At a recent writers' conference I was given a goodie bag with nearly 100 postcards, bookmarks, and other 'favors' advertising novels with female protags. As I read through them, sorting the ones that interested me from those that didn't, I discovered something about myself. If the card blurb described a heroine who was a gritty, kick-butt, smart-alecky, or take-no-prisoners type then that card ended up in my 'not interested' pile.
While I think pseudo-super-hero-tough-gal types are great fun in the movies, in novels I prefer my heroines strong, yet feminine. I'm certainly not interested in novels about weakling damsels in distress. But I do tend to favor heroines who are resourceful-real-people types, rather than estrogen-macho.
So why the difference? Why do I enjoy pseudo-super-heroines on the screen, but not on the page? I suspect it's because when I watch a character on screen I feel I'm watching her story from the outside. But when I read a character on the page I feel I'm experiencing her story from the inside. Experiencing her story from the inside means I have to stand at least partially in the character and perhaps I'm not a kick-butt kind of a gal.
Unless, of course, I have to be.
What about you? Do your tastes in movies and novels always run parallel?
Something that's helping me write today: A conversation with fellow writer Jen Fitzgerald this past weekend which has me thinking about the difference between the deep joy of the art of writing and the mere practical benefits of publishing.