour smell of man, unwashed for days, having spent those days in layers of wool, even in the summer, that doesn't set quite the same mood as the scent of leather, cedar, and something purely, unmistakably Stuffington. When he smiles rougishly at our fair h, if he's missing several teeth, it won't have the same affect as the symmetrical white grin.

I think everyone has a line of what disbelief they are willing to suspend and what they aren't. Almost anyone would reject the cell phone. Some would reject the button down shirt, or the strong, fierce woman who sees herself at equal or better to any many. Few would reject more modern hygiene.

I am most familiar with historical romance- bodice rippers. Where the rogueish hero usually just about rapes our heroine in the first few chapters and then they love hate throughout the book to the whirlwind romantic conclusion.

They are both usually not considered pretty for their time period but would make suspiciously great looking Victoria Secret models of today, and usually the heroine is also an educated upstart who loves to read,and the hero is always fascinated by women who are historically inaccurate!

Same.  I often do read historical romance and and mystery for the history.  Mary Balogh is one such author.  There's a huge variety within the romance genre.

Only the first book of the Outlander series could be considered a romance, so on the whole it's taken as just "fiction."  Sometimes historical fiction, sometimes literary fiction, it does seem to make cataloguing difficult.  lol

The critiques of Outlander are one of my peeves.  I don't expect everyone to like it, but to insist that Jamie is a rapist is just fucking stupid. 

Yep. I got into it with a lady that insisted that Frank was abusive, but Jamie wasn't because he was from the 18th century. Umm...

ETA I'm almost done with this book. It has been probably the best book I've ever read about slavery/civil war and reconstruction. Beautifully written, great story based on the authors family and well researched. It was published 50 years ago. I'm shocked no one made a movie or miniseries. Highly recommend


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk