I was by no means advocating specifically for more spunky women and fewer angsty ones (after all, it has been noted that most of Sarah's female protagonists tend to fit neither of those models, but are instead competent, straightforward and even-tempered). It was a single toss-away comment as an example of one possible other kind of more colorful personality that was different than being either Felix-like or Mildmay-like. I could have picked any number of other examples instead. My main point was the same as your conclusion that "There are a billion different ways for women to be interesting".
I just get the impression from Sarah's writing that she likes to have fun with her characters by making them a little extreme in some way, and they're fun to read as well, even when they aren't particularly having fun. Which made me think that maybe why her female characters won't talk to her as much as her male ones is that they are less extravagant. They're believable, but maybe she's a bit bored by them.
There are not only a billion different ways for women to be interesting, there are also a billion different tastes in what kinds of people one finds interesting. Like the original poster to whom I was responding, I'm also not a writer (at least, not of fiction - just of software and technical articles.) But I think if I were a writer, and I were getting blocked with my female characters more than my male ones, I would examine the female characters that I do find myself wanting to talk to, the ones whom I keep having conversations in my head with after the book ends, and analyze what about them makes me respond that way. Even if there are fewer of them than there are of the men, there are sure to be some.
Re: I'm not really a writer
I was by no means advocating specifically for more spunky women and fewer angsty ones (after all, it has been noted that most of Sarah's female protagonists tend to fit neither of those models, but are instead competent, straightforward and even-tempered). It was a single toss-away comment as an example of one possible other kind of more colorful personality that was different than being either Felix-like or Mildmay-like. I could have picked any number of other examples instead. My main point was the same as your conclusion that "There are a billion different ways for women to be interesting".
I just get the impression from Sarah's writing that she likes to have fun with her characters by making them a little extreme in some way, and they're fun to read as well, even when they aren't particularly having fun. Which made me think that maybe why her female characters won't talk to her as much as her male ones is that they are less extravagant. They're believable, but maybe she's a bit bored by them.
There are not only a billion different ways for women to be interesting, there are also a billion different tastes in what kinds of people one finds interesting. Like the original poster to whom I was responding, I'm also not a writer (at least, not of fiction - just of software and technical articles.) But I think if I were a writer, and I were getting blocked with my female characters more than my male ones, I would examine the female characters that I do find myself wanting to talk to, the ones whom I keep having conversations in my head with after the book ends, and analyze what about them makes me respond that way. Even if there are fewer of them than there are of the men, there are sure to be some.