(no subject)

[skygiants]

First, whoever sent me the anonymous virtual gift - thank you! It makes me grin whenever I look at my profile.

Second, chlorrel recently lent me Gail Carriger's Soulless, and as total supernatural-romance fluff it was very enjoyable! The basic premise is an AU semi-steampunk Victorian England (of course) in which vampires, werewolves, and ghosts are a relatively accepted part of society; the scientific explanation for them is that they have an overabundance of soul. Our Heroine Alexia, on the other hand, is soulless, which does not mean anything in terms of her ethics and emotional functioning but does mean that when she comes into contact with a vampire or a werewolf she cancels out their supernaturalness and sends them back to default human state. The plot revolves around mysteriously-appearing-and-disappearing vampires and werewolves and a shady conspiracy and is mostly an excuse for Alexia to run around and hit people with her parasol, although it does also set up for some potentially interesting worldbuilding around the question of how vampires and werewolves are made.

This is the sort of book where the heroine is less upset about being attacked by a vampire at a ball than the hostess' distressing failure to provide snacks, the werewolf would be exceedingly respectable and an excellent marriage prospect if he weren't so Scottish (and possessed of terrible taste in cravats), the frilltastically dandyish outfits of Alexia's vampire BFF and his adoring man-harem are described in loving detail, and the bickering love interests keep referring to That Incident With the Hedgehog. If you like this sort of thing, you will probably enjoy this book. The author is desperately in need of a good Brit-picker, which could get extremely jarring, but since the whole point of the book is basically LOLVICTORIANS and while we're at it LOLVAMPIRES I am not complaining too much. It's an AU! Lots of handwaving. (It is, however, a fairly standard Victorian AU in other ways: namely, everyone is white, with the biggest divergence from the visual standard being Alexia's darker Italian skin tone. Which - is not that big a divergence. Also, while there are sympathetic non-straight characters, it's mostly played for laughs. Then again, so is everything else.)

A few things I did like about the romance, objectively speaking: Alexia is a twentysomething spinster and her werewolf boyfriend is over a century old, and whenever she starts going on about how she is too old and a spinster and on the shelf, he is like "seriously? I am feeling kind of sketchy with the age difference here already, an eighteen-year-old would be AWFUL." Also, Alexia is bossy and dominant and amazingly in charge, and her alpha werewolf boyfriend is totally into that, which is cool.

However, I think I have figured out one of the things about romance novels, even good ones, that often means they don't quite work for me: I have a self-control kink. The romance novels I have read are so often about the ~irresistible urges~ of OMG I FIND THIS PERSON SUPER HOT, with all the development of the people learning to like and respect each other woven in through the IRRESISTIBLE PASSION. And while this is a perfectly legitimate trope, and there is certainly nothing wrong with passion, I tend to find it a lot more interesting (and respect the characters more) when they are able to suppress that because of more pressing concerns. But this is just me! What about you guys? When it comes to fiction - or fic, for that matter - which do you like better?

[Poll #1532193]

Comments

[e-mily.livejournal.com]

My favourite is people who totally shouldn't end up falling in love but do, particularly the ones that have known each other for a long time.

They DIDN'T love each other, but it just happens.

[skygiants]

I tend to find that kind of long-term dynamic really interesting too. (People who actually know each other falling in love! SHOCKING!)

[elspeth-vimes.livejournal.com]

I humbly submit that attempts at stoic self-control which are sabotaged by inner dorkiness are the most attractive.

...Then again, I really love it when couples are able to put their feelings on hold in order to, say, save the world in my fiction, so perhaps I should have voted for self-control. Hmm.

EDIT: Actually, I should have just said partnership.

[skygiants]

My multi-part response here is as follows:

a.) I can't imagine any of the people you're thinking of there *solemn*

b.) inner dorkiness makes everything better, especially because it shows that the author is not taking their creation too seriously

c.) equal partnership is my FAVORITE THING!

[furikku.livejournal.com]

I am keeping mum on the poll because that gets a little close to TMI that I'm not entirely comfortable discussing in somewhat public places!

But that book sounds rather fun and like something I might check out if I do not have a problem with the writing style! (I am SO FUKKEN PICKY about prose.)

[skygiants]

That is totally fair! The last thing I wish to do is make anyone uncomfortable. :O

I think you would enjoy the book, though - the writing is a lot of fun and very clever in parts, it's just the dialogue that occasionally veers into not so much with the Victorian.

[misslucyjane]

So, as someone who reads and writes romance novels, I should have a coherent answer for this...and I don't. La?

My favorite novel doesn't begin with TOTAL AND ALL-CONSUMING PASSION but it's also a domestic novel, basically, and so there's no world to save: there's just family stuff to deal with. And OH DEAR GOD the kisses, once they start, are AMAZING...

I like instant attraction between couples, and I like slow-burn passion, and I like when the process of falling in love is well-illustrated. it just depends on how it's all written, I suppose.

[skygiants]

Coherent answers are in no way required! I am not even sure it was a coherent question . . .

Anyway, writing is obviously a key proponent in any of these. And I would never say "such-and-such trope NEVER WORKS FOR ME" because that is pretty much just tempting fate for someone to hand me a book completely centered around that trope and have me love it; I can only speak for myself in terms of trends.

[wickedtrue.livejournal.com]

HAHAHA! The whole house read that this weekend! We all said pretty much the same thing!

Oh goodness. Gen and I had this long, dorky conversation about why we love the very few OTPs we both have while Merc did her hair. She squeaked at us a lot. It was adorable.

My thing is partnership. I could honestly careless about Big Romantic Gestures, PASSION, and all those things. WHATEVER! I do read them; I fully embrace my affection for trashy romance, but it isn't actually my true affection.

It's like you said: I love the long term growth. I love them equal, standing in tandem, fighting the good fight. It doesn't mean both have to be these hardcore soldiers saving the world through their mutual hardcore-ness (THOUGH I LOVE THAT TROPE SO MUCH, OMG). I love it when it is two people that have things and common, aren't the exact same person, and really balance each other. Like, you know, REAL COUPLES. It makes me do this flaily dance of joy and hug things.

Like, I loved Ripley and Corporal Hicks in Aliens. It is this very slow thing that's more tension and suggestion, and he likes she is tough as fuck, and she likes he respects her authority and tough as fuckness. Plus he has common sense. She finds that really hot. And they save the day and adopt a kid! EEEEE!

It's also why I loved Susan Ivanova and Marcus Cole in B5. It starts out as this very unbalanced relationship. He thinks she really nice to look at, then falls head over heels for her when she kicks ass, takes names, and command a fleet in an interstellar war. She thinks he is a total moron (because he IS around her, all the time) and totally takes him down all the time because HELLO, GROW SOME COMMON SENSE. She is too practical for handsome rogue heroes!

They work together for years, and he grows some common sense and tops being a moron around her all the time. They're friends that talk about their hobbies! Plus save the universe! They get to the point where she goes, okay, it's you. You're That Person for me. And then it all ends tragically, which means I love it all the more, but. EEEE!

In short: I'm a dork.

[elspeth-vimes.livejournal.com]

...I should have said partnership.

*edits her own comment*

[skygiants]

HAHAHAHA MY TIMING IS AWESOME.

I so wish I could have been there for that conversation! Except not really, because I was busy very seriously shipping everyone in Angel with everyone in Ugly Betty with Shati and I would not have missed that for anything either, so clearly you will just have to reprise this sometime when I am there. I AM SURE THIS WILL BE A GREAT HARDSHIP FOR YOU.

Also, as I said above: yes to all of this, equal partnership is my favorite thing ever! (This trope you mention of saving the world through mutual hardcore-ness is also relevant to my interests. But yes.) I love the partners that complement each other, where they have some things that are totally different but it works for a balance.

Although I am a little confused by your example - only in terms of bits-I-know-about-canon. Doesn't Ivanova date the blonde psychic girl?

[areyoumymemmy.livejournal.com]

HA Soulless is on my library pull list, and I see Gen/Feather/Sandry house is also ahead of me. Man, it's like we all have similar book tastes.

I pretty much hate the irresistible lust trope, because I so very rarely see it done as anything other than OUR GRAND PASSION EXCUSES ALL OUR SHITTY ACTIONS AND PROBLEMATIC DYNAMICS and will incidentally also provide for our futures.

I much prefer people who are passionate about more than one thing, and have at least a modicum of self-control, or otherwise I could get the same story arc from the Discovery Channel.

[skygiants]

I know, it's totally weird! I was going to put it on your pull list if it had not been there already. *laughing*

Yes, having other interests is KIND OF IMPORTANT to - well, survival in the world, I feel, as well as a happy relationship! (You and me baby ain't nothin' but mammals? - did I make you watch the Utena vid to that?)

[sandrylene.livejournal.com]

The whole romance trope of lack of control always seems to me to just play into this escapism fantasy. It's like, yes, submitting to whatever passions is always supposed to have all these negative consequences, but in the genre they never actually end up working out poorly - everything is happy endings with the man you love.

So basically it's just "no, eff your responsibilities. Twoo wub is always justification for being irrational, and love will conquer all, and by the way, here, nosh on this box of candy."

I mean, substance-wise, sure, it's lacking. But it's escapism - it's sort of supposed to be lacking.

Urgh. Mondays mean my logic is sounding useless and circular. But basically because I'm willing to take anything romantic as total unrealistic escapist BS (which is sometimes just the sort of brainfluff I need), the whole lack of self control trope doesn't bother me.

[areyoumymemmy.livejournal.com]

Your logic sounds like mine, which means it is impeccable!

Also, I should have noted that if my brain is in the right frame of mind, I can still enjoy the trope, but it's getting rarer and rarer, alas.

[kiarasayre.livejournal.com]

So, I love you.

I love you because sometime last summer I came across a review of an ARC that involved a kickass female protagonist in Victorian England with vampires and werewolves, and I cursed my luck because I was going to be in Cuba when it came out. And then I closed out that tab and a few weeks later thought, "Well, I should find it and order it anyways, maybe my mom can bring it to me" and could not find it. It's been driving me absolutely bugnuts crazy for upwards of six months now and this is that book OMG.

[skygiants]

. . . my timing is EXTREMELY AWESOME in all ways! \o/ I am glad I was able to help (and when you read it you should tell me what you think!)

[jezrana.livejournal.com]

I like when characters feel OVERWHELMING PASSION, but also for whatever reason feel like they can't or shouldn't give in to it, so they exert self-control, and give in to their ALL-CONSUMING PASSION only when whatever obstacles there are have been dealt with. To me, it makes the end result a lot more satisfying than if they just gave in right away.

(Also, that book sounds very relevant to my interests.)

[skygiants]

I agree! I mean, I don't demand pacing like in Korean dramas, where you are allowed, like, one onscreen kiss by the time the show ends, maybe, if you're lucky. But I do think, story-wise, it's more satisfying if they are able to put their OVERWHELMING PASSION aside to start out with.

[littledust.livejournal.com]

Okay, so. What I like is when people are stoically in control of their total and all-consuming passion! Because UST is like MY FAVORITE THING EVER, but I also love the moment where both parties realize OMG there is something there and then MAKE OUT.

Stoic control of passion also leads to adorable moments between teenagers where one or both parties says, "I would really like to have sex, but I don't think I'm ready!" In GOOD media, this comes across as less preachy, more sweet and respectful of emotional as well as physical needs. See: Matt Saracen of FNL.

[skygiants]

I also have NO OBJECTION to that moment. *laughing* Or to UST! But the stoic control makes it much more interesting to me . . . so basically I am agreeing with you. :D

Also: respect of boundaries is sexy.

[gaisce.livejournal.com]

Although I like all of them in specific permutations, my favorite dynamic is how the introduction of this potential love interest makes the other one or both of them...dorky. Not suddenly brooding and passionate or intensely fixating on them, but there is just something about that guy/girl that leaves them flustered and out of depth. Extra points if they are normally very stoic and together otherwise. Extra points forever if this is because the plot revolves around how both of them grow dynamically into better people because of the other's influence.

[skygiants]

I am a big fan of hilarious fictional dorkery, I'm not going to lie - and it does endear me much more to one or the other partner if instead of acting SUPER COOL they are acting like total morons. >.> Am I easily amused? MAYBE.

However, this: extra points forever if this is because the plot revolves around how both of them grow dynamically into better people because of the other's influence is true for me forever and always.

[vivien]

I like both!!!

My favorite thing ever is the UST that simmers for a while before BAM! Have some all-consuming passion. Funnily enough, I don't seem to write that way. *eyes RP pairings and snickers*

This book sounds like a lot of fun. I will have to check into acquiring it.

[skygiants]

Just wait until Ingress grows up, Viv. *solemn*

I think it would be very much up your alley! (Also, I forgot to say - I just got your letter the other day, and it made me smile enormously. <3)

[aberration]

I've said before that I don't really go for romance that much as a main sort of plot point (I used to like short little fluffy fics back in the day, but nothing that took up more than a few hundred words), but self-control is actually a turn-off for me at this point, and I think I have a pretty particular reason for it:

I've read/watched a lot of gay fiction by now, and especially in mainstream media, I've become kind of tired of the questioning/suppression/shame themes. I get their place, and their reality in that experience, but there also comes a point where I feel like it ultimately contributes to invisibility by giving a reason to avoid actual representations of any sexual orientation that isn't straight (which is obviously different for "stoic self-control" when it comes to heterosexual relationships, but yeah), and... well, frankly, speaking for myself, while I can get it in other contexts, shame and/or suppression for some greater good aren't hot to me in that context. (They kind of suck.)

Granted, though... I don't know, I can never think of any kinks when people ask this question. And I can get really into pairings, I just... have no particular pattern for it, other than I think it has to work with the characters. The one I used to have was that I loved pairing the romantic interests of a third character. ... wow does so much of my life make sense in retrospect -__-

[skygiants]

Oh, man - I didn't even think of that aspect, which was, in retrospect, probably fairly heterosexist of me. *rueful* I can totally see what you're saying, though.

Ha, I can think of so many times I have spent the entirety of a love triangle going "ditch [x] and run away together! Just do it!" This is almost always true when [x] is a dude and [y] and [z] are both awesome ladies stuck in a terrible love triangle plot.

[spence-reid.livejournal.com]

I love the way you describe things. Just fyi. : )

[skygiants]

Thank you! :D

[obopolsk.livejournal.com]

I'm definitely in the "stoic self-control" column. I'm also fascinated by relationships between people who have known each other for a long time, even when they don't always work out in a romantic sense. (Like Sweethearts by Sara Zarr, which I've found myself returning to often lately.)

[skygiants]

Yeah, there are a lot of really fascinating dynamics that are not/do not have to be explicitly romantic ones!

(I am wondering if my flist is self-selected for preferring stoic self-control. *giggling*)

[magwana.livejournal.com]

I like all of these things, to varying degrees (stoic self-control that goes on for too long? SO FRUSTRATING!). But I love people who are friends and then suddenly realize, 'Ooops, my days are better WITH you around!' Probably I owe this in large part to reading things like Anne of the Island and War for the Oaks at impressionable ages!

(edited for clarity and also tiredness.)

[skygiants]

I do quite like - well, as often Georgette Heyer says it best; "advancing by imperceptible but rapid stages from the position of a stranger to be treated with circumspection to that of the close friend in whom she could safely confide, and who was, for some obscure reason, indispensable to her comfort." FRIENDSHIP. <333333 It's awesome!

[ashen_key]

Why you post these things when I have no brain? D:

(placeholder comment is placeholder!)

[skygiants]

I am sorry! You are placeholdered officially. FOR GREAT JUSTICE.

[lacewood]

Self control is awesome, but I think I might have an equally big fondness for "super awkward repressed inability to deal with emotions". "What are these feeeeeeelings?! Complete bewilderment/horror! Cannot deal!"

Probably I just like UST too much for my own good. XD

[skygiants]

I do kind of love (while facepalming at) dorks who can in no way deal with their feeeeeeeeeelings. (I feel like this is a trope one sees often in kdrama/jdrama! And it is OFTEN HILARIOUS.)

. . . . also I just have too much fun saying feeeeeeeeelings in a mocking tone, uh.

[genarti]

Shooooockingly, I picked stoic self-control! Although I am totally with elspeth_vimes about inner dorkiness sabotaging the stoicism. And about partners, although honestly I adore partnership whether it's romantic or completely platonic.

I think really, my favorite fictional romance scenario is when you have two people with stoic self-control putting aside their feelings for the Greater Cause, and then getting together when they realize that:

a) the higher priorities are over! We've just won the war/lost the war/had our cover broken anyway/whatever. NO REASON NOT TO ANY MORE.
b) the other person does in fact feel the same! So this stoic self-denial was kind of pointless.
c) the higher priorities actually don't interfere with a romantic relationship after all. Well. Okay then!
d) the other person not only feels the same, but now admits it to themselves and/or is ready for a relationship now which for good reasons they weren't before. Hey, awesome!
or e) multiple of the above options.

So basically I like it when people have higher priorities than their love lives, and carry that out in practice! If the love lives fit into those priorities also, awesome.

(I think this is why I tend not to like romance novels. It's nothing against the genre! But the romance is the primary narrative focus, kind of by definition, and it's an aspect I like best as a secondary focus.)

[skygiants]

Well, Gen, I could respond to this detailed and thoughtful comment with a full, detailed and thoughtful response.

Or I could just refer you back to our GIANT BACKLOG OF EMAILS ON A REASONABLY RELATED SUBJECT and invite you to extrapolate my thoughts. *giggling*