Skip to main content

Babies, Babies, Babies

In an earlier post, I posed the question, "Why do romance novels assume that a baby = HEA (Happily Ever After)?"  To me and to many other women like me, babies are not the be all and end all.  I, personally, do not need a baby to feel complete, but so many romance novels use the presence of babies as an indication of how happy a couple is.  For instance, a few years back I read the matchmakers series by Candace Camp and the epilogue to the last book had every single couple happily cooing at a baby or two.  In historicals, like that series, it makes a little more sense to give the protagonists children because having kids was a huge facet of noble life--without children, especially male children, the family seat would transfer to some evil relation, who cares only for himself and would probably tear down the ancestral house and build something *gasp* modern or would treat the tenants in awful ways.  However, in contemporary novels it isn't essential for the happy couple to end up with the 2.5 kids, a golden retriever, and a white picket fence.  Not every couple wants that, and the fact that romance novels perpetuate that ideal really alienates an entire segment of the reading population.

One of the main reasons I love the In Death series is because Eve does not want kids and that she can be happy without having them.  I have no doubt that somewhere down the line, she will end up with a kid, but it doesn't have to be right now.  (Nora Roberts has said that if Eve and Roarke have a baby that would be the end of the series because things would change drastically about the way Eve performs as a cop.)  Even though Roarke does want children, he doesn't pressure Eve into having them just because he wants them.  He is more than willing to wait until she is ready.

The reason I am going off on this baby tangent is that the book that I am currently reading, Any Duchess Will Do by Tessa Dare, seems to be leading to the baby = HEA ending.  I've gotten about half way through the book, and the hero, Griff, really wants kids, although he doesn't come out and say it--at least, he hasn't yet.  I read a scene earlier in which Griff, his mother, and Pauline, the heroine, are visiting The Foundling Hospital, an orphanage, and he is visibly sick over being there.  It doesn't appear that his aversion to the place is an aversion to children--he was really good with a little boy at the beginning of the scene--not to mention the fact that he suddenly decided to live like a monk, forgoing the life of debauchery that he had been living up until about a year earlier.  He is very obviously a tortured hero and I think it is fair to say that something happened to him in the last year--I have a feeling that he got some girl pregnant and that she and the baby died in child birth.  Griff's grieving; it isn't hard to see, and it is quite obvious that Pauline is going to make everything better for him, which of course means that she is going to have a kid and not die in labor.

What is refreshing is the fact that it is Griff that wants babies and not Pauline, however, it still doesn't negate the fact that in his perfect world happiness means having a baby.  You really don't know how perturbed this makes me.  It is almost as bad as the whole Big City = Big Bad and Small Town = Perfection trope that has been shoved down readers' throats since possibly the dawn of time.  I just wish that there were more books about people like me, who don't necessarily believe that babies are essential to happiness.


  1. Do you by chance have other books (know of others) that are romance sans kids-hea?

  2. There are tons of romances without the baby HEA. I recently finished Jill Shavlis's It Had to be You and the couple ended up just dating in the end--it is part of a series, so they may eventually end up married with kids (cue Ed O'Neil and Katey Segal), but their story's ending didn't have them running around with a brood of kids. I'm currently reading the next book in that series, Always on my Mind, and while I haven't finished it yet, I don't think it will have that type of an ending either.

    The In Death series by J.D. Robb is futuristic romantic suspense and the author has said that while the series is going on there is not going to be a baby for Eve and Roarke because that would impede Eve doing her job the way she does it. Of course them having a kid is always in the cards in the end, but there isn't going to be one until it ends and the nice thing with this series is that you can see that they don't need a baby to be happy and complete. (There is a baby in the series, though--Eve's best friend and her husband had a baby a while back, but she wasn't inserted to make me believe that Mavis and Leonardo needed her to be happy.)

    Most of Karen Rose's romantic suspense novels have baby-less happy endings, although some of her heroines have eventually had kids in other books, but as with the In Death novels, it wasn't about getting the couple a baby by the end of their book as a way to prove that they're happy and meant to be (because, obviously, having kids doesn't necessarily mean that a couple will be together forever).

    Julie James's US Attorney series is another one that leaves the baby thing to be a natural progression in later books rather than as a same book epilogue, which is a good thing because most of those books take place in a very short period of time. As of now, one of her couples is pregnant and I believe they're the only ones that are even married.

    I think the baby as a happy ending thing is mostly done in Historical Romances, even though they do happen with contemporaries too, and this is probably because of the way things were back in the 18th, 19th, and even early 20th centuries when people got married and had kids because it was expected of them. It was a bit of a societal thing, especially with the aristocracy because heirs were needed to keep the titles in the family. I find it rare for there to be a historical without babies being a part of things (a lot of the time they're being used as part of the motivation for the man to settle down; it was a responsibility not something that they wanted just because they wanted a family). One of the things I love about Lauren Willig's Pink Carnation series is that her heroines don't push for babies and despite knowing that most of them eventually have kids (because part of it takes place in the present with the descendent of the first book's protagonists), I know that it wasn't a HEA thing or even a responsibility thing it was because it came out of their love. It wasn't meant to show me they were happy the way it is in a lot of books.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Throwback Review: The Dream Trilogy by Nora Roberts

There are some books that stick with you no matter how long it has been since you first read them.  For me, the Dream Trilogy has always been in the back of my head.  I probably read them a good 15 years ago and the last time was a good 10 years back.  As a matter of fact, that trilogy was part of the first round of books I purchased when I got my first kindle for my 24th birthday (I never actually read it after buying the digital version; I guess I just needed to know that I could read them if I wanted.

The first book of the trilogy, Daring to Dream, was released in 1996 when I was just 10 years old and more concerned with passing math (I did, but not without many a night of struggling to remember what the E in PEMDAS meant) than I was with the goings on of fictional characters inside the pages of a book.  In fact, if I read at all during that time period it was to get a free pan pizza through Pizza Hut and the Book It! program.  I've mentioned this a few times before, but I act…

Review of "Bay of Sighs" by Nora Roberts

A couple of months ago, I volunteered to read Stars of Fortune, the first book in Nora Roberts's Guardian Trilogy for the Smart Bitches RITA Reader Challenge because ParaNoras are my crack.  If they were illegal, I'd be serving a life sentence for possession/intent to sell a controlled substance.  Unfortunately, I wasn't a fan of book 1, but I'd already requested Bay of Sighs, so I felt the need to read it too.  Plus, I liked the idea of a mermaid heroine -- one whose name was not Ariel.  I really wish I resisted reading this.  It was awful.  It took everything I hated about SoF and magnified it to the level that I wasn't able to finish it.

Annika is a mermaid, sent to "the shore up above" to stop an evil goddess from getting the Stars of Fortune.  Together with the five other guardians, she must search for the stars and protect them.  Afterwards, she must return to the sea, which wouldn't be a problem if it wasn't for Sawyer King...

Sawyer has be…

Review of "Sleepless in Manhattan" by Sarah Morgan

I bought this book with the intention of reading it on a plane from San Francisco to New York City last weekend.  Of course I read about 30% before even stepping foot onto the plane and once I was actually on it, I read maybe 5%, listening to the most recent Smart Bitches podcast and watching a few episodes of Charmed on Netflix because I had an awful night sleep the evening prior and was too tired to read.  I finally sat down to read it Sunday and Monday night.

Paige Walker has lived a sheltered life, brought low by a heart condition that had her in and out of the hospital until her late teens, but now in her late 20's she's finally healthy and happy.  She loves her life in Manhattan.  She'd felt stifled in her hometown of Puffin Island and as soon as she was able she moved to New York with her best friends, Eva and Frankie, as well as her older brother, Matt.  On the verge of a promotion at work, she figures she's got it all, but then the rug is pulled out from unde…

Review of "Magnate" by Joanna Shupe

The first thing that intrigued me about Joanna Shupe's Knickerbocker Series (other than the fact that Knickerbocker is the full name of the New York basketball team) was that it took place in Gilded Age New York.  I remember reading about that time period in both my high school and college American History classes and through the 21st century liberal gaze, I saw that period as rivaling our current economic situation (which is true in some respects and utterly false in others).  This alone was reason enough for me to check out this series, but seeing as the hero of Magnate is one of those figments of the GOP's collective imagination -- the self-made man, who struggled out of the slums of Five Points and made his way into the boardrooms and ballrooms of Manhattan (of course, this description is the true difference between the late 19th Century and today, the fact that a boy from the slums actually can become a millionaire) -- my finger deftly pressed the "Buy with One Clic…

Review of "Pretty Face" by Lucy Parker

Pretty Face is pretty fucking awesome.  There, I said it.  I first picked it up based on all the squeeing about Ms. Parker's first book, Act Like It, which I am sad to say, I still have not read, despite said squeeing.  I don't usually read books by authors I know are British and I'm sure this comes from all those stuffy classics I had to read in high school.  Granted, many of those classics were written by American authors (I still have nightmares about reading Moby Dick--Mr Sullivan, if you are out there and have stumbled on my blog, I'm sorry, but Melville was an awful writer, who used the English language as a torture device), but still, there seems to be some type of block in my brain that stops me from wanting to read something by a British author.  I'm glad I made an exception for Ms. Parker.

Luc Savage is in the middle of a crisis: he can't find anyone to play Elizabeth I in the new play that he is producing.  While he's used to dealing with actors…