Love Story vs. Romance
Yeah, yeah, I know -- I'm getting into a bad habit of posting late. 3rd week in a row. I have no excuse but the typical one everyone has -- I'm too darn busy! And, no, that's not a good thing.
Okay...on to the post.
This is something I've been thinking about for some time. It's one of those topics that can become convoluted and mushy, where the lines blurr and no one knows what anyone is talking about after a while.
I don't understand the distinction between a love story and a romance. I've searched online, but only get a lot of **opinion** spit back. It seems most people believe there are two distinct categories. I'm not so sure.
What is your take on Love Stories vs. Romance?
Labels: Joan's posts
posted by Joan Swan at 5:13 PM
2Comments:
Nicholas Sparks makes a big deal about the fact he writes love stories and not romances, as if "romance" is a dirty word. (Don't get me started.) I never paid much attention, but after reading one of his books (and then throwing it out the window), I looked it up. Love stories deal with romance, but the ending may or may not be a happy one. Though a love story may end in a tragedy (ie death of one main character), the story itself is only a tragedy if the main character isn't changed somehow by the relationship he/she experienced. On the flip side, romances always have a happy ending, one or both characters are changed because of the relationship, and they end up together at the end.
The line gets blurred though. For example, Titanic would probably be considered a love story since Jack dies in the end and he and Rose don't live happily ever after, but the movie goer is still left with that "happy" feeling walking out of the theatre because the last scene shows Rose and Jack together again, albeit in death.
Very nicely said, E. And I think you hit the target of my discomfort with the subject--the whole undertone of romance being a negative thing. Then again, I might be a tad sensitive. :-)
Post a Comment
<< Home