HisaishiFan wrote:Ditto, Mitsuki Lover. With the romace as a part of the plot but not the sole plot. And no smut. Although I've always liked Jane Eyre and that's pretty much a straight up romance novel. I also like it when people really come to know each other's deepest flaws and, even thought it is scary and painful, they stick together. Kyo Sohma and Tohru Honday, anyone?
And, yeah, I believe in happy endings. Sloppy, rough, imperfect, but happy endings.
*Gasp* Another Jane Eyre fan! Wow, I looooove that book, I've read it twice. It's. So. Amazing. Starstoryteller, if you want to know how to write a good romance, read Jane Eyre. Charlotte Bronte did EVERYTHING right when she wrote that book.
So anyways, I've thought LOADS about this subject, and here's what I've come up with--
Dislikes: When EVERYTHING works out for the young lovers. They never have problems with one another, and if they do, they settle it by saying something stupid like, "We were
both wrong, but I hate not talking to you. Can we pretend it never happened?" How unrealistic. Couples do not do that when they argue.
When the guy is so sappy with the girl that it comes across like she's practically an invalid. And I'm not talking about a guy being a gentleman and opening the door or something like that. A prime example would be Dee Henderson novels (sorry if I step on any toes by saying this)-- when she writes, AT LEAST 20 times a chapter the guy "brushes her chestnut brown hair from her face" or something like that, and I want to barf! First off, you'd think if the girl wanted her hair out of her face, she'd push it back herself. But beyond that, no guy does things like that THAT much. Be realistic. Some expressions like that are OK, but too many authors go into overd-rive on it, and it just gets irritating.
When either the guy or girl is able to make every single one of the other person's problems go away. Par example (and here we go back to Dee again): In pretty much every one of her books, you'll find at least a handful of lines where the narraration says that the guy is going to "make sure she has a good time." Her life stinks, but
he's going to make
sure she has a good time. Um, how exactly does he plan to do that? There's no way to gauruntee it, so stating it in the narration just comes across as cheesy. I think the reader should be able to tell that that is the characters intentions without the character actually having to come right out and say it. If they do have to, then it's just bad writing.
When the romance is the main plot. That's OK for something like "A Walk To Remember," but a lot of times, authors try to write mysteries or suspense novels and keep romance as the main plot. That comes across as too forced to me. I think it works much better when the author lets the romance be a great supporting side plot. Just a few days ago I read a book called "Comes a Horseman" by Robert Lipraulo, and he did a great job with what I'm talking about. The plot was great on its own, but the romance just added nicely to it.
Likes: Uh, take the reverse of everything I disliked and you've got it. :-P
.) Negative attitudes pertaining to chastity or Christianity 
.
: This is a needle in a haystack to find but a dark but honorable man (they have those but they are often vampire/slayers and are in the occult) really intrusting plots. And just a touch of passion/mush. #^_^# 
: WAY too preachy. Boring or depressing plot lines.
your turn you guys
"Foul Beast"
