~~ biting back the romance bug.

[reenka]

Again and again, it seems I keep coming back to the question-- What's wrong with romance. I mean, it's pretty obvious that of all human relationships, that of lovers is the least widely acceptable as a topic of serious study, compared to parents & children, siblings, working relationships, friendships. In a universe of cliche, romance (that is, sexual love) has a special place of inspiring a sort of... either disdainful boredom by the enlightened or thoughtless consumption by the masses. I feel like a throw-back, with my lifelong unabashed fascination with the subject, especially considering that in real life I'm rather antisocial, so the romantic theme is largely a theoretical interest. Hum.

The sexual aspect of this is even more looked down upon as a topic of serious inquiry, almost as if to this day, it's seen as a straggling tag-along, to be acknowledged but hopefully swept out of sight unless completely necessary. There seem to be divergent movements, at least within pop culture, to constantly separate & more firmly unite the concepts of sex and love, though of course both acknowledge that they're different (though complementary) things.
    I'm not so sure of that.


I'm fascinated by sexuality at least partly because it seems like a natural extension of romantic love (eros being sexual by nature). On the animal level-- certainly recreational sex is known, but this doesn't actually separate it from love, because among bonobos, for instance, the 'love' is still present as a conciliatory experience. If the animal in question -can- pair-bond on any lasting basis, it seems they use sex as a way to assert a certain (temporary or not) relationship as well as to feel good.

Basically, wouldn't most people's response be that porn is the least 'important' subject there is? And the most important, depending on which person you ask when. Personally, I find this dichotomy fascinating-- the way sex is everywhere, all-pervasive, the source of a million-and-one human motivations and consequences for us all, and yet it's commonly considered a lowly (embarrassing) source for inquiry. You can't write/read porn seriously, can you. That'd make you a wanker in the worst way. In denial, even. In desperate need of actual sex, perhaps. Off your head. Etc.

I myself see sex (and romance) everywhere, a background hum in nearly every story. I'm sure hormones have something to do with this, but that can't be all of it-- I remember wondering who would get together with whom in movies and fairy-tales & stories of all sorts when I was a five year-old, too. I don't actually remember a time when I wasn't interested. What does that say about me? Something negative, probably, to most people. I'm just 'such a girl'. I've got to listen to reality, right, where (sexual) love isn't the Most Important Thing; I've got to Get Down To Business.
    And yet. And yet, our whole present-day culture is obviously fascinated with the whole concept (which must be why so many people are tired of it, but that doesn't make it any more logical to dismiss).

I think a romantic/sexual relationship can be seen as a really effective lens of understanding people and their effect on one another, but the ramifications of the experiment depend on the people involved. Sometimes it -is- a cliche (in my own understanding) simply because the couple can't find a way to effectively communicate, or conversely because they're so at ease with each other that nothing ever changes between them & no issues get confronted. This confrontation & change-- this ionic bonding-- is the currency and the heart of both drama and one's growth as an invidual. While the covalent, steady bonds we make provide our lifelong foundations and are utterly indispensable, they are too easy and if unchecked, would sink us into a personal rut.

In my own personal experience if nothing else, with the right people involved, an ongoing sexual relationship is probably the sharpest mirror possible for an understanding of oneself. To me, this has always been the core question: Who am I in contrast to the Other? And that is what romantic love tries to show the lovers (and/or the readers). Sex is-- or can be-- the major catalytic act in this process besides talking. Touch remains when words fail. Touch and taste and look and feel the Other-- that's porn for you. At its best, it's visceral, gut-level, deeply honest, no holds barred realism. Aesthetic 'lying' in porn is widely accepted and desirable-- but I would say it's also pure cowardice/escapism. Porn doesn't have to be escapist, which has partly earned it its bad reputation-- I really think so. Erotic fiction can be the most honest, pure-truth thing you (I) can write.


As far as coming up with some semi-quantifiable system for study of this subject (as I can't help but feel compelled to come up with), there are a few axes to consider in a given couple:


+ High level of inherent interpersonal conflict - (if non-resolvable but self-sustaining, chances are best)

+ Possible progression to resolution or overall apparent relationship arc(s) - (needed to stave off stagnation)

+ Larger significance to each other - (what is the context of the beloved in the lover's life and the ramifications thereof)

+ What are the questions raised for each other & as a couple? - This is largely the romance writer's question. A 'high potential' couple tends to open the door to larger questions-- that is, by exploring the intersection of these two personalities, the metaphorical creases and irritations and interplay between them, one could get at something larger than either of the individuals-- something that transcends them or the duration & nature of their relationship. Love becomes a gateway the way it has always truly been-- the way it was in Romeo & Juliet and the Iliad and the fairy-tale of Beauty and the Beast. That's the beauty of it all-- great romance can never just be about itself. It is always, always a reflection of society at large-- the one that produces the story as much as the one that currently retells it.


These are mirrors-- doorways. Love itself is a doorway to the Other-- romance is the Story that links the separate rooms inside us. Sex is definitive both by its presence and its absence-- and in fact, its aching, hollow absence is often more powerful than any amount of presence. It is really the -anticipation- and the looking-towards-tomorrow that characterizes romantic love-- that unique Mystery, that divine insanity that tells you that the Beloved is deeply unknowable and infinitely desirable of being known. Love centers around Mystery and feeds upon constant communication-- a Look that goes on even when-- especially when-- the Beloved isn't present to be seen.
~~

I'm definitely not repeating the commonly accepted wisdom that close friends shouldn't (or can't) try to be lovers-- far from it. In a sense, friends make the best kind of lovers, since the implied ability to communicate well is simply vital. On the contrary, it merely depends on what kind of friends you are, and whether you really are both compatible & incompatible in the right ways. :>

    And yeah, I'll interject and say that this is why pairings which have no inherent personality conflict and are examples of like-with-like seem to be the flaming antithesis of what I see as romantic or sexual. To me this is so basic-- to the point that I think it explains why most of us aren't attracted to our siblings or parents. Thusly-- for me-- James/Sirius, Snape/Draco, Harry/Hermione = ick!! while Fred/George = yum! because that's a complete unit. Which is to say-- it's possible even for sibling pairs to come across as complementary (especially male/female pairs), but it's very rare. And yes, I always harp on about this particular squick, but it's me, what do you expect?

Naturally, I don't mean to overblow this and say romance is -more- important than something or other-- than anything else. I'm more interested in determining its role by somehow overcoming the urge for comparisons, though clearly that's difficult. To rank is human, but to equate is divine, etcetc.

Do I know what I'm talking about? Not as such, no.
~~

Oh, I'd started to read mousapelli's `He's not heavy, he's my boggart', when I realized-- I love James. I don't just snicker at him & think he's a cute sort of asshole-- no, I love him. I also feel it might be my calling to abandon slash & start writing James/Lily het, but I might be wrong about that (besides, them being doomed puts a damper on my enthusiasm). Still, I love insensitive, self-centered, given to brash outbursts & mockery, materialistic & pragmatic yet-secretly-romantic James. I think he's starting to remind me of Tamahome, which is rather odd, and yet. Hey, does that make Sirius into Tasuki?? Ahahahah. That James, he's such a kidder.

Thinking of him as an Auror makes me laugh and laugh (and laugh). It's the rebels that make the best cops, y'know (that fascination with authority-- oh yes). What's hilarious, come to think of it, is that I imagine that pre-OoTP, people thought James was kinda like Percy. How hilarious is that?? Ha.

Comments

[malafede.livejournal.com]

See, James/Lily is what's wrong with romance.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

If it's wrong, I don't want to be right.

[malafede.livejournal.com]

Poor James. He could have been so punk.

[blacksatinrose.livejournal.com]

You should write James/Lily.

Just because no one else seems to. ;)

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Ahahah I might if you'd read it :))
I just need an angle.
Man, all the ways Lily could (and probably did) torture James just make me all warm and fuzzy inside.

[malafede.livejournal.com]

She could lecture him a lot.

[blacksatinrose.livejournal.com]

*iz blackmailed!*

I've never read a Lily/James! Although they're gonna be in the Sekrit Project so I guess I'll be writing them soon.

*sekritly plots*

*procrastinates*

[darklites.livejournal.com]

Eee! So much with the James love! I always found him rather dull until OotP, and then his cheekily arrogant ways just totally won me over, because I am just easy like that (er, when it comes to fictional characters - in real life I'd probably think him a total idiot, haha). And his whole smug 'my hair is so sexily tousled, look at me fluff it!' *heart is aflutter!* :D

James/Lily is *so* classic romance, haha. It's like ever romance novel ever written. :/ My personal sekrit James ship is James/Sirius! Oh man OotP is so rife with James/Sirius, why does nobody write it? :( That line about Sirius being the only one he would stop showing off for was the most adorable thing ever to me, haha. And oh, the way Sirius still can't admit to himself that James is dead! Actually I think the reason it's not written that often is because it inevitably clashes with James/Lily and it gets *really* messy and angsty and probably trashily soap-opera-like. But I've this big kink for passionate friendships, and Harry/Ron's never worked for me in that aspect (I can't see H/R beyond boyish wankfic, they just don't have the right chemistry for anything more imo). So I sit around and mope at the lack of James/Sirius! Heh.

I read some James/Lily after OotP and it was ... fun, I guess? But sort of predictable, and not in that gleefully excellent way. (Would be interested if you tried your hand at it though!) I think the idea of James/Lily works better than the execution. I wonder if it is the same with James/Sirius. I shall ponder this while I stop procrastinating. Ahem.

Re: *procrastinates*

[malafede.livejournal.com]

My personal sekrit James ship is James/Sirius! Oh man OotP is so rife with James/Sirius, why does nobody write it?

... I like you. We should form a secret society.

Re: *procrastinates*

[darklites.livejournal.com]

:>

Its slogan can be, James/Sirius: at least they trusted each other. *is evil*

Re: *procrastinates*

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

I suppose I've never been able to get away from classic romance :> I am that much of a sucker, yes. (I mean. I like Harry/Ginny in terms of my idea of its possibilities, Ron/Hermione, Sirius/Remus-- all the obvious things). To me it's not enough that it's 'obvious' or 'really there' (which J/S might very well be)-- I need to feel it works as an interesting relationship-- which is what I tried to break down with the whole 'needs conflict' & 'needs an arc' thing. James/Lily has an arc-- James/Sirius is a union of like-with-like, and doesn't have an apparent inherent friction or direction, which makes me all 'meh' about it. I do think they could be cute together-- platonically-- in a S/R fic, AHAHAHAH. *coughs*

I have a big kink for passionate friendships too, it's just that it needs to be a certain kind of friendship where the people have compatible differences as well as things they share-- whereas I really don't see James & Sirius' clashing potential except that they might argue and fight over the same turf. Harry/Ron doesn't clash & doesn't quite work in a similar way, actually-- though Harry's not -like- Ron, they have a very speaking-the-same-language (or, well, not speaking and rather -doing- as the case may be-- which is why wanking works) type relationship. I think Sirius and Remus (to beat my dead horse) would need to -talk- more than Sirius & James, would need to grow more as people to succeed together, which is why they seem more interesting whether or not they're as 'there' as S/J in OoTP, y'know?

I don't like the predictability of J/L either-- so yeah, it's mostly an idea-type-thing. But I loooove classic pairings. Waaah. KATHARINE HEPBURN/SPENCER TRACY ALL THE WAY :D :D

Um. Since I myself haven't read any James/Lily, at least it has a good likelihood of not being like all the rest, I guess :>

Re: *procrastinates*

[malafede.livejournal.com]

James/Sirius is a union of like-with-like, and doesn't have an apparent inherent friction or direction

That's just not true. I mean, what you're saying it's that it doesn't follow the traditional story arc of prejudice/hate to rediscovery/love (sparkles happen). Sirius/James just deals with different (possibly more realistic, possibly more nihilist) sides of humanity. It's obsession, codependence, megalomania, irreverence, pathological ego-issues, domination, withdrawal. It's the inherent isolation of closed systems. It's homosocial behaviour. It's more a story than a love story, I think. Plus, this is people who know how to have fun.

Re: *procrastinates*

[darklites.livejournal.com]

no inherent personality conflict and are examples of like-with-like seem to be the flaming antithesis of what I see as romantic or sexual. To me this is so basic-- to the point that I think it explains why most of us aren't attracted to our siblings or parents.

I missed this the first time 'round, so focussed on the James/Lily thing, heh. I am not sure how true this is, because do we really have no inherent personality conflicts with our siblings/parents? I am not sure this is a good comparison. And doesn't the whole 'bickering' romance cliche have more in common with a sibling relationship than anything else?

I think the reason I feel James/Sirius is that it seems that even after all these years, it's James who is still Sirius's center, you know? He was the one Sirius measured his whole life by, and there is something romantic in that to me (gah, how did I get H/D parallels into J/S?!). I guess to me J/S doesn't have an arc but they have an underlying connection of sorts that will carry them together throughout their lives. I suppose it could just be a platonic one, though. I'm torn on the idea of having a friendship be the most important relationship in your life, you know? In some ways it's so beautiful to me that I am almost dizzy by it, but then of course that whole sex thing gets in the way. Like you said, it seems that sexual love brings two people together to a place where nothing else can get you. I feel like James and Sirius are, for each other, That Person in their lives, that is, The Most Important. So yeah - Dilemma.

When you think about it J/L is totally Mills and Boon-esque!! The man is arrogant and dashing and popular, the woman tries to resist him. She is Fiesty (as evidenced by the red hair, because, y'know, that is the Symbol of The Feisty Woman). She refuses to have anything to do with him. The man has always known that they will be together, and knows she secretly wants him. Cue succeeding events where the woman will realise - gasp! - he was right! Eep. Thinking of it that way, I am almost scared of it.

Oh, and regarding the porn bit. I find that really interesting too, and I personally think that the backlash against porn is mainly due to sexuality being so fluid, so what is sexy to one person may not be sexy to another. Which is why the violence in pornography is so often called 'degrading to women', even though that line of argument is probably just as degrading to women since it implies that a streamline of sexual fetishes is disallowed, and there are 'male' and 'female' categories of sexual taste. Radical feminists totally scare me, man.

psst, I accidentally posted under the journal I sometimes lurk by when I am bored/have extra time, so I deleted it hahaha. *blush*

Re: *procrastinates*

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

And his whole smug 'my hair is so sexily tousled, look at me fluff it!'

AHAHAH CANON JAMES IS LIKE MAYA'S DRACO EXCEPT HE'D BE TRYING TO SMOOTH IT INSTEAD. *COMPLETELY DEAD TEN TIMES OVER*

Re: *procrastinates*

[cellia.livejournal.com]

I just want to say that I am *so* with you on James/Sirius.

Actually I think the reason it's not written that often is because it inevitably clashes with James/Lily and it gets *really* messy and angsty and probably trashily soap-opera-like.

I actually love this part of it... although I'd want to see it non-trashy and just everybody of that triangle having love for the others, just different types...

The problem, or maybe what makes such relationships hard to write, is that they lack that obvious, near-symbolic contrast that reena writes about liking in romance.

I think the conflict often makes a cool fic easier to write; just twist the tropes halfway and you're at something sexy/interesting/resonating. But the fics that have more friendship/life partner flavor to them, they stand on the skill of the author at capturing subtleties of character and making us care about the non-drama of the relationship (one good way to do this is to set it against actual dramatic events... my fav genre of fic, btw). Not quite as much bang for your buck, but when done well, man I love 'em... :)

Re: *procrastinates*

[darklites.livejournal.com]

Yeah - I think one of the reasons Remus/Sirius is so popular because it is sort of very ... neat, you know? Because James had Lily, and Sirius and Remus can pair off (poor Peter, he gets nobody). And not to say that R/S doesn't have appeal and interesting issues in its own right (*cowers from Reena* ;) ), but yes, James/Sirius just seems to be so much more difficult because the ending of the story dictates that it won't end 'happily', and it doesn't tie things up in a pretty bow, I guess?

Most James/Sirius out there is just buddyfucking, which kind of disappoints me because I think their canonical relationship is more than that.

[triestine.livejournal.com]

I'm definitely not repeating the commonly accepted wisdom that close friends shouldn't (or can't) try to be lovers-- far from it. In a sense, friends make the best kind of lovers, since the implied ability to communicate well is simply vital.

I agree; my previous relationships failed when I realised how little I'd actually known about the people I'd fancied and pursued, and the more I knew them, the more irreconcilable differences I saw. (I love that phrase, 'irreconcilable differences'.) Then I fell for a friend of several years, and knew quite well what I was letting myself into, as well as how to deal with the obstacles; we'd already worked them out as friends. Of course, should things go wrong anyway, I shall fume and curse myself for this post. :)

I love reading about relationships between 'enemies' of whichever kind, but I never saw one happen in this reality. I confess I did not understand this part:

I'll interject and say that this is why pairings which have no inherent personality conflict and are examples of like-with-like seem to be the flaming antithesis of what I see as romantic or sexual. To me this is so basic-- to the point that I think it explains why most of us aren't attracted to our siblings or parents. Thusly-- for me-- James/Sirius, Snape/Draco, Harry/Hermione = ick!! while Fred/George = yum! because that's a complete unit.

So if like/like is the antithesis of what you find romantic, how does F/G function for you? They are very much alike in spirit as well as shape, or else one would be able to tell between them without problem, by behaviour alone.

Hugs,
M.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

I like friendship-based romance if... it's the 'right kind' of friendship, ahahah. And man, is that hard to quantify (...I could so make money if I did). It's all about a balance of knowledge & Mystery, unity & diversity... not too much, not too little. I don't really mean the other, 'ionic' thing is about 'enemies' so much as-- er-- people who have some blockage with communicating-- either some extreme difference in personality or background history or... temperament or something. That's what does work in reality (at least short term), by being complementary and filling in the blanks of the other, so to speak-- I totally don't know about enemies, since... well, I do think one can lust after someone who pisses you off without being 'grand enemies' or something. People making you angry & infatuated happens to me all the time even with -friends- though :>

Anyway, it's a balance between knowing & understanding someone (vital!) and keeping that spark of not-knowing to drive one's relationship forward & the passion hot (also important), heheh. :>

Yeah, the Fred/George thing is confusing (as I knew, but didn't go into). It seems -different- than Harry/Hermione, say, -because- they're so similar they're virtually the same person-- so at that point it's not just friendship or like-with-like as much as-- they're a -unit-, a single thing. They wouldn't have a romance so much as a complete fusion. So it works just because twins are freakish anyway, no worries about being codependent or all that. :>

~reena :D

[suaine.livejournal.com]

Yeah. *nods* I totally get you on the romance/sex stuff.

Now, I would write something well thought out and profound to elaborate on your theory and initate great intellectual debate, but I ahven't been coherent in days and all my brain comes up with is: "Dude. So right. My hed iz pastede on, yay!"

*grins*

[pir8fancier.livejournal.com]

Well, I do think that there are two things going on here. One, is what feeds a story. If you don't have conflict on some level (preferably on LOTS of levels), the reader will not turn the page. So on purely a mechanical level, I believe that the stories that work well from a mechanical point of view are pairings where the tension is so potent that the computer screen is radiating heat: Draco/Harry, Snape/Harry, even Draco/Hermione. Even in a non-slash environment, look how basically JKR uses the Ravenclaws and Hufflepuffs merely as filler. The REAL tension in the books is between the Gryffindors and the Slytherins.

Caveat here. All the stories I write are thinkly veiled romances. I've tried writing bleak and my stories still end up being bleak romances. On one level, I think there is something certainly in me that wants closure. That wants the story to end somehow. And as a woman who has, in her life, invested heavily in the marriage/parent/kid thing, I do think that, for me at least, this reader wants a family unit. Interestingly, this still pertains to male/male relationships, not because I want them to have children (I actually have a real THING against mpreg) but because I want a family unit. It can still be just two people. But I think it goes back to the cave thing where the women are over the home fires. Home fires. We tend to see relationships in units. When relationships work, the babies appear.

Oh, and the third thing. I am just a hopeless frigging romantic. I *WANT* my characters to have hot, great sex where it feels so great that their body parts are going to explode. And I certainly want to read about it!

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry...Percy? Why did anybody ever think he was Percy? I seem to always be surprised at this fandom's view of James. First everybody was surprised that he was actually kind of a jerk when HELLO THIS WAS TOLD TO US TWO BOOKS AGO and now...they thought he was Percy?

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Ahahah I was exaggerrating... I think? People thought he was an upright citizen and also Head Boy Omg. A model example of Gryffindor virtue, etcetc. I have no idea, I think there wasn't really any sort of real James vibe-- I mean dude, James/Lucius was a common enough pairing for him :>

[aiglet.livejournal.com]

I think the problem is that our culture has separated sex and love and romance to such a degree that people think not only that they *can* be separated, but that they *should* be separated.

Porn, as something that (generally) feeds only the "sex" part of the equation, has become devalued because people want to think of sex as "dirty" or "bad" or "wrong." I mean, honestly, can you picture the writers of "romantic" or "lovey-dovey" Hallmark cards involved in porn? (As those people, not as the people they might be when they're not involved in giving us all emotional diabetes, that is.)

People have become convinced that "love" is this thing with putti and chocolates, and "romance" is fancy dinners and moonlight walks, and "sex" is this thing that happens but no one really talks about it. People don't want to recognize that the putti and chocolates are the aftereffects of the sex, and the dinners and walks are display behavior as a prelude to the sex. It's like trying to read a trilogy with the middle volume missing.

Also, I think it's hard for people to write non-sappy romance in this day and age. There aren't a whole lot of modern "literary" authors working in the "comedy of manners" style of romance, which is generally anything but sappy, and often frank about sexuality. There aren't a whole lot of authors talking about the quiet times in a relationship, the joys of curling up and watching movies and drinking hot chocolate on a rainy day.

Anyway, I think we're in violent agreement again, just on tangents to each other...

[notrafficlights.livejournal.com]

Romance is good. Though I always have to think hard to find reasons to justify James/Lily. James is the kind of guy I hate. And Lily, well, sometimes really IC Lily I have a hard time with too.

One of the problems I have with a lot of romance- even slash sometimes- is that it's so gendered. I hate that, because I hate the way genders are constructed in Western society. You can never totally escape it though, but you can reduce it. It's a real turn-off emotionally and physically for me though.

*bookmarks your entry for when she eventually gets around to writing her "Emotions can be pornographic too" entry*

I think he's starting to remind me of Tamahome, which is rather odd, and yet. Hey, does that make Sirius into Tasuki?

*dies* *blinks* *dies again*

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Eheheh I like the kinds of guys most people hate. They're so cutely impossibly stupid :D :D :D It's like, sure, in real life I'd avoid them, but in fiction they're just cute. I totally think that my favorite romance stories have always been about Asshole Boy and Girl Who Kicks His Ass. :D :D :D :D (...either because she's actually tougher than he is-- as in Hana Yori Dango, say-- or because she's so nice and sweet he's just rendered into a puddle of goo-- as in Please Save My Earth & Fruits Basket & such.) It depends on my mood whether I like kick-ass girl or uber-wonderful girl. Hee. And like, I know it's gender-specific and rather dated at that but it's just so much -fun- that I don't even look at it from a feminist pov.

Like... I do think girls & boys are different. And even if you have a very tomboyish 'tough' girl, you're still saying, 'you have to be a like a boy to beat one at his own game', which is discouraging.

I think I just enjoy them as stories and not as like... the ideal of what men & women should aspire to, or something.

Like, I have huge problems with IC Draco-- like, I just want to smack him. In fact, if I was his older sister, there'd be no end to the amount of smacking he'd have to put up with. And I even have a problem with pairing him with my ickle Harry, whom I love and don't want to have to put up with Malfoy, of all people. I just like watching them fight, though :)) So really it's not ideal at all, just entertaining :D

(AHAHAHA AND CHICHIRI IS REMUS, HE JUST SO SO SO IS.)