Everybody knows how a romance novel ends. That’s the explanation I hear most frequently as to why someone doesn’t read them: “The guy gets the girl, and they live happily ever after. There, just saved myself a couple hours of reading.”
I subsequently have to explain what, to me, is obvious: “There’s a lot more to any book than the last couple of pages. A story is a journey, and even when the destination is the same, no two paths to that destination are exactly alike.”
When I describe the journey in a romance novel, I rarely mention the “romancey” bits—the meet-cute, the flirting, the kissing, the sex, the I love yous, and the HEA—all the predictable elements dismissed as formulaic.
Instead, I focus on the conflicts, the obstacles that cast doubt on the potential for a happy ending, and these are legion in the realm of romance.
Oh no, James has gone from playing along with Georgina’s adolescent boy disguise to making out with her—now she thinks he’s attracted to adolescent boys.
Bowen won’t shut up about his attraction to Mari being solely because he believes she’s the reincarnation of his long-dead fiancee—Mari, for some bizarre reason, isn’t overcome by warm, fuzzy feelings upon hearing her present incarnation is of no value to him.
Summer’s abducted at scalpel-point by a guy she finds naked on an embalming table and refers to him only as Frankenstein for two-thirds of the book—yet those crazy kids manage to not only stay alive while on the run from a killer but also fall in love.
Not to mention the rivalries, the lies, the misunderstandings, the meddling family members, the plane crashes, the crimes, the natural disasters, the curses… Any conflict you can imagine can be—and probably has been—incorporated into a romance novel.
A straight, unrutted path to the destination would make for a very dull read. We want to see the characters making progress toward their HEA or HFN, of course, but reaching the finish line with them is a lot more satisfying if we’ve seen them sweat and struggle and put some effort into it. The setbacks are what move the journey forward and keep readers turning pages.
What are some romance-novel conflicts that have made you unable to put a book down until you found out how they resolved?
No related posts.
I love it when someone from the past (or the future) shows up to muddy the waters. It’s interesting to see characters faced with the dilemma of choosing one path or the other.
There, just saved myself a couple hours of reading.
I don’t get that either. I mean, why read mysteries? You know the killer is going to get caught in the end. (And why is it always a killer? Why isn’t the mystery ever built around a theft or a non-lethal arson or a swindle or a mugging? There are books about solving those kinds of crimes but they’re not called mysteries — why not?) Whatever problem the protag has at the beginning of the book is going to be solved by the end, 99% of the time, in any genre. So why bother reading?
But then, I also reread books I’ve read before (including mysteries) so obviously there’s something seriously wrong with me. [wry smile]
A story is a journey, and even when the destination is the same, no two paths to that destination are exactly alike.
Exactly. [nod] And it’s not even necessarily about seeing where the journey goes, or even how it goes; I wouldn’t reread books if that was the only attraction. I enjoy hanging out with the characters, feeling what they feel, experiencing the things that happen to them. Something that made me laugh or wince or cheer or snarl on the first read will probably have the same effect on my when I reread a year or two later, if the book was really good in the first place. If it’s really great I might not wait that long to reread.
It’s not only about the experience the characters have while going along on their adventure, it’s about the experience I have while I read.
Angie
“There’s a lot more to any book than the last couple of pages. A story is a journey, and even when the destination is the same, no two paths to that destination are exactly alike.”
Ah, there’s the challenge in writing a Romance novel. As a book reviewer, I discarded almost all of the Romance novels (say 95%) because the journey wasn’t interesting enough for me to keep reading to the inevitable HEA. When one does grab me, then I know I have a keeper.
Usually its a good murder mystery as the bases for the story, and the romance as the back drop. That’s what works for me. And often just a satisfying ending works…With a promise of something more. It doesn’t necessarily have to be the HEA, all the time.
I like a mystery (not necessarily a murder) I tend to write ‘puzzles’ where h/h have to work together to solve a problem, although they’re usually at cross-purposes when the book starts — and sometimes well beyond the mid-point. There may or may not be dead bodies involved, and finding a killer isn’t usually the goal. For me, the romance happens (and I know it will, and like to see how it plays out) but I have to care about the story against which the romance is set.
It’s still all about the characters for me. Which must be why I, too, can re-read mysteries and enjoy them.
I just wrote about something similar on my blog this morning
The conflicts I like best are ones that don’t have much to do with the romance at all. I just read two romances back-to-back this week. One had a subplot where the heroine was in danger from the abusive boyfriend of a friend she had helped. The other only had the conflict of the hero’s mother not liking the heroine. I found the first one more interesting that the second because it wasn’t directly keeping the couple apart.
Not reading a romance because you know how it’s going to end is like saying you won’t go see Titanic because you know the boat sinks lol. It’s the characters that give a book a page turning quality that keeps you up till three in the morning because you can’t put it down.
“Not reading a romance because you know how it’s going to end is like saying you won’t go see Titanic because you know the boat sinks lol.”
Which is exactly why hubby refused to go see it. His words exactly!
Whatever problem the protag has at the beginning of the book is going to be solved by the end, 99% of the time, in any genre.
I disagree with that. Ok, in mysteries you know that whatever they come across will be solved at the end, but in many other books not only do you *not* know what the protagonist’s challenge will be (you’ll know by the end of the beginning, usually, but you can easily start with a smallish problem that blends into a major one) and in most SF books you get both an internal and an external plot, which intersect and resolve at different rates. In a Western, you can be pretty certain that the good guys will win – but you don’t know whether the hero will reform and settle down, whether he will get the girl, or whether he’ll ride into the sunset.
For me, it is that uncertainty that adds interest.
Green_Knight — fair enough, that was too shallow. [nod] Let me revise that to say that, 99% of the time, once the main plotline has been established (i.e., once the reader knows what the protag’s goal is and what his/her primary obstacle is) you know that it’s going to be resolved.
So for example, in a Western, defeating the bad guys is usually the main plotline. Whether the protag gets the girl or settles down or rides away is generally secondary. If the primary plotline is the romantic one, then it’s a romance with a Western setting (rather than a genre Western) and the good guy will get the girl and either settle down or take her with him.
If aliens are invading, the protag (usually with a lot of help) will generally either defeat them, drive them away, or figure out how to negotiate a peaceful coexistence or something similar, but however it’s managed, the actual invasion is going to be stopped the vast majority of the time.
I agree that there’s a lot of room for variation in the details, but apparently the details don’t matter to the person who knows the guy gets the girl in the end of a romance and therefore doesn’t have to read it. [wry smile]
Angie
Nell’s comment made me remember when I took my mother-in-law to see Perfect Storm and she didn’t know that no one survived until mid way into the movie.
The conflict I like is when two people who thought they were meant to be together end up not because of something totally stupid done my one of them. Then they meet again years later and still feel sparks but have to figure out what happened in order to see if it can really be.
Wow I hope I explained that clearly.
Interesting topic. I HATED Million Dollar Baby because of the end. I had no idea going in that it would end that way; if I’d known, I wouldn’t have felt so cheated.
As far as romances go, that’s funny that Dani in NC likes the external conflict that keeps her reading. I find that it’s the character’s internal conflict — not the inter-relational conflict, but the character’s own personal issues — that interest me most. When I can’t possibly see how they will recover from their pain (but I know, because it’s a romance, that they ultimately will) that’s what keeps me turning the pages eagerly to the end.
Not reading a romance because you know how it’s going to end is like saying you won’t go see Titanic because you know the boat sinks lol.
That’s precisely why I didn’t go to see Titanic. I knew how it ends, therefore I knew it would just depress me. On the other hand, I read romances because I know their endings won’t depress me. Life’s too short to court depression. If I want to feel down, I can just check the news.
Ok, first please name the stories you used cause they look good, especially the Frankenstein one.
Obstacles: real ones. I don’t really care if it’s internal or external (though I tend to like external more), but the reasoning has to be good. I’m the opposite of Brandy- those plots usually annoy me to no end. I overheard your brother’s sister make fun of my hair- I can never be with you, but I’ll say it’s because I’m seeing someone else, so there.
If I like it, I’ll reread it. Annoys my mom to no end.
Book #1: Johanna Lindsey’s Gentle Rogue (old school 90s faux pirate story)
Book #2: Kresley Cole’s Wicked Deeds on a Winter’s Night (paranormal)
Book #3: Karen Robards’s’es’s Walking After Midnight (AKA “the mortuary book” because my memory for titles is abysmal, 90s romantic suspense)
(Before anyone faints dead away at the revelation I’ve read anything NON-paranormal, check out the dates thereof. It’s been a while.
)
My favorite informal movie review–friend A had just seen the latest World War II movie, and friend B launched in–gosh, it would be so tense–and violent–didn’t know if she could stand wondering how it’d turn out. Long pause, then friend A says, “Well, the Germans lose . . .”
And thanks for posting the titles–I was completed intrigued and wondering if I would be able to google my way to them!
I loved that whole Kresley Cole paranormal series.
The only thing I hate about the supposed dead girlfriend/wife showing up out of the blue plot, is the ex is always portrayed as a witch.
You never understand what the hero saw in her in the first place. Like in that Kresley Cole book above, she shows up and she so devious … there was a lora leigh one with the same plot, his mate turns up and you don’t get what he saw in her.
It would be more interesting if the ex was not a shallow characture, and gave the heroine a run for her money
Anna, that’s a good point.
At first I thought, “Well, if the ex was so great, he’d have stayed with her, wouldn’t he?”, but in the case of her being DEAD and all, yeah, go ahead and make her a saint to complicate things further.
I know better than to question a man’s taste at this point. I have a friend who dates the most revolting (personality wise)women on the planet, and everyone sees this instantly… except him. Totally deluded, and he’s otherwise smart, insightful, and an excellent judge of character. If he can perpetually get it wrong, I have to cut a hero some slack for his lapse of judgment.
Kerry — the thing is, that’s not necessarily true. It’s possible for an ex to be a perfectly good person, cool and nice and intelligent and loving and generous and whatever all else, but just not right for whichever main character. I’d love to see a romance where the ex isn’t a raging bitch or asshole, where it’s clear that if they had to live together 24/7 they’d murder each other, but where they get along fine on an occasional basis and it’s clear what the main character saw in his/her ex in the first place.
Otherwise I’m with Anna — why’d he/she marry that bitch/asshole? Were they really that stupid back then? Sure, you can come up with a scenario where that happened and it wasn’t just stupidity (and particularly easy to do that in a historical), but because that’s what everyone does, I’m kinda sick of it. I’d love to see writers do something else with exes for a while.
Angie
Well… then my thought process would trend toward: If the heroine is ever less than “perfect,” the hero will drop her like a hot rock, too, since he couldn’t work it out with the “almost perfect” ex.
I’m certain I’ve read books where the exes were perfectly civil, worked together or had shared custody of mutual kids or whatever, but honestly, if there were plausible reasons for splitting, they elude me. “We just fell out of love” isn’t going to fly with me and would make me immediately doubtful about the future of the featured couple in the book.
I’d like to see something different, too, but there are limits to what I’ll believe, heartless little jade that I am.
It’s not so much a matter of being almost perfect — ’cause seriously, how many of us are? — bit a manner of not fitting together with the other person. I’m good friends with plenty of people I wouldn’t want to live with. There are people I love whom I wouldn’t want to live with.
Or as my mom used to say, it’s amazing how aggravating squeezing the toothpaste from the middle can get after ten years of it.
Just because two people aren’t OMG InLove Soulmates!!!1!1!!eleventy!!! doesn’t mean one of them has to be a jerkwad. Every couple has points of friction. The question is whether their bond is strong enough to let each of them overlook the others’ habits and mannerisms which are annoying. If yes, then they can stay together happily. If not, then they can’t. But that doesn’t mean that one (or both) was necessarily a cold-hearted bitch or an abusive douchebag.
I’m just sick of the Standard Ex in romances being way off at the extreme end of the spectrum. It exists, yes, but it’s only a tiny part of the spectrum. I’d love to see the rest of the spectrum used.
Angie