.jpg)
Oh, Cicero, your legs look so fine below your toga. Take me!
Bollywood movie stars with heavy eye make-up. The rugged Marlboro man. A courier in Louis XIV's court with a white perfumed wig and lace cuffs. An African hunter with intricate body scars made by rubbing wood ashes into knife cuts. Culture and marketing dictate prevailing standards for rating attractiveness, but shouldn't the attraction between a hero and heroine be deeper than clothes, cars, and skin? Do the best hunters, the strongest fighters, the last men standing always have flowing hair and azure eyes?
Astrologers and biologists assert subtle, yet powerful attractions--compatibility and pheromones. Our eyes might linger a second longer on a man with physical beauty, but as soon as he opens his mouth, or fails to hold open the door, we know.
Oh yes, we know.
I agree, Ana - character, personality etc etc are more important than looks - but the heroes in romance novels do tend to be impossibly handsome!
ReplyDeleteHi Ana,
ReplyDelete"Bugger" You've taken the words right out of my post for tomorrow! :(
I'll vote for Marlboro man, though do love the smell of a cigar: pref slim type. But, a blond hero in city-slicker suit with preternatural blue eyes and nice smile wets my taste buds every time without fail for a contemporary romance. For a historical I'm apt to let in to my heart a Richard Armitage look-a-like, no probs. ;)
best
F