More thoughts on romance (inspired by The Sharing Knife/Bujold)

[cahn]

I realized something while reading TSK, which is that I don't like the way Bujold does romance when she's consciously thinking about romance.

What really draws me in, with romance, is-- part of falling in love, really getting love right, is seeing oneself differently. Realizing one might have to be a different person for the beloved. Learning to live with the faults of the beloved, and changing yourself to be the person that can live with your beloved.

The romances I love are all like that. Pride and Prejudice. Perilous Gard. Gaudy Night/Busman's Honeymoon. A Civil Campaign, except for the part where Miles' romance gets short-circuited at the end (which kind of irks me, but whatever). Possession (well, many styles of love are explored... one major one of which is an exploration of what happens when change/compromise does not occur).

The romance in TSK, in contrast, is relatively a bunch of infatuated sighs of "oh, isn't X wonderful?" Which is fine, and certainly a necessary part of romance, but if I want to see that I can just, you know, walk down the hallway and find someone who is engaged. Or read my journal entries about D :) Or, in fact, my journal entries about all my ex-boyfriends, all of whom have many fine and worthy qualities, though not enough-- and not well enough matched to mine, or at least we were unwilling to match them-- to keep us for a lifetime, or even for more than a couple of years. And that's the kicker: just reading about infatuation is rather unconvincing to me. If the author has not sufficiently shown us how the characters are doing the work-- and it can be work, albeit fun work-- of matching themselves together, well, I don't see any reason that I should expect the romance to last any longer than, you know, those of the growing number of people I know who are starting to get divorces.

Now, I'm not saying I don't enjoy the part of romance where the lovers are finding out all sorts of new and lovely things about each other. I really do like that, and I had great fun reading TSK-- and, because Bujold really is a consummate craftsman, it's not quite as cut-and-dried as I've implied here. But... I don't keep going back to it, the way I do to the deeper treatment of the books mentioned above.

Comments

[shadefell.livejournal.com]

I didn't think the Romance was the main aspect of the book so much as the Different Cultures and the Sharing Knife/Fetus Energy Mystery Thing was. It kind of got short shrift, with a lot of it being summed up (Dag being away, coming back, going away on rounds, coming back, her healing, then sex) because that's just not the focus of the book. It's kind of gooey and glow-y and happyfuzzy, but... it's not a romance novel.

Followed a train of links from the bujold community.

[charlie-ego.livejournal.com]

I agree with you about the Different Cultures, but definitely I thought the Sharing Knife thing, while solidly set up, was really not given prominence. I felt kind of like to wrap up the plotlines in a way that would make Beguilement come to a natural sort of conclusion, it was sort of forced into a romance mold.

Also, I feel like it's as much of a romance novel as, say, Gaudy Night. Which is really a mystery. But it's also a wonderful romance, at least to me :)

[http://users.livejournal.com/aseop_/]

But I like gooey romance! And remember, the romance does not end with their marriage. I expect that future books, and we have several more coming, will present further challenges to their relationship. Since their relationship is such an important part of the story, I doubt that it is over yet. It makes sense that the first book is about the infatuation and falling in love, there's plenty of time for troubles later.

[charlie-ego.livejournal.com]

That's a very good point, and one I should have thought about more-- that I am probably being at least somewhat unnecessarily harsh because of the whole I've-only-read-half-the-book (or a quarter, I guess-- isn't it two duologies?) thing, and that more relationship development may be coming later. Indeed, it's possible I may have played right into Bujold's hands and that the entire next book will be an examination on what comes after infatuation.

On the other hand, my view is also somewhat affected by Diplomatic Immunity, which is kind of this "okay, now we're married and now we will have no internal issues, only external ones" sort of thing. On the third hand (foot?), Barrayar is the sort of insightful look of marriage (Aral/Cordelia, Kou/Drou) that comes as a natural sort of sequel to Shards of Honor.

[http://users.livejournal.com/aseop_/]

I know many fans have issues with Diplomatic Immunity. I agree that just because you're married doesn't mean everything is just ducky. Barrayar does show some of the tensions that can happen in a marriage, certainly the Chalion books have emphasized courtship, and tend to end with the assumption that at least in terms of relationships, everything is happy ever after. Other than Aral and Cordelia I can't think of any long marriages that we've seen in Bujolds work. So here's hoping that we get some more realistic portrayals of marrital difficulties.

And yes, it's looking like it will be a 4 book series, so they'll be plenty more adventures.

[jenett]

Came here via the Bujold community - some excellent thoughts.

Have you read any Laurie R. King? (both her Mary Russell books, and her Kate Martinelli books touch on this particular kind of romance issue.) I adore Gaudy Night and Busman's Honeymoon, in particular, for similar reasons to yours (and Civil Campaign for those but also many other reasons.)

I'm reserving judgment on The Sharing Knife until I see volume 2: knowing that they were originally written as a single volume, I have hopes of further growth and development later. (Which is, actually, generally true of her other work, looking at some of the Miles development arcs, or Cordelia and Aral.)

[charlie-ego.livejournal.com]

Ooh, no I haven't, though I've heard they're good. Thanks for the rec!

[filkferengi]

Laurie R. King's first Mary Russell book is _The Beekeeper's Apprentice_. I think you'd find it a fascinating contrast to both _Gaudy Night_ and _Beguilement_.

[poodlerat.livejournal.com]

Here from the Bujold community. Wow, I really agree with you on what constitutes a good romance, if the fact that we love the same romances is anything to go by. If you haven't read it yet, I want to second the recommendation of The Beekeeper's Apprentice. Also, if you've never read anything by Guy Gavriel Kay, you might enjoy The Lions of Al-Rassan (historical fantasy) or The Summer Tree (high fantasy). All his work is really good, but I think Lions is his best in terms of romance...

Both your essays on TSK express pretty much exactly what I feel about the book. I didn't hate it, but it lacked the Bujold magic in so many ways that I was quite disappointed. Compared to the average fantasy novel, it wasn't that bad, but next to Barrayar, A Civil Campaign, or Curse of Chalion it just felt clumsy. I also think LMB does much better with heroines who are mature enough to be sure of themselves; Fawn's hesitance and...gentleness just got on my nerves after a while.

[charlie-ego.livejournal.com]

Yay recs! I will go look up Beekeeper's Apprentice at the first opportunity. Guy Gavriel Kay gives me conniptions (for some reason I've taken a violent dislike to his writing style, which really isn't his fault, but there it is), and I'm sorry, but I could not stand The Summer Tree (I also take a violent dislike to Arthurian fantasy unless the author demonstrates s/he knows at least as much as I do about Arthurian matters, which is I admit a somewhat difficult barrier, and certainly just a personal quirk), but! I did very much like the Sarantium books (Kay demonstrated he knew waaaay more than I did about Byzantium :) ). I'll definitely check it out.

Yeah, I'm hoping that Fawn gets a little more, I dunno, assertive. Or something. On the other hand, I reread Curse of Chalion (my absolute positive favorite Bujold ever!) and paused halfway through, and thought, "wow, if she'd written this book in two parts I would have hated the first part." So I guess we should wait for the second half. But I hate waiting! ;)

[poodlerat.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I think it's a real shame that her editors or publishers or whoever made her split TSK into two (for reasons that are still not entirely clear to me. I mean, clearly they were economic reasons, but it's not as though this is a common strategy---I'd really like to know who thought it up and why they thought it was a good idea.) Unless Legacy is brilliant, I don't think it will be able to fully redeem Beguilement, because reading the first half by itself exposed a lot of weaknesses that might never have been apparent if the story had been published in one volume.

I think I may understand your point about GGK's style---his writing is very...I don't even know how to put it...thick? Lots of elaborate language and playing on your emotions and...a lot of other stuff that can actually make his books hard to get into.

The Summer Tree and its sequels are actually my least favourite of all his books, mostly because I don't like high fantasy, and the chasm between modern language and high fantasy language is at its most jarring in that trilogy. Even though I'd already fallen in love with his other books, I tried to read The Summer Tree three times before I managed to finish it.

I didn't mind the stuff about Arthur, but since my knowledge of Arthurian legend comes entirely from reading Rosemary Sutcliff's Arthurian novels and the first half of The Mists of Avalon, that doesn't mean much. If you have the time and inclination, I'd love to know some of the places he went wrong or fudged with the legend...

The Lions of Al-Rassan, A Song for Arbonne (my second favourite), and The Last Light of the Sun are much closer to Sailing to Sarantium and Lord of Emperors in terms of style and content. If you enjoyed the latter two in spite of his writing style, you'll probably like the others, too. Tigana is sort of a bridge between his high fantasies and historical fantasies, with some elements of both.

[/GGK evangelizing]

[charlie-ego.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I do now wish that I'd waited to read Beguilement until Legacy was published.

It's funny about GGK, because I usually don't have a huge problem with somewhat-mannered writing styles... but occasionally one just rubs me totally the wrong way for some reason. Piers Anthony is the other one I can think of offhand (well, ok, Anthony has maaaaany other issues besides his writing style).

Hm, I don't remember exactly *what* bugged me about his Arthurian-legend stuff, just that I remember ranting to people about it at the time :) My husband likes them, though, and owns a copy, so maybe I'll have to go back and look.

I did like Tigana, though :)