ase | Romance Tropes and Me

Tonight I'm thinking about the current "Open-Source Boob Project" drama on LJ, and am torn between "gee, this is a big reaction to a small group of consenting adults at a con" and kneejerk rage because the context changed when people brought this out of the con and online. There's a post to be written about context and behavior. Meanwhile, have some thoughts on romance novels.

I lent

hourglasscreate the first two Sharing Knife books, and thanks to discussion of same I've gotten a solid handle on why I lose at romance novels:

1.) I want the relationship to put the protagonists more in harmony with themselves and/or the people around them. This is why I can see rereading Pride and Prejudice in the future: Darcy and Elizabeth Bennet's pairing-off upholds social expectations, but their relationship is a compliment to their personalities and landed British gentry values. "Unsuitable on the surface, compatible in core values" is tough to pull off. As a corollary, I cannot abide Us Against The World unless The World (tm) is a complete dystopia and the protagonists' forbidden love is their one chance at a desperate scrap of happiness.

2.) The world is larger than two people. I want to know where all your friends are while you're diving into this mismatched relationship. Again, where is your community? Where's the context? And I want to know what both of you are getting out of it.

2a.) Acknowledging character... not flaws, but incompletions... is okay. In a "no, really, I know exactly why you're single, and some of these reasons make us a good fit and some of those reasons are why we will quarrel over breakfast some days" way.

3.) I am really, really bad at Happily Ever After. I see the problem of living alone and without love solved, but ask "so what about this other list of things? What about 20 years from now? 'Will you still need me, will you still feed me...' seriously, will you?"

This may explain why I love Mark and Kareen's romance in A Civil Campaign beyond all reason - it's a problem, it's character development, it's who you are and how that's defined by the social space you inhabit - while I have a harder time getting behind some of LMB's other romances. But Mark and Kareen are presented as both being aware that what they have is a relationship that can't be taken for granted, but must be worked at. (Miles... doesn't always get this.) Mark's humanity is a wonderfully grounding trait.

Anyway. So that's why I'm off romance novels, take three or four or ten. I want them to be buddy stories with character studies and engagement rings.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Oo. I was hoping you'd do this post. (And the one on the open-source blah blah, but I'll get to that.)

1) So I can be made to like Us Against the World, or unsuitable-surface/compatible-core (I dare not recommmend Possession to you, as the things I love about it don't, I think, overlap with the things you love in books very much at all, but it is an example of doing it right), but I am dead set against it in Sharing Knife because a) community and family are so important in the sort of society she's building up (and, because she is LMB, she richly details it so that you can't help but realize it's that way) b) the Vorkosigan and Chalion books, all of which I love madly to pieces, are about accepting your place in the world (which is a theme I resonant much more strongly with anyway), and this sudden reversal is a wrench for me.

Also, Pride and Prejudice totally rocks, also for your reason 2a.

2) So, that's the thing. Many books are about introverts, because authors tend to be introverts, and I'm okay with there being few-to-no good friends in the picture, because I didn't have close friends until I switched high schools, and I'm even okay with the emotionally-abusive family that doesn't get you (although I'm going to have marginally less respect for you if you write that, because it's cheating a bit). But Fawn and Dag are not exactly introverts (Scrappy little Fawn doesn't have any friends??), and their families, while dysfunctional in huge ways, are not emotionally abusive to the extent they would need to be to make me believe this. Again, this is because LMB is a good enough writer that she cannot do 2D villains, especially in the context of the strong emotional ties of family, but it makes me not really buy the romance.

3) Hee. I'm okay with Happily Ever After, though not okay with the "sexual attraction is enough for happily ever after," which I think Sharing Knife plays into (without meaning to... I'm sure we're supposed to think Fawn is also loved for her scrappy character, but... come ON) and absolutely not with the "one day, or hot moment, or emotionally-driven dangerous moment, of sexual attraction is enough" which pushes all of my rant-hot-buttons.

I actually liked Ekaterin and Miles' relationship much more in Komarr than in ACC... it was about problem-solving, and character development, and I felt it went kind of out the window in ACC. (Also, I was extremely disappointed by the problem-solving in ACC. "Will you marry me?" should not be a solution to all your problems.)

Um. I think this might be longer than your post. Sorry :) Anyway, the one-sentence summary is: We clearly disagree somewhat on romance, while agreeing totally on Sharing Knife. All of which you knew already :)

More or less in order:

1.) I dare not recommmend Possession to you

Dude! Read it. (http://ase.livejournal.com/tag/a:+byatt+as) As I recall, I liked how it came together at the end, but I found the first two-thirds a long hard slog.

I think I would like the SK-verse more if Dag and Fawn's vulnerability to social shunning were more prominent in the narrative. I want to draw parallels to racially "mixed" marriages pre-1970s or so, and LGBT relationships through the '80s and '90s and today. The well-meant interventions and social pressure to "pass", as well as the less well meant gestures. Basically, LMB's writing somewhat escapist fantasy-romance, and I keep trying to make it something that escapes the world to say something about the people in it.

2.) and their families, while dysfunctional in huge ways, are not emotionally abusive to the extent they would need to be to make me believe this.

Fawn's family lacks a certain essential pathology, but Dag's mom is so deliberately cruel to Fawn I find Dag's family issues more convincing. Fawn is a mismatch to her family; Dag's family appearances struck me as more evidently dysfunctional.

Again, this is because LMB is a good enough writer that she cannot do 2D villains, especially in the context of the strong emotional ties of family, but it makes me not really buy the romance.

Yep. I really wanted a moment of reflection from Fawn that her family, while stifling, was not intentionally harmful. LMB does tend to write well-meaning but useless brothers and other family (hi, Ekaterin's relatives) in her romances.

I definitely had P&P in mind when I wrote 2a.

3.) . . . not okay with the "sexual attraction is enough for happily ever after," . . . and absolutely not with the "one day, or hot moment, or emotionally-driven dangerous moment, of sexual attraction is enough" which pushes all of my rant-hot-buttons.

I haven't seen enough of that one to make me twitch. I don't plan to seek it out.

I actually liked Ekaterin and Miles' relationship much more in Komarr than in ACC

As did I, for similar reasons. Miles' courtship needed to be at least six months longer than it was.

"Will you marry me?" should not be a solution to all your problems.

*snorts* No, it's trading one set of problems for an entirely different set. Ekaterin, now you're stuck with Miles. :-)

Um. I think this might be longer than your post. Sorry :)

If you were really sorry, there wouldn't be smiley-faces! :-) I'm a fan of hashing things out, so please: talk.

Anyway, the one-sentence summary is: We clearly disagree somewhat on romance, while agreeing totally on Sharing Knife. All of which you knew already :)

Yep. I'm just pleased I've got my essential romance down to a one-sentence blurb.

I want to draw parallels to racially "mixed" marriages pre-1970s or so, and LGBT relationships through the '80s and '90s and today.

Oh, yes yes yes. This strikes to the heart of why I was so annoyed by the ending of the second book. If you're writing a mainstream book where the mixed-race couple gets dissed by their families, and their reaction is to move to California "to work to improve race relations!!" I would... be highly skeptical, both of their motives and of their chance of success at their stated goal. I would totally think they were running away from their real problems to chase ideal figments... wait a moment.

Dag's family appearances struck me as more evidently dysfunctional.

Yeeees, there is that. Although Dag also appears to have a much better network of friends-and-relations. And he is, like, 70 or something, for crying out loud!

LMB does tend to write well-meaning but useless brothers and other family (hi, Ekaterin's relatives) in her romances.

Especially brothers. I'm not sure it's a coincidence that LMB herself has brothers... Ekaterin's brothers, Drou's brothers, Fawn's brothers, Cordelia immediately realizing Drou has brothers...

I haven't seen enough of that one to make me twitch. I don't plan to seek it out.

Eh. It's mercifully rare in mainstream fantasy, unless it's also doubling as romance. However, I was watching Enchanted the other day, which I actually liked quite a lot, but true love in one day, ick.

If you're writing a mainstream book where the mixed-race couple gets dissed by their families, and their reaction is to move to California "to work to improve race relations!!" I would... be highly skeptical, both of their motives and of their chance of success at their stated goal.

This is where I nod sagely and crank the Rent Broadway cast soundtrack up a bit. (I'm entirely too sympathetic to Benny's perspective. I sing "La Vie Boheme" at the top of my lungs anyway.) In some ways, that sort of thing is very typical of the human condition, but not in smart ways.

I would totally think they were running away from their real problems to chase ideal figments... wait a moment.

*snorts*

Where are Dag's friends, anyway? Surely he's got more friendly contacts than his Aunt Mari and a couple friendly acquaintances from his last patrol. Right?

I haven't seen Enchanted, so I can't comment on how it does the "one night = true love" trope. I've heard mostly-good reviews about the movie, so it's on the (infinitely long) list of movies to see some day.

Romance Tropes and Me

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject