Love Interests

bearilou said:

Which is not the same as a love interest.

Click to expand...

I think part of the problem is that some of us are using "love interest" more conceptually (based on our own application of the idea) and some are using it to mean strictly "romantic interest".

I suppose it's one of those terms that's been very narrowly defined as a specific thing, but plot-wise "love interest" can be many things. (Again, buddy-cop movies are no different than romances when you look at plot structure and beats. Because "partners" means more than just romance.)

So, maybe we need better words.

WeaselFire said:

Because it defines the character.

Click to expand...

Heh, I feel like if the romance is the only thing defining the character, there is something seriously wrong with that character. :-/

But real people have love interests that define them, so my fictional characters do as well.

Click to expand...

Many do, yeah. Many also don't. Many also have love interests which don't define them.

They often have families, personal triumphs and tragedies, financial troubles and religious outlooks. As do real people.

Click to expand...

I'm not quite following what these things have to do with romance. I mean, when I was single I still had family, personal triumphs and tragedies etc. They did not come into existence only when I have romance in my life.

I tell stories. Stories have characters. Characters have character traits. Otherwise, the character isn't believable and the story isn't believable. Love interests are simply another character trait.

Jeff

Click to expand...

It sounds to me like you're seeing LIs as an extension of the character? I see LIs as a separate entity, so they're not a character trait, no. The way the character loves someone else may be a character trait, but again, that comes with every relationship, romantic and otherwise.

bearilou said:

...and you look fabulous in that dress, dahlink.

Click to expand...

Why, thankyew. *blushes* *pounces and squishes the piggy*

As long as it's true to the character at that time in their life, I'd say it's fine either way. One thing I have noticed in real life, is most people have a love interest or have an interest in having one. Some have sworn off, some are too focused on other goals; I've written one of each. Neither of my two MCs to date have had a "love" interest per se, and I hadn't considered it until reading this thread, but both run across a woman who tests their resolve. That probably says more about me than them.

Aggy B. said:

I think part of the problem is that some of us are using "love interest" more conceptually (based on our own application of the idea) and some are using it to mean strictly "romantic interest".

I suppose it's one of those terms that's been very narrowly defined as a specific thing, but plot-wise "love interest" can be many things. (Again, buddy-cop movies are no different than romances when you look at plot structure and beats. Because "partners" means more than just romance.)

So, maybe we need better words.

Click to expand...

I'm not entirely sure that it needs a new word for it, because it works fine as is. That and the fact LI has meant romantic interest for quite a while. But you do make a good point about buddy-cop stories, and friendships in general having a courtship period just like a romanc does. Things is that the focus seems to be on the romance part, like it is something humans need. And for many many people romance seems to mean sex, which I object to obviously because it implies asexual and aromantic are the same.

Albedo said:

I don't really understand. Love and relationships are an integral part of everyone's lives.

Click to expand...

What I mean is, there are certain works (novels/movies/games what have you) that barely touch upon these things focusing on the need to get that artifact/save the world/any other goal. I prefer when the story goes much more in depth into the feels of all kinds instead of focusing on adventures

If that's what confused you anyway Might've misunderstood your point.

A love interest doesn't have to involve sex. When I was in the closet I used to fall in love with some of my best friends, yet they never knew I thought of them in that way.

Yes, and a sex interest doesn't have to involve love. What we might agree is love anyway. Where that line's drawn, your guess is as good as mine.

Albedo said:

Agreeance! (Is that a word?)

I'ma bet, though, that there are about a hundred books with the red weirdness, for every one with the green.

Click to expand...

Must be reading all the wrong books then, because I see "half a dozen young men have exciting activities over the course of a couple of months and none of them even look at the barmaid" a lot in certain types of fantasy (becoming less common, but I can name several best selling books that are like that.) And there is a real "thing" about fantasy not having icky feelings in it -- in certain, and laughable to my mind, quarters. Feelings are what everyone has. If you want your character to be real or as real as a fictional person can be, then need to feel things. Not necessarily romantic ones, but apparently those are the feels that upset this sub set of readers. My God, no man would ever think romantic thoughts! Lust is great, but actually feeling something for the woman you are screwing? *pearl clutching* Yeah right, because no man ever wrote a love song/poem...oh. Wait....

Fantasy authors (or some at least) have a mega problem with showing any feelings. Except vengeance or wanting to stove someone's head in. Sex is only shown via rape. Consensual sex is...but...but...OMG A NIPPLE! *faints*Especially weird when they spend three pages detailing the ins and outs of a graphic rape. But saying yes? Too lurid to show

*deep breath*

Sorry. Rant at stupid people over. For the next ten seconds at least.

I don't really understand. Love and relationships are an integral part of everyone's lives.

Click to expand...

Yup. However in certain places it is very hard for men to admit that they experience them, and then they complain. Hard.

*eyeroll*

TO me, my characters need to be real. That means they run the whole gamut from not interested to fall in love at drop of a hat. And they need to be not all the same.

If I can't do that, I've created a book with characters that are paper thin puppets.

It also depends on the span and focus of the book, as mentioned above.

The last mss I wrote had no love interest, and I found it--to be cliche--liberating to skip the whole romance angle, focusing on friendship and other types of relationships.

At this point I'm happy when I read a novel that doesn't have a romance added into it.

Unimportant said:

Er, not everyone's lives. Most people's, yes. Asexual people, aromantic people, hermits, some folks with dementia, the Eye of Sauron.... They're not in the middle of the bell curve, but they do exist.

Click to expand...

To be fair, I think Al was talking about love and relationships in general, not necessarily romantic love or sexy relationships?

I'm both asexual and aromantic (er, as far as I know, anyway), and astoundingly heartless in many respects, and also introverted, and also shy--but I do have a small, select number of relationships with people (and animals...which I think counts) I value, who I would say I love, though I certainly don't mean romantically

I think that was the meaning? Considering the context I think

Plus, the Eye of Sauron was such a flat character. Utterly boringsauce. I just yearn for it to spend a scene playing with a kitten. (relationship!)

But you are quite right, in your overall point. So I'm not quite sure what *my* point is...maybe I don't have one, lol

SampleGuy said:

Also I wonder what an asexual society would be like in a sci fi setting.

Click to expand...

Write it and find out. If it's SF, they won't have to worry about not reproducing that way (because they'll have figured out others)

Damn, I'm sure I read a book like that. What was it....

The thing with a romantic sub-plot is that it needs to weave properly into the main plot. The actions of the main plot should have a direct effect on the relationship and vice-versa. Failing to do this leads to the romance feeling empty and tacked-on.

Sometimes I include a romantic subplot in my own writing and sometimes I don't. The novel I'm about to query has a pair of characters who are attracted to each other, but there's no time for romance because of how tight and fast the plot is happening. It would be unrealistic and slow down the story.

I certainly don't think you need romantic sub-plots to be realistic. Frankly romance is where I most frequently see the story derail into unrealistic territory. Most relationships have problems and I rarely see this reflected much in books. I am kind of looking forward to the fantasy of manners style story I'm planning which is full of completely dysfunctional romances, though. Twisted, unhappy relationships are so much more fun to read and write than the traditional happily-ever-after romances.

My plots tend to center on love stories and human relationships in general, so yes.

Saving the world tends to be the subplot, instead of the other way around.

kuwisdelu said:

My plots tend to center on love stories and human relationships in general, so yes.

Saving the world tends to be the subplot, instead of the other way around.

Click to expand...

Seconding this! And it's also the kind I like the most I guess. The plots I write are often heavily driven by things that characters did, because of the feels, much less a desire to conquer/save the world or have riches or whatnot

Unimportant said:

One of my more recent stories focused on the protagonist's obsession with the body parts she'd collected from the lovers she'd murdered. I guess that counts as a relationship....

Click to expand...

I'd def read that.

bearilou said:

I happen to know quite a few people where a 'love interest' isn't at the top of their priority list of things important in their life.

Click to expand...

I've known plenty of people who are like this at various times in their life, or even for always. What is interesting is that I've also known some people who tend to be most attracted (or get crushes on or whatever) people of this type.

My brother was like this in high school. He never had a girlfriend, because he always fell for female friends who were so focused on school, sports, activities, and whatnot that they didn't have TIME for or interest in romance.

Maybe some of this was because he was also very into school, sports and whatnot, and he was popular and had a lot of friends and activities, so it was "safer" to be interested in people he couldn't have at that time in his life. I'm just guessing, though, and I seriously doubt it was a conscious decision if this is true.

I on the other hand, tended to allow my feelings for guys to distract me from the things I *should* have been focused on at that age. I am a strong bonder who has always had a very small inner circle of close friends and a wider circle of friendly acquantances with whom I'll share a specific interest or activity, but not an intimate connection. I don't even know how to have that sort of in-between friendship most people take for granted.

So I tend to be happiest in a stable romantic relationship. I think it's because I'm a bit of an introvert, so I'm happiest when my best friend is also my lover/partner, because then I've got most of what I need emotionally in one place. I've never quite mastered that thing that most women seem to have--a circle of friends who drop by or go for drinks or coffee after work, or who call or text them several times a day with exciting thoughts and news, or who spontaneously decide to go to movies or whatever together.

So I'd darn well better have a romantic partner who likes the same kind of movies and activities and likes to talk about the same kinds of things (fortunately, I do).

The point is, everyone is different. It's not about right and wrong, but about portraying people with different needs, wants, and priorities in your stories.

Roxxsmom said:

So I tend to be happiest in a stable romantic relationship.

Click to expand...

I tend to be happiest in an unstable romantic relationship.

But then, it's been a long time since I've been in any kind of relationship...

I tend to prefer stories with romantic relationships. They give me the feels and often when I'm reading budding romantic has the best opportunity to do so. I'm not quite as checked in once the romance is underway unless they are facing struggles or outside forces testing that relationship.

Every story I've written has included a love interest. Actually all of the budding romances has played an important role in the plot. As for the actual characters that are the love interest. They tend to be fixers or negative explosions in the MCs life. They play the sort of role that removing them would drastically change the plot. In my current WIP, the romantic entanglements of the three main characters are complicated.

My first novel had no truly romantic relationships among the major characters. I put in the potential for one between the protagonist and the major secondary character, but I didn't want to do so because I was aiming for a Fafhrd/Mouser vibe and didn't think it would fit with the characters in that volume.

In the current book, I have a fairly strong romantic/love sub plot between the secondary MC and another woman. It started out as a reason to explain the nature of their interactions (didn't make sense unless there was a romantic component), and the love interest has developed into an ongoing member of the series cast, and has a significant role in this volume as well.

Currently, -none- of my MCs for my multi-book project have a love interest or romantic bent. There are, for a few of them, past romantic interests that are touched upon but are definitely not a center focus of the plot or character development. Whether or not my "main" protagonist ends up with some form of romantic bent remains to be seen. I haven't decided yet, but I'm doubting it very much. Above all else, I want to stay true to the characters and to the story without forcing a happy ending or some kind of love interest in there just to satisfy a certain type of reader (or publisher).

Frankly, I usually find romance itself tedious as almost every story has to have a love (or, at least, lust) interest shoved in there and rammed down my throat until I want to gag. It's almost always too expected and too obvious. I can see it coming from a mile away and I'm already bored out of my mind with it. I enjoy a good love interest/love story if it's done well and if it isn't the ONLY thing that's important to the character's life/story. But if that's the whole "gimmick" of the story/movie? I'll pass. Just not my thing.

Shocking, but people can and do lead interesting, full lives that don't necessarily have romance or sex blazing away every second of every day, or even at every major "event" in that person's life. Even more shocking is some people don't even -want- it in their lives. It's my belief you can still make a great story with such a character, despite popular trends.

Unimportant said:

Er, not everyone's lives. Most people's, yes. Asexual people, aromantic people, hermits, some folks with dementia, the Eye of Sauron.... They're not in the middle of the bell curve, but they do exist.

Click to expand...

buzhidao said:

To be fair, I think Al was talking about love and relationships in general, not necessarily romantic love or sexy relationships?

I'm both asexual and aromantic (er, as far as I know, anyway), and astoundingly heartless in many respects, and also introverted, and also shy--but I do have a small, select number of relationships with people (and animals...which I think counts) I value, who I would say I love, though I certainly don't mean romantically

I think that was the meaning? Considering the context I think

Plus, the Eye of Sauron was such a flat character. Utterly boringsauce. I just yearn for it to spend a scene playing with a kitten. (relationship!)

But you are quite right, in your overall point. So I'm not quite sure what *my* point is...maybe I don't have one, lol

Click to expand...

Yeah, that was my point. Like I said, everyone except those with certain sociopathic personalities experience love. Love DOESN'T have to be romantic. I'm saying the idea that asexual or aromantic people somehow don't experience love or have normal human relationships is wrong and pretty offensive.