Just to clarify, I am refering to the modern, non-classical, definition of romance: the love relationship between a man and woman.
Can you recommend a book by OSC that you feel contains a well written romance?
Thank you.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
Enchantment.
Posted by Void (Member # 8259) on :
Thanks. The title sounds promising. I will check it out.
Posted by just-a-min (Member # 7308) on :
The Women of Genesis series all contain intersting courtships that proceed on through marriage. It makes them unusual to see the relationships progress through disapointments and childbearing and child raising. Rachel and Leah is even more unusual because both sisters end up married to Jacob by the end of the novel and we also come to know Jacob's two future additional wives. Jacob's and Rachel's relationship is the more typical romance. Read Enchantment first. If you like it, Sarah, Rebekah, and Rachel and Leah will be very satisfying.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Alvin Maker Series. Alvin and Peggy are my favourite OSC couple, probably next to the one in Lost Boys which shows a nice married couple struggling through all sorts of things, but it's pretty painful.
Posted by Bekenn (Member # 6602) on :
Is it just me, or do OSC's romances tend to develop way too quickly? They always seem to fall completely and deeply into a lasting love within just a few days, before people could reasonably be expected to understand each other....
Case in point: Teacher's Pest from First Meetings.
Posted by alluvion (Member # 7462) on :
Well, a writer can only draw upon what he knows.
Posted by Kratos (Member # 7859) on :
Hah! Well said Alluvion.
Posted by 1135813 (Member # 7816) on :
I also can't help noticing that they almost all end up with the persons in question getting married-- is this just because the ones that don't work out don't get much screen time, do you think?
Posted by Orson Scott Card (Member # 209) on :
People fall in love quickly - it's the most effective method in the wild, and it persists in civilization.
What makes a love "lasting" is the mutual decision of both parties to make it so. No one remains in that first-rush-of-attraction state forever. That's why the love that makes a marriage is not the romantic love of fiction.
The only reason my "romances" seem to be rushed is because you're used to romance writing (as in filmed love stories) in which the whole game is to keep putting obstacles in the way of the lovers. That's why the cliche love story always was, "Boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl."
My wife's and my romance was spun out over three years, and boy, were those obstacles not fun!
Sometimes, as in Treasure Box, the falling in love is covered very quickly because that's not what the story is about, that's the "given."
But in Homebody, I think I prolong the love story reasonably long - even though the novel is not about that.
And in Enchantment, I turn it on its head - the couple is MARRIED for a long time before they fall mutually in love. But I think that's still kind of romantic, under the circumstances.
But my point is, let's keep in mind that when it comes to love, we're all chimps. We only improve on chimphood when we make a commitment and stick to it for life. And that's not "romantic," that's just being grown up.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
I don't know, being grown up is pretty romantic.
Hobbes Posted by Orson Scott Card (Member # 209) on :
I think so too, but let's just say that books about falling in love outnumber books about sticking to a marriage by about ten thousand to one <grin>.
Posted by Vid (Member # 7172) on :
Are you saying that what I see on TV isn't actually what love is like? *shocked look*
Being about to get married, I'd like to point out that the number of *good* books about sticking to marriage are few and far between. (Of course, the Bible tops that list, but that's a given)
Posted by Bekenn (Member # 6602) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orson Scott Card: The only reason my "romances" seem to be rushed is because you're used to romance writing (as in filmed love stories) in which the whole game is to keep putting obstacles in the way of the lovers.
Yes and no. Yes, typical "romance" writing does follow that pattern. No, that's not at all why your romances seem rushed to me. Your actual courtship of three years seems much more in tune with reality (probably because it is real).
While I absolutely do agree that attraction and strong feelings can develop quite quickly, attraction and strong feelings do not lasting compatibility make. Both traditional "romances" and your writing correctly identify and portray the first part; neither really gets it right on the second.
Romances typically throw in obstacles that the characters involved didn't cause and aren't responsible for, and so the story focuses on how they react to external pressures on their relationship, usually leading to misunderstandings, arguments, application of blame, the heroic resolve to persevere despite these external pressures, and finally the kiss-and-make-up scene that leads to happily-ever-after.
Your writing (correctly) eschews the external pressures, because they simply aren't very interesting when you get down to it. Unfortunately, you tend not to replace these external problems with internal ones. Nobody knows a prospective mate well enough within a few hours, days, or even weeks to know that there isn't some major disconnect as-yet-undiscovered that could throw the whole thing in jeapordy. Because of this, most people go through a getting-to-know-you process long before they commit to anything long-term.
My observation is not based on how quickly characters fall for each other, but rather how quickly they choose to commit to that relationship for life.
Case in point: John Paul and Theresa Wiggin, Teacher's Pest. They meet in class one morning (Theresa teaching, John Paul attending), and by nightfall they know that they're going to be married and have kids together. Yes, it's a short story, so I understand the need for narrative brevity, but something there still isn't right.
Posted by Liz B (Member # 8238) on :
In "Teacher's Pest," the reader knows that marriage and kids are the ultimate conclusion, but the characters don't really "know." In this story, they haven't yet actually committed for life -- they're really still just making noise. It just happens that we know that their "noise" was accurate.
My point is that there's a lot more that happens after "Teacher's Pet" ends (that's well beyond the scope of the story). After all, Theresa and John Paul haven't actually run off to get married. The story is about that moment of attraction and realization -- so the "internal pressures" haven't come into play yet.
That can happen in real life, even if consummation never comes. I "knew" I was going to marry my Governor's School boyfriend when I was 17. I'm actually not making fun of myself too much when I say that -- things didn't work out with him because of distance (and because he was a crappy letter-writer), but in a lot of ways we were really compatible -- which I was wise enough at 17 to realize, and helps to explain why that was the hardest breakup of my life -- harder than some of my more "serious" relationships later.
Posted by Magson (Member # 2300) on :
I know a couple who were set up on a blind date. By the end of the date he had proposed and she had accepted. 14 years and 4 kids later they're still going strong. So it worked for them.
In my own experience, I met my wife in February 1996 and we were married in August of 1996 -- not quite 6 months from our meeting, and just a hair over 4 months from our 1st "official" date. We had 7 glorious years, then it all fell apart in less than a month. Turns out that when we were getting to know each other that she told me a lot of lies, and the guilt finally caught up with her, but she couldn't tell me, so she found another guy to tell, and. . . . the rest is history. With my 20/20 hindsight, I can see the red flags that existed when we were dating, but I was so caught up in "being in love" that I didn't catch their meaning or simply ignored them. So in my case I definitely wish I'd taken longer to get to really know her, rather than getting to know the image she presented to me.
Let's see. . . what was my point again? Ah yes: I agree that it "happens fast" when it happens. And it sometimes even works out even without the lengthy courtship. And it sometimes doesn't. But it still happens fast, whether we choose to make the courtship take a while or not.
Posted by 0range7Penguin (Member # 7337) on :
Proposing at a blind date? could you imagine the freind or freinds that set them up! So how did it go? Oh that, I got engaged.
Edited post:(Forgot to add the comma so that the last line made sence) Posted by BryanP (Member # 7772) on :
It's not like the love between Alvin and Peggy is easy, either. I mean, she falls in love, then runs aways, comes back disguised, Alvin falls in love, her mom dies, they go separate ways, she comes back when he's in jail, runs off, then finally comes back and agrees to marry him. Then they're never together (at least we hardly see them) and then she's worried about whether he'll still love her (at least that's where I am in The Crystal City and I don't know what's going to happen....though I'm sure they'll make it).
Posted by R. Ann Dryden (Member # 8186) on :
My parents met, went on three dates three nights in a row and got engaged on the third one. They've never looked back and it has been 28 years since then.
My own relationship was a bit different. I felt that my husband couldn't be the guy for me because although I really liked his mind, I was not at all attracted to his body. But I prayed about it and asked God that if it was His will for us to marry, he would change my heart so that I found my husband physically attractive. It worked. Any time I feel the romance fading I pray some more and it comes back full strength. For me, love is a choice I make every day that is not based on emotion, though it is nice when the emotions are there.
Posted by Bekenn (Member # 6602) on :
Okay, I'll admit that it does sometimes happen very quickly (the decision to commit, I mean, not the thoughts and feelings that lead to that decision, which I don't think I've ever contested), but those cases still seem over-represented in Card's work. I could just be seeing things; I'd have to go back through my collection and catalogue all of the relationships to see for sure, since my memory's not perfect (far from it), and there clearly are examples of both types.
I could just be projecting my own absolute refusal to become romantically involved with any woman I don't already consider a close friend onto what I think of as "realistic" relationships, but on the other hand, I'm well aware that I am very unusual in that respect.
Whatever. It wasn't originally meant as criticism, just something funny I thought I noticed.
. . .
Sooo... anyone wanna talk about about the extreme young age of all these romantic partners? Y'know, Nafai/Luet, Bean/Petra, Abram/Sarai (she's what, 10? 12? when he proposes, though he then waits until she's 18 before he comes back), what're-their-names from the beginning of Hart's Hope....
Just kidding.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:But I prayed about it and asked God that if it was His will for us to marry, he would change my heart so that I found my husband physically attractive.
Why not pray for God to change your husband's body? Posted by Verily the Younger (Member # 6705) on :
quote:I think so too, but let's just say that books about falling in love outnumber books about sticking to a marriage by about ten thousand to one <grin>.
Am I the only one that read that sentence and thought, "Now there's a genre that our society desperately needs right about now"?
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)