Thanks for taking the time to comment. I got to thinking about this question partly because I recently read Lisa Klepas’s Blue-Eyed Devil.

Kleypas’s deft use of language makes any book of hers a treat, but this book is told entirely in first person, in the heroine’s voice. I found I missed excursions into the hero’s point of view–more than I would have thought.

As a writer my primary interest in writing romance is my fascination with how relationships develop, and with how relationships CHANGE both participants. That said, it’s obvious I need to explore both points of view.

Rebyi, though I haven’t read either of the works you cite, I know what you mean by “not done well.” I have never read a book by a man told entirely in a female voice that I thought worked.

Done well, I don’t mind at all because the book is tight and flows well. (Feehan’s early Carpathians, Kenyon’s early Dark Hunters, Moning’s Highanders, Showalters Lord’s of Underworld)

When I’m researching my books a lot of my questions to men go something like: What would make you do THIS? Okay, then what would KEEP you from doing that?

Sometimes I’m surprised by the answers. But it does make for some interesting conversations–and what’s most interesting, the MEN say it was a great conversation!

I like both types of romance, but I think I do like the hero-centered better because I like getting into the men’s heads. I know what goes on in women’s heads, but like you said – men are different and getting these pieces of what makes them tick helps me. I enjoy the read and sometimes get a little more insight into my own wonderful hero.

Good luck on the free book!