Sunday, September 8, 2013


I woke up this morning thinking about things that happened this summer in my world that were emotionally and physically trying--and how I've dealt with them. Specifically, how I've worked to purge negative emotions from my weekly CSA newsletters.

Was I raised not to value my emotions? To suppress them?  Act 'grown-up'--is this healthy? Is it better to have an honest freak out session and then reclaim one's composure?

I've read that depression is anger directed inward. That doesn't sound good. Neither is selfish anger, intended to intimidate and over power.

What about "approved" emotional reactions: grief...happiness...falling in love?

And in the pre-dawn dark, I wondered: as romance writers, do characters with heightened emotional reactions stand out more? Or is it best to put "normal" characters into emotionally charged situations?


  1. Hmn? That's an interesting question, Ana.

    Nowadays the buzz seems to be about escapism, more so than ever. I guess that would mean 'normal' characters, even in emotionally charged situations might seem too much like our own lives.

    Too, those characters with heightened emotional reactions probably have the most to overcome in an inner conflict sense, perhaps making for an even more satisfying HEA when he/she overcomes in the face of true love.

  2. I think both types of characters can be fun. Normal characters in emotionally charged situations require a balance or a bit of realism. They can't get too overwrought or their credibility is called. Characters with heightened emotional reactions can be fun to write because they allow us to say, "what would happen if..." and sometimes let us live vicariously through them. But at the same time, we have to be careful not to go overboard or we'll lose the reader.

  3. Must admit I prefer the normal characters in emotional situations. When characters become 'larger than life', they actually become unreal to me.