Romance in fiction.

[rogueslayer452]

Taken from the Crunchy Questions Meme:

Do you think fiction needs romance to be compelling?

Short answer: No.

Longer answer: There isn't anything wrong with having romance in a story, but not every story needs to have romance in it to be compelling. There are plenty of stories out there that have absolutely no romance at all, and they're still amazing. Also, the problem isn't so much the romance angle, it's more of the inherent expectation of needing it along with the mishandling of it in the writing. From forcing a romance just for the sake of it to fill that particular quota to reducing it to tired and antiquated stereotypes, none of this is interesting or compelling. Now, yes, this is all subjective because what one person doesn't find compelling another person will, but in the overall spectrum of romance in fiction there is a common pattern. This is mostly an issue with heteronormative examples, but this can also be seen in LGBT romances as well. I also feel like, because fandom and the concept of shipping have become more mainstream these days, many creators think that there needs to be "ship teases" to purposefully bait and string fans along so they stay with that story, and honestly I don't like that, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

There's also this kind of obsession that every character needs to have a romantic partner, when that's not even true in reality. There needs to be more representation of those who aren't that interested in being with someone romantically, and who won't miraculously get their minds changed at the end of the story itself. There needs to be more stories that focus on the companionship of another without it ending in a romantic or sexual nature.

Bottom line, there is nothing wrong with having romance in a story, but when it's written in have it make sense in context of the narrative and the arcs of the characters. Don't just have it in order to check a box of some sort. Not every story needs a romance to be compelling, and not every character needs to be in a romantic relationship in order for them or their journey to be fulfilled.

Comments

[author-by-night.livejournal.com]

. Also, the problem isn't so much the romance angle, it's more of the inherent expectation of needing it along with the mishandling of it in the writing. From forcing a romance just for the sake of it to fill that particular quota to reducing it to tired and antiquated stereotypes, none of this is interesting or compelling.

I actually needed to read this, because while my WIP has romance, it doesn't really happen with my MC. There isn't really any room for a romantic plotline with her; she has a lot going on, including non-romantic love stories.


There's also this kind of obsession that every character needs to have a romantic partner, when that's not even true in reality. There needs to be more representation of those who aren't that interested in being with someone romantically, and who won't miraculously get their minds changed at the end of the story itself.

That's the other thing. A lot of people are asexual, aromantic, or they're just not really looking. In fact, I know of several people who don't appear to have found anyone. I haven't found anyone, and for my money, it's been a combination of factors. Partly time, partly missed opportunities, partly just not being all that fussed.

Also, the idea that someone is being burdened because of a bad romantic experience: So what? Do what you'll do. It's one thing if a person thinks "I can't date because I'll screw it all up anyway" - though even that's probably something to unpack before jumping to a new relationship. It's another thing to say "you know what? Been there, done that, I've been rebuilding and am good with where I am." I can respect that.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_profiterole_/]

Objectively, no. Subjectively, I must say that when I buy a book with several LGBT characters and there's no queer romance, I'm a bit disappointed.

[blakmagjick]

"but not every story needs to have romance in it to be compelling"
THIS

[tabaqui]

ALL OF THIS, homg.

I truly detest the hackneyed and cliched 'romance' that is the stuff of most movies and tv shows. So few are remotely interesting, and not nearly enough are LGBTQ. So - no thanks.
(Books mostly, too, though they get a little more leeway by not having time/budget constraints).

[noybusiness.livejournal.com]

Oh yeah, it is annoying when sometimes a TV show has a gay character whom we never get to see actually *being* gay beyond talking about the fact they're gay, either not being seen to date at all or only occasionally and with no permanence, while you see other characters being straight and forming couples.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_profiterole_/]

Oh yeah, that's annoying.

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

Yeah. And if there is any LGBT romances, there may be a high possibility they're not written well because the writers have no clue how to right LGBT characters or relationships, which can be quite underwhelming or disappointing with how things are done.

But no matter the sexuality, forced romances are a bore, and it's unfortunate that it happens far too often in all mediums of fiction. It also kind of explains why I rarely go for canon relationships, because the non-canon relationships are far more interesting than what canon brings. Heh.

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

Focusing on a character's development is more important than trying to force a romance that has no need in being there. There are times when I've had this notion that I definitely want characters to be together, but then I realize that no, it's not the right time. Not yet. Either one or both are going through something and it's better not to rush something when it doesn't feel right.

A lot of people are asexual, aromantic, or they're just not really looking. In fact, I know of several people who don't appear to have found anyone.

Precisely. There seems to be this pressure in mainstream media that everyone needs to have someone, and that if you don't at a particular age then you're a "loser", which is absolutely untrue and it's quite harmful to insinuate that everyone is in need of a romantic relationship or romantic/sexual experience. Like, everyone has different needs and different levels of those needs, and there needs to be a kind of representation for those individuals who don't fit into that particular box and to say it's okay to not prioritize romantic relationships.

Also, some people just figure out that they prefer being single. Even if they've had past relationships, for whatever reason they didn't work out, it doesn't mean the relationship was bad or abusive or anything like that. Sometimes people just don't mesh together, and that's okay. That's another thing I kind of want more of, showing that not every breakup is horrible.

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

On the flipside, there are things in fiction where there's only one gay character and then they introduce another character who is gay and then the writer just puts them together for no other reason than the fact that they're both gay, even if they have absolutely no chemistry with each other. That annoys me.

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

The tokenism some shows have in this regard is just absolutely frustrating, because they try to appear like they're "progressive" for having an LGBT character when in reality they just ticked off that box without doing much effort in giving this character a personality outside of just announcing every five seconds how they're LGBT.

[valeria-sg-1.livejournal.com]

I agree with everything you said.
I've had a chip on my shoulder about forced heteronormative romance / dramatic ships for a bit now.

[tabaqui]

YES. OR they're just all about being LGBTQ, which....really? I get it, it's an issue still for a lot of people, but can we NOT have the 'very special romance' or the 'very special episode' or the 'very special lesson about being gay' fucking couple? ARGH.

Yup, that too - the 'these are the couple' couples just *really* never have much in the way of connection, way too often.

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

Yeah, like, LGBT folks are just regular people. Not everything about them has to be centered around their sexuality, especially not in a very blatant "very special episode" kind of way. Seeing a character's entire identity and personality be all about them being The Gay One is not a good look at all, it doesn't make your work progressive just regressive in reducing them to that specific thing that you think is what someone being gay is about. This is why it's important to have those of the LGBT community to work behind-the-scenes with these stories, like be writers and producers and directors, etc, so there's less tokenism and more authentic storytelling.

(And this goes for any marginalized group, too.)

[tabaqui]

YES. Sheesh. It's so frustrating sometimes.
All the time.