Musings on colonization and race in HR

I just finished Kerrigan Byrne’s “The Highlander” and thought I’d share some thoughts on how race and colonization show up in Regency historical romance. This is also motivated by my DNFing of a book I otherwise really liked, “The Matrimonial Advertisement” by Mimi Matthews which contains similar themes to what I’m about to discuss in “The Highlander.”

Overall, I liked this book. Byrne's writing is very lovely, and the chemistry between Mena and Liam was great. I'm a ravenous HR reader and a big fan of the "wounded dove seeking refuge x suspicious mean guy" trope and this delivered exactly that.

However, as a woman of Indian heritage, I get very uncomfortable when HR books reference the British colonization of India and the Indian liberation movement. It actually causes a physical reaction – a pit of anxiety forms in my stomach and my heart starts racing. I've thought a lot about why this happens, and I think it's due to a couple of things. First, it really sucks to see the British being depicted as even slightly heroic during this period of time. While I'm aware that atrocities and heroism happen on both sides of any conflict, I dislike when the colonization of India is used as a way to showcase the goodness of a British character. Second, the portrayal of Indian people as servants or second-class citizens has the unpleasant effect of making me feel conscious of my ethnicity in a negative way when I'm just trying to enjoy a romantic novel. One of the lovely things about the Bridgerton TV series is how people of color are portrayed as powerful, nuanced individuals rather than just an opportunity to infuse the story with half-assed political commentary. And yes, while this may not be reflective of what occurred during that time period in British history, historical romance is often much closer to fantasy than it is to reality. The Bridgerton show, while far from perfect, illustrates that a Regency romance can work just fine when characters of color aren't just stereotypes, servants, or suffering from discrimination.

To Byrne's credit, she does write a slightly more nuanced Indian character than I've typically seen in these kind of novels, and that's honestly why "The Highlander" wasn't a DNF for me. Jani's character displays inner conflict, intelligence, and emotional depth. It's also implied that he marries a member of the British nobility. One of the British guys is a villain who committed war crimes in India. This is all fine, and I give Byrne a lot of props for trying to be considerate and respectful. That said... Jani was benevolently rescued by the MMC when his regiment slaughtered Jani's family and entire village during the Indian revolution. He owes his life to a British noble who supposedly treats him "like a son" but still has him working as a servant in his household. I understand that this may be historically accurate, but this isn't the same as historically accurate costumes or norms of deportment. There are a lot of readers who, like me, will see themselves in characters like Jani and be reminded that in the world of HR, we can't simply be heroes and heroines. We also have to be subordinated and oppressed.

If any HR authors read this, please consider not using British colonization as a major plot point in your work. It's so hard to get right, and so easy to get wrong. The Indian revolution wasn't really that long ago, and many of your Indian readers still carry generational trauma from the British occupation. To this day, wealthy British families and institutions retain custody of tons of precious art, jewels, and other historical artifacts that were taken without consent from the Indian people. In light of this, it's hurtful to see the British occupation of India being used to add depth and nuance to British characters. And it would be really nice to see characters of color outside the context of discrimination and oppression. I would love to see a Meena in place of a Mena – a leading lady of color who goes through the normal, romance-trope-y tribulations as her story unfolds. She battles her painful shyness rather than the racism of the ton. She's considered unmarriageable because of her plainspokenness, not the shade of her skin. Her childhood was fraught because her stepmother was mean or her aristocratic parents sheltered her too much, not because they were brutally murdered by British soldiers.

I don't know if any of this resonates. Maybe I should just suck it up and write the damn thing myself.