Review of "My Lady's Choosing: An Interactive Romance Novel"
Growing up, I never read any of the "Choose Your Own Adventure" (CYOA) books. I don't know if it's because they weren't readily available to me or because I just wasn't interested. But now I have found one that's just for adults and is explicitly romance-themed. So, I thought I'd give it a try.
The book is "My Lady's Choosing: An Interactive ( Read more... )
Just like one of the pop cultural understandings of BatB is that it's romanticized Stockholm Syndrome? -_-
/At least three times for ships which are basically textbook Jane Eyre/
Which ships/fandoms are those?
/though it does fit some specific moments reasonably well/
Yes, I've seen people try to match it up with Ben's comment about Rey being a scavenger and his remarks about her parents, and Rey learning that she was wrong about him ("I know everything I need to know about you"). But I've seen the P&P parallels being made with Zutara too, and it's a similar thing: both sets of couples initially are antagonistic to each other, but then thaw as they learn more about each other. But with Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth, they weren't *enemies.* Elizabeth didn't like him, but they weren't on opposing sides like Reylo and Zutara are. The obstacles to their relationship mostly came from them, not from the people around them.
/if a Bronte were writing S&S, things would go differently/
Oh, boy, I wonder if anybody's tried writing/speculating about that: "If the Bronte sisters wrote Jane Austen..."
/sneering/
I remember seeing this piece of writing advice once that said to avoid using the word 'sneer' or 'smirk' for a hero, because to them, sneering or smirking implied that the person was nasty.
/'enjoying' her pain or embarrassment/
Which I don't find attractive at all, and I'm puzzled why some people do. Is it some kind of humiliation fetish?
Reply
Rumbelle (Belle/Rumpelstiltskin, Once Upon a Time), which is a Beauty and the Beast ship. And I mean, literally, Disney owns the show and they are the show's version of B&tB- Belle is introduced wearing the gold ballgown and they once danced to the theme tune. He's cursed, she almost breaks it with True Love's kiss (and then the writing-- already very shaky-- slid off a cliff in the second season and they completely fumbled both the curse thing and the TLK thing and there was never a satisfying conclusion as the show got worse every year it was on, but I digress).
Obviously, this being literally B&tB, you don't really need to look to any other models to argue about how we're supposed to read the ship. It's not subtle. But people still feel the need and they all go to P&P even though their original (and by far best) episode basically maps 1-to-1 to Jane Eyre's emotional arc up until she goes to live with StJohn Smarmface. Except Rumpel is the Beast, so he let her go voluntarily for her sake and then later kicks her out because he cannot trust or accept the love/freedom she offers (it's more complicated than the traditional B&tB plot, he has a lot going on) as opposed to Rochester's moral failure forcing Jane to leave him.
Anyway, there's nothing about it that invites comparison to P&P at all, except maybe that he's secretly a hugely sensitive dork and so is Darcy, but their issues are not remotely similar. Far from being a snob, he's originally a peasant who couldn't be more disenfranchised and his curse isn't a just punishment on him; he's a victim. He's also a cunning trickster figure. Belle is Belle, straight up.
Whouffaldi (Twelfth Doctor/Clara, Doctor Who) she's a governess and a schoolteacher with a fierce and uncompromising sense of self, he's an older unfathomably powerful grumpy alien who is profoundly good but often not at all nice. Their relationship is enormously complicated and full of push-pull dynamics of who is holding whom to account for morality and responsibility. There's a lot of denial and Gift of the Magi style self-sacrifice, usually involving lying. Far from a problem of first impressions, the problem is they know each other inside out and yet still manage epic miscommunication because of aforementioned denial and emotional insecurity. There's a story in the comics where they meet Charlotte Bronte and the dialogue indicates they inspired her to write JE based on them. People still go for the P&P comparison and it makes no sense whatsoever.
And Jareth/Sarah. Nuff said.
It's like they think any kind of fraught, conflicted romance= P&P, even though that is emphatically not what P&P is about at all. Especially if genuine moral failure or denial is the main obstacle. Darcy is staunchly morally upright and chivalrous. Rochester is hella shady and the power dynamic needs to be hashed out at length before he and Jane can be together. If shadiness and power are major issues in your ship, JE is your archetype, not P&P.
'sneer' or 'smirk' for a hero, because to them, sneering or smirking implied that the person was nasty
It does! Such an ugly connotation and people throw those words in like they're commas. They seem to understand it makes him come off as a huge asshole because the other characters usually react appropriately, but WHY do you want your love interest to be a huge asshole?
and I'm puzzled why some people do. Is it some kind of humiliation fetish?
idk. It is so, so common and I don't get it at all. Why would he enjoy her pain? Especially if this is after they have supposedly fallen in love, which it often is. If it's in the context of climatic melodrama and he's a wounded Byronic hero angry at her for betraying him or something, okay, I can deal with that, but it's in mundane domestic scenes where no one is even mad at anyone all the time. Is he a sociopath? Who enjoys seeing their partner suffer appropo of nothing? What the hell.
Reply
I think that it may be because of the arguing. Mr. Rochester is gruff to Jane when they first meet, but she doesn't dislike or hate him and he doesn't hate her. She tolerates his manners with seeming politeness and doesn't snap back at him. The only times where they do seriously argue are when their relationship evolves to romance: when Jane stands up for herself as she's about to leave because of Blanche and when she refuses to become his mistress. It's not a love-hate dynamic that spirals into 'enemies = lovers,' which is what they think that P&P is.
/Darcy is staunchly morally upright and chivalrous/
There was this article on this website that tried positing Mr. Darcy as a 'bad boy' to reject in favor of a nicer man like Friedrich Bhaer from "Little Women" and I just could not believe what I was reading. Mr. Darcy, a 'bad boy?' Fitzwilliam Darcy? The man who's concerned about his reputation, who's extremely conscious of social norms, who always tries to do the right thing, who rides off to rescue Elizabeth's sister from the actual 'bad boy' of the story, George Wickham? That Fitzwilliam Darcy?
Apparently being repressed and arrogant and an introvert and arguing with the heroine means that you're a bad boy now. Dear Lord.
/the other characters usually react appropriately/
Sometimes they don't, and that's really frustrating.
/WHY do you want your love interest to be a huge asshole?/
I can think of two possible reasons. The more optimistic one is that writers know that their characters have to be flawed and not perfect, so by trying to make their characters flawed, they accidentally go too far and make their characters extremely unlikable.
The other, more pessimistic version is that the writers aren't trying to give their characters flaws to overcome: they just like jerks. They think that the character's smugness is confidence and their nastiness is caustic wit.
/Is he a sociopath? Who enjoys seeing their partner suffer appropo of nothing?/
If the love interest is meant to be the voice of the writer, then I guess the answer to that question would be that the author likes seeing this character suffer, for whatever reason. Because it's 'funny' or something.
Reply
Leave a comment