I have noticed a surprising dearth of topics discussing plot points and other similar things, so I thought I would ask your opinions on a matter of contention between myself and another friend who writes.
I am of the opinion that relationships that just "fall together" in writing are not very well-written, because they are not realistic. For me, good writing mimics the real world (when possible), and writing that fails to be realistic at the same time it is fictional and fanciful is not very high in my eyes. For this reason, relationships in TV shows, movies, and books that are not realistic do not appeal to me. This isn't me saying that the typical "Prince Charming sweeps the girl off her feet" plot doesn't appeal to me, it's just that it is so often poorly executed and unrealistic. Honestly! If people fell in love as quickly and deeply as they do in movies, the divorce rate would be a lot lower. Thus, when working in fandom, I often root for couples that are not provided for in the canon.
An example of a relationship that irks me because of its failure to be realistic is Aang and Katara's relationship, from Avatar: The Last Airbender. The development of the relationship between them is laughable, simply because it exists of Aang having a crush on Katara, kissing her once, and then she is magically in love with him at the end, despite showing no real reaction to the prior kiss and in fact having a motherly role throughout the show. This relationship and the argument I had with my friend over it actually made me think about this subject more in depth.
However, my friend maintains that Katara and Aang's relationship is well-written, romantic, and good. I disagree, because of the above mentioned points; she is angry with me because she does not think conflict makes a good relationship. I don't think that conflict makes a good relationship, but a good relationship is rarely formed without some type of conflict, simply because people are different. For instance, my almost-fiancee and I fight regularly over one or two small things: the biggest thing being that I want lots of pets and he does not. This does not mean we are incompatible, just that we have differing opinions at some points. Those relationships in which the couple never disagrees are usually a facade or very new (in that the relationship is still in the infatuation stage). Do I wish that relationships did not involve conflict? Of course! However, they inevitably do. . .
Because of this, it is my opinion that written relationships need to have conflict and flaws in order to make them real to the reader. If they do not have these things, then they are too unrealistic and fail to be good writing, because good writing draws the reader into the world, and these relationships often mar an otherwise beautiful story. "Perfect" relationships are something that abound in Christian romance novels, which is why I don't often read them, and why many others scorn them. It requires a massive suspension of disbelief to believe relationships are formed like this. Only in a perfect world could they be so!
Your opinions?
I am of the opinion that relationships that just "fall together" in writing are not very well-written, because they are not realistic. For me, good writing mimics the real world (when possible), and writing that fails to be realistic at the same time it is fictional and fanciful is not very high in my eyes. For this reason, relationships in TV shows, movies, and books that are not realistic do not appeal to me. This isn't me saying that the typical "Prince Charming sweeps the girl off her feet" plot doesn't appeal to me, it's just that it is so often poorly executed and unrealistic. Honestly! If people fell in love as quickly and deeply as they do in movies, the divorce rate would be a lot lower. Thus, when working in fandom, I often root for couples that are not provided for in the canon.
An example of a relationship that irks me because of its failure to be realistic is Aang and Katara's relationship, from Avatar: The Last Airbender. The development of the relationship between them is laughable, simply because it exists of Aang having a crush on Katara, kissing her once, and then she is magically in love with him at the end, despite showing no real reaction to the prior kiss and in fact having a motherly role throughout the show. This relationship and the argument I had with my friend over it actually made me think about this subject more in depth.
However, my friend maintains that Katara and Aang's relationship is well-written, romantic, and good. I disagree, because of the above mentioned points; she is angry with me because she does not think conflict makes a good relationship. I don't think that conflict makes a good relationship, but a good relationship is rarely formed without some type of conflict, simply because people are different. For instance, my almost-fiancee and I fight regularly over one or two small things: the biggest thing being that I want lots of pets and he does not. This does not mean we are incompatible, just that we have differing opinions at some points. Those relationships in which the couple never disagrees are usually a facade or very new (in that the relationship is still in the infatuation stage). Do I wish that relationships did not involve conflict? Of course! However, they inevitably do. . .
Because of this, it is my opinion that written relationships need to have conflict and flaws in order to make them real to the reader. If they do not have these things, then they are too unrealistic and fail to be good writing, because good writing draws the reader into the world, and these relationships often mar an otherwise beautiful story. "Perfect" relationships are something that abound in Christian romance novels, which is why I don't often read them, and why many others scorn them. It requires a massive suspension of disbelief to believe relationships are formed like this. Only in a perfect world could they be so!
Your opinions?
Last edited:
