Water Under the Bridge

[sistermagpie]

I was having a conversation today about something completely unrelated, and it made me think about first time stories or new relationships vs. old relationships with a lot of baggage.

I like first time stories and stories where characters start a relationship. This is probably something that goes along with liking non-canon characters where you often start out with the idea that these characters could get together but aren't, so it's satisfying to see them realize that they agree with you. If the characters actually are together in canon you can imagine any place on the timeline--before they got together, just after, long into it, etc.

But in many ways I prefer relationships with a history. Definitely that's the way I feel in real life. I was flipping channels the other day and came upon an old ep of Friends where Monica was asking Chandler if he was worried, now that they were getting married, that he'd never start a relationship again. And Chandler was like...no. That's a plus. Starting a relationship, meeting a new woman he really liked, just filled him with anxiety. Comfort and familiarity was his fantasy. I always liked that scene. Maybe it's just that I'm not married so I have far more experience with the starting-out-with-a-person-I-don't-know part, but yeah, nothing about a long marriage seems boring to me.

I thought about this because I happened to be having a conversation that brought up the idea of water under the bridge kind of making a relationship not the one that's going to help the person. (Sorry if that's really vague--it seems too tedious to explain the storyline this was about since I'm not even that familiar with it myself and it's only a starting off point.) In plenty of cases, and certainly often in life, that's true. Too much stuff can happen for it be possible for a relationship to work anymore, or at least work the way it had.

But I guess the reason it becomes a pet peeve for me is it's become such a staple of continuing storylines wherever they are. It's like the way that whenever a couple gets together it's assumed that either the story has to end or they have to break up. Sure if it's a romance the place where they get together can be the natural end to the story. What sometimes bugs me even more is that this gets described as "realism," as if the idea of two people getting together and staying together is automatically fake.

But usually it's more like the idea that the only way couples are interesting is when they're getting together. Once they are together people act like there's nothing else that can happen so they break up and a few weeks later some new hot guest star arrives to start a new romance. Or in some cases it's more like...they want to tell a new first time story and the longterm relationship gets in the way. Then also sometimes people feel the new first time relationship is less special if there's this other relationship. So they make the first relationship unimportant so they can start fresh with no competition.

Of course in fanfic it's often linked to shipping, but it's not always shipping. Sometimes it's not even just first time vs. lots of baggage so much as that PLUS the feeling that the best relationships are exclusive-or at least hierarchical. Maybe it's just not wanting to deal with the network of relationships that most people have that are important in different ways. I was going to say it's part of just the general thing of placing romantic relationships above all others and needing the romantic relationship to pwn all other relationships in the person's life but maybe it's also tied to the desire for simpler relationship stories?

Like, I was talking to somebody about the Captain America movie. I don't know Cap well, but they said it sounded like they were going with the standard coming-of-age story, and that this was weird because the real story just wasn't that. But it's easier and it's simpler to just go with that template. You lose this individual, more unique person who's going to have idiocyncratic views of things because of his specific past, and replace him with the easily recognizable kid losing his innocence in war or whatever. I think we've gotten more and more used to those kinds of stock characters we almost forget there are other types. So when you get stories that include more unique, specific people audiences and critics sometimes almost don't know what to do with themselves.

Comments

[anamirza.livejournal.com]

Reading this I realize that my marriage has been real short on new hot guest stars showing up. So if that's realism, I am so, so losing out.

I think stock characters are comforting. Like closure. It's nice when the universe for once acts according to prediction - even if it's only in a story. When it doesn't - well, that's the same as real life, i.e., much less comfy. It's funny because while in general I really enjoy when the template gets subverted (e.g. Princess Academy) it can also be really uncomfortable. In the Woods is one example I came across recently; Passage is another less recent one. I am not sure I will ever re-read Passage .

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

IKR? It amazes me when people act like it's just unrealistic for people to stay together for 5 minutes much less the length of many relationships or marriages. I remember that coming up a lot on The Office where it seemed doubly strange because the two people in the relationship were both creatures of habit who had more trouble doing something new.

I do agree about the stock characters, though. There's a reason they work. I remember one time talking to somebody about children's theater and they were pointing out that below a certain age there really aren't stock characters. Kids don't get the whole "we're subverting the trope" until they've become familiar with the original, which they don't see as cliche.

[ptyx.livejournal.com]

Interesting post. Gave me food for thought.

There are some fanfics featuring established relationships -- the couple's daily life, their children, and so on. I've written a few myself.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

There are--though I suspect there's probably more first-time fic. I can totally understand why people like domestic fic, though. I think sometimes it gets a bad rap, though. (Heh--I almost wrote "it gets a bad rape"--which is probably something you see more often in fanfic!)

[shark-hat.livejournal.com]

One of the reasons I like The Mummy 2 [blush] is that it has a married couple with a kid, and it is a happy, functional marriage and family, and when the supernatural comes and bothers them, they go and kick its arse together.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

That makes me happy just thinking about it. I mean, I'm not somebody who wants everybody to have a family or have babies. But I don't think it's inherently more boring a thing to happen in life. And for a lot of people it's just what they would naturally do! And I love stories about adventure families like this.

[shark-hat.livejournal.com]

Oh, absolutely, in RL and in films, having a family wouldn't be a happy ending for everyone! But there are lots of films, as you say, where falling in love is the important thing, and also a lot where there's a couple or a family at the start, but the plot is: a father's wife and kids are kidnapped/murdered; he must take get them back by being badass/get revenge. (Often he's been a terrible father but he can be an good alpha male revenger, oh yes, so the film doesn't have to show much boring stuff like family life but can get right to the badassery.)

Kids' or family action films often show decent families, of course, but in adult action films it's pretty rare. So this one- where there's an established relationship from The Mummy 1 and it's a good one! And Evie doesn't get fridged or devolved into the left-behind housewife character! And Rick is actually a decent father!- just makes a refreshing change. (Of course there's plenty wrong with it as well. I think it's one of those things like unpopular 'ships; if there's only one fic with your ship, you hug it and squeeze it no matter if half the characters are wildly OOC, but when there's a hundred you're much pickier.)

[ava-jamison.livejournal.com]

I definitely enjoy reading or watching relationships with a history. Much more than the the alternative version.

Wow, I'm really surprised they'd go with a standard coming-of-age template for Cap. That's not his story! Weird.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure if that's really where they're going or anything, but there was something about some description that made it sound like that. It's almost sometimes like an inside-out thing. Meaning that I think a lot of types become recognizable because a lot of different characters have them--it's like the hero with a thousand faces thing. It's not like everybody said "we have to follow this type" it's just that certain heroes had things in common and that became a template story.

But it does seem really crazy if they are going that way, because most of the time I think I assume people stick with stock characters because they can't think of anything else. So the idea of getting rid of a more interesting character in favor of a stock narrative is completely counter-intuititive!

[seductivedark.livejournal.com]

Some speculation:

Maybe they go with stock characters as shorthand to move the story along without explaining a bunch of backstory. Backstory fits better in books where there is no time limit like a movie or where instant recognition doesn't matter as much as it does when someone's trying to air a new sitcom and attract viewers. Backstory might well be a luxury only a successful show or movie series could indulge in. Or...

Maybe it's what they think viewers want, the tried-and-true, the comfortable. Talking about relationships, readers and viewers have a very long-lasting relationship with certain character types. So of course they'll pair us with these stock characters because a new, untried relationship is dangerous for everyone involved, including the production company.

Or maybe they think we're all so shallow that we can't really appreciate anything but a trite character and story-line. Our attention spans are at the level of a toddler's, we won't buy the product if there isn't instant recognition. We're dumb, they're only leading us to some meager form of entertainment. :P