Where Romances Go Wrong: On the Other Hand

The book might have made

more sense if it was like this.

In previous (re)posts, I castigate romance solutions that kill off characters and lead to instant change. I argue that the characters need to solve their problems without easy external fixes. 

However, there is a romance problem where writers overcompensate--that is, they pile on the problems and angst and worries and uncertainties to the point where not only does one to think, "No one can get out from under all this!" one begins to think, "And why should I care?" 

The hero and heroine need to slog through the rough patches to get to the happy ending! is the response.

Okay--I happen to agree with that. But the rough patch needs to be like the swamp in the woods I grew up near: little hillocks surrounded by muddy, gross water that afforded hours of fun due to the challenge--as opposed, to say, the current state of Mars. I'm completely enthralled by Perseverance! But death from radiation, lack of water, dust storms, and boring rocks isn't exactly my idea of a healthy lifestyle.

This problem is one I tackle in my Violence in Romance post. Eventually, the trials become so great, the need for the characters to separate and tackle their trials alone becomes necessary. And...no more book!

Because love actually doesn't solve anything. Sustain, yes. Solve? No.

Mars does work--if all one cares about, as I do right now, is Ingenuity.