OTP Meme

[brigdh]

There's a new meme which encourages one to 'explicate your ship/OTP paradigm' and I am, unsurprisingly, fascinated by it. It's a topic that I adore- along with 'explicate your OTC paradigm'- and reading other people's essays has been amazingly interesting and thought-provoking. You should all go and read Phoebe's essay in particular, and not just because I would never have been able to put my own thoughts into coherent order if I hadn't read hers first. ETA: And now Dorian's essay is available! Read that one as well.

I also expect everyone to write one of these yourselves. Not enough people have been doing it! I want more lovely essays to read and consider.

I don't want to repeat anything Phoebe's already said (or Dorian, or Rana, for that matter, who have also said scarily accurate things, and clearly all of our paradigms overlap in significant ways), but a vital part of how I approach relationships and stories and the world is through the experience of its beauty: constant and pervasive, inexhaustible though often ephemeral. I don't mean just a pretty flower or painting, but that startling, overwhelming emotion of seeing something as simple as the curve of a streetlamp against the straight lines and right angles of building; the sort of beauty that shocks. My reaction to this beauty is to celebrate it, which might be nothing more than to smile, or to point it out to someone else nearby, or to attempt to capture it in words to put into a story or livejournal post later. It's not quite right to say I want to create it; I just want to show it to other people, and make them aware that it exists, and that maybe we should do something about it, such as helping it to continue. There's a Rumi quote that captures this feeling for me: "Near roses, sing".

And this beauty can be in nature or in art, but it can also be in people, individuals. For me, when I have this reaction to a person, it's never about a surface beauty or what they look like; it's always some aspect of their personality. Intelligence, or humor, or kindness, or any wordless quality that is- beautiful is no longer the right word. But something that is there, and real, and which makes the world a better place because it exists. The things which feel like they should exist, but which unfortunately do not nearly often enough.

There are different ways to deal with these experiences, and particularly the possibility of losing them. The one I go for, the one I have my characters act out over and over, is to fight to preserve whatever that special quality is, once they've found it. It's not quite the Hallmark and romantic comedy version of the True Love narrative, though they sound similar when summarized. But the True Love story goes: you find someone special, the two of you fall in love in one big, glorious moment, and you are forever afterward healed and made whole by this relationship. Whereas mine departs from that on at least three levels.

First of all, it's not about the relationship, it's about the individuals in it. That's sort of a petty distinction, but what I mean is that neither character expects to be changed or transformed in any way by this relationship. S/he simply has another person who s/he likes (with or without sex; this paradigm totally works for platonic relationships, though I usually prefer to write ones with sex in them. By 'likes' I only mean "This person is an example of what I find to be good in the world, and who I do not want to change or leave or die") and who, therefore, s/he attempts to protect or insulate from anything that would diminish those qualities. It's not about expecting to find yourself better off; it's about helping someone else to be themselves. Which sounds really self-sacrificing, but it's not. If you garden, do you consider the weeding and watering and so on to be a sacrifice, or is it just part of the experience of joy from the flowers and plants? You like something, you want it to continue; to me it feels like an entirely natural reaction, if not responsibility, to help it to do so. If you want the universe to contain certain things, no one else is going to create those changes for you. You have to do it yourself. I think this is why my characters don't experience the failure of finding transcendence in a relationship; transcendence is way more than they're looking for. Generally, they won't even talk about "love", or act out the stereotypical activities of romance; that's something they perceive as bigger and more binding than what they do. They might sort of sidle up to it and look at it out of the corner of their eyes, but actually talking about it would be too much.

Secondly, it's really not about the one moment, and then the happily-ever-after. My paradigm is centered around the mundane ever-after, the continuing struggle and effort to find what works and a balance, which is why I don't write nearly as many first-time stories as established-relationship ones. The big grand moment when Hisoka throws himself in the fire for Tsuzuki is lovely and tear-jerking, but won't mean anything if it isn't followed up with a million days where Tsuzuki is slightly sad and Hisoka tells him he's being an idiot. Anyone can be helpful once, in the big dramatic moment; my OTP paradigm is about finding the characters who can be helpful to one another over and over again, who know how to fix the problem without it needing to be spoken or made into melodrama. So, there's Hisoka and Tsuzuki; there's Sanzo brooding in the rain and Goku knowing to come make him play cards, or Gojyo to share a cigarette, or Hakkai to say something that sounds superficial but isn't; there's Richard knowing how to distract Alec from a dangerous mood. I don't want stories about the big moment of the True Love narrative because, really, that's easy. It's boring. I like stories about the hard part, the ceaseless, grueling everyday after, and the characters who are willing to keep up the effort. And I think this is part of why The Fall of the Kings bugs me so much. (Highlight text for plot spoilers) Because I really cannot deal with Basil acting to drive Theron more mad than he already is. And I know, I know: there's all sorts of extenuating circumstances and that's sort of the point of the whole book anyway- but to deliberately make it harder for one's partner to function is so exactly the opposite of what I want characters in love to do that it drives me to flailing and I lose all pity or sympathy for him.

Thirdly (hee, I feel like a second-grader writing an essay), it's really, really, really not about healing. Christ, this trope drives me crazy. Not necessarily because I think making someone whole again is impossible, but why on earth would anyone want to? And particularly the type of character I tend to go for. They are broken because of what they have been through, and because of choices they have made in response to their circumstances, and to erase the traces of that strikes me as erasing the reality or importance of their pasts and decisions. And really, it would diminish who they are to heal them: Tsuzuki is capable of immense acts of kindness because he fears he's inhuman; Hisoka is strong because of his drive to prove himself; Sanzo is fierce and independent because of choices he made when the only options were kill someone or die himself, trust himself or trust the oblivious, hidebound monks; Alec is fascinating because he wouldn't accept his expected behavioral roles, whether of his family or class. All of these characters had easier routes they could have gone, but they each wanted something else so much that they went the hard way instead, generally in the face of forces capable of destroying them. To 'cure' them of that choice... it makes me feel icky, to say the least. I'd much rather see a relationship that confirms them in their decision and perhaps offers some strength and stability to help them act on it in healthier ways, rather than one that changes it or erases the need for it. And here I could quote Hemingway's "many are stronger at the broken places" or matociquala's "the thing about broken edges is they cut", both of which are totally part of the appeal for me, but even more fundamentally I think that people become who they are through the mistakes they make and the things they have survived. Why, why is it considered such a good thing to take those distinctions away and turn everyone into cookie-cutter paragons of normalcy and wholesomeness? These characters already suffered to escape that and remain themselves once; don't force it on them and then treat it like it isn't a tragedy.

In essence, my OTPs are about characters who react to one another in that astonishing beauty sense, who stubbornly hang onto those compelling qualities despite rationally knowing that a different choice is easier, and who help one another to keep up the fight. It's not the True Love paradigm, because it's specifically not about finding the meaning of life in someone else; it's about those grand sorts of meaning of life being unreachable and accepting one small, selfish piece of goodness instead. It is utterly fundamental to my outlook that people must create or preserve their own beauty and goodness for themselves, because it is the only way to get those things; they don't exist naturally in the universe without human participation, and no one else will make it for you. My characters don't always get a happy ending (though I like to reward their making the effort because I'm fluffy like that) and they're usually aware that they can't have one, because no matter how long one might be able to preserve his/her partner in the face of an uncooperative universe, in the end everyone dies. (Well, maybe not shinigami. But even they do have to move on, eventually.) It doesn't matter though, because it's not really about the happy ending. It's about struggling to keep something good alive. They might fail- they will fail- but they tried, and maybe they kept it alive for one instant longer. Beauty is everywhere, but so is ugliness and pain, and I don't think there's much anyone can do to shift the overall balance. But I like characters who are willing to run headlong into that brick wall anyway, because it does occasionally make a difference for one moment, one place, one person, and even if it doesn't, when you go down, at least you went down fighting. That's the dynamic I'm interested in.

Comments

[syonakeleste.livejournal.com]

I think you've encapsulated human personal interactions here, if you take it a bit further: to have any sort of a relationship with another person is to preserve what is beautiful in that person by knowing it and sharing in it. But therein lie the seeds of new beauty, also, for we cannot help but take what we learn and suit it to our own needs, or match it to things in ourselves and create anew.

[wordsofastory.livejournal.com]

*nods* Yes, I do think so. It's a paradigm that completely works for platonic relationships, I just happen to tend to write the pairings that include sex. *grins*

But thank you, that's a lovely way to put it.

[ranalore.livejournal.com]

Man, I hope more people do this, because it's just fascinating, and it's discovering that beauty and knowing I personally can't make it, so I hope more people of the right mental bent will. *G*

[wordsofastory.livejournal.com]

Me too! This is one of the more interesting memes to go around in quite a while. I love seeing where my ideas are and are not shared my other people, and how that works with my reactions to their stories.

[veleda-k.livejournal.com]

That was a fascinating and brilliant read. You went far, far beyond the concept of a fandom OTP, into exploring what it means to be human. Ok, that probably sounds stupid, but I found things here that have real relevance to my life, and I have no romantic prospects at all.

I love the idea of this meme, but I'm hesitant to actually do it, because p_zeitgeist and you both wrote these amazing, beautiful, insightful essays, and mine would just be ranty, fannish tripe.

I'm probably not making any sense. I need to go to bed.

[wordsofastory.livejournal.com]

Thank you. But I don't think it's terribly surprising; once you start trying to articulate what types of stories appeal to you, on an abstract, fundamental level, it seems fairly natural that it ends up being tied to other things you find important, and the way you perceive and construct parts of your worldview.

Which is my really long-winded way of saying that I wish you would write one too. It might be more interesting that you'd think.

[lynndyre.livejournal.com]

You intrigue me. This makes me want to analyse my pairing preferences, too.

[wordsofastory.livejournal.com]

Well, thank you. And I certainly hope you'll write one of these yourselves; I'd love to see a wider circle of people's thoughts.

[p-zeitgeist.livejournal.com]

Wow, this is fascinating. (Which, yes, is rapidly becoming an overused word in this discussion, but it's the right word, dammit.) You're right: we share some of the same concerns, and there's the same rejection of the social mythology surrounding romantic love, but the divergences are every bit as marked as the similarity of underlying issues.

I'm still thinking all this through, and will no doubt be back later for second and third bites at this particular apple. But one thing that jumps out at me immediately is that you've managed in passing to put your finger on why I don't write Saiyuki, despite loving it and the characters. Sanzo and Goku and Gojyo and Hakkai, they all need what your paradigm gives them to do for each other. They don't need what my paradigm would do; to some extent their journey west does the same thing, and to the extent it doesn't, that particular high-romantic view of the universe and of their place in it would be wrong for them. It wouldn't help them, and they wouldn't want it: it's out of place in the Saiyuki universe. In fact, while I wouldn't want to put this forward as more than a possibility until I've been able to read all the Burial arc in good translation, it strikes me that a hungering after that very kind of romance may be part of what's wrong with Hazel. Spiritually speaking, it doesn't quite work in that universe -- although having thought that far, I'm left worrying about Nii, to whom it's completely unavailable but who might have benefitted from it.

And, you're so right about the way the whole healing thing can trivialize the initial experience as well as take away from what made a character who he or she was to begin with. I hadn't thought about it in quite those terms before, but yes. Yes, of course. No wonder it can be so infuriating.

[wordsofastory.livejournal.com]

but the divergences are every bit as marked as the similarity of underlying issues.

Yes, which is why I don't think I would have ever noticed if we hadn't written these essays, and which seems to lead to all sorts of other interesting questions. I still would love to get a larger sample size, though; we three are fascinating enough, but what sorts of issues will come up once we get a radically different perspective?

Oh, that is interesting. Because the moment when I fell absolutely in love with Saiyuki, rather than simply reading it as an interesting series other people had recommended, was the big speech Sanzo gives to Hakkai about how "the gods save no one". Which I could practically have written myself, it fits so well into my paradigm, and which caused me to flail with ecstatic love at anyone nearby. But I see too how it doesn't work as well with yours, or probably Dorian's. It's strange, how subtle and yet overwhelming these distinctions can be.

the way the whole healing thing can trivialize the initial experience as well as take away from what made a character who he or she was to begin with

Thank you. I don't want to go too far in the other direction either, of course, and start insisting that no one can heal or that brokeness equates to some sort of Specialness, but the healing trope of the True Love narrative just ignores the way people change- and the importance of those changes- in response to their histories and choices, and I hate that.

[p-zeitgeist.livejournal.com]

. . . of course, another way of putting the thing about Saiyuki is that all the high romance they could possibly need has been forced on them from outside. They're incarnations of great powers of Heaven, on a mission to save a piece of the world. And it's not as if they get nothing out of that, on a gut emotional level; the pleasure they take in knowing they can best anything the universe throws at them, and their joint breakdown over the Kami-Sama thing when it turned out they couldn't, are both illustrations of how much they rely on it. Their lives in heaven seem to have suffered from a lack of grand meaning, but their new lives on earth don't. In fact, their lives on earth have so much grand meaning that Sanzo at least is in full rebellion against it, vividly aware that too much attachment to it will only bring pain.

But as I think about it, I realize I could probably have written the Gaiden guys, who before everything goes to hell suffer from the same implicit problem as the YnM guys: that is, immortality with nothing to do. Or at least, nothing that makes the doing feel worthwhile.

I still would love to get a larger sample size, though

So would I. And dammit, I want to hear from the romance writers, and the people who have a strong preference for first-time stories over established-relationship stories. It's a different part of the forest, and I bet the set of similarities and differences they'd find would be both exotic to my mind and as strange and interesting as what we're finding over here on the non-romance side.

[wordsofastory.livejournal.com]

their lives on earth have so much grand meaning that Sanzo at least is in full rebellion against it

That's a good way of putting it. Saiyuki is a story that I've always been struck by how aware it is of the fact that it is a story, and not just a story but a retelling of a story. There's so much playing with narrative expectations of good guys and bad guys, and the original legends versus this version, and how plot should happen, and what stories can or should be used for.

All of which, I imagine, makes it hard to add in even more narrative.

the people who have a strong preference for first-time stories over established-relationship stories

Oh, yes! I generally hear these explained as that first-time stories have an inherent tension, but I'd love to hear more detail about what it is about that tension which appeals, and why.

[mistressrenet.livejournal.com]

Not necessarily because I think making someone whole again is impossible, but why on earth would anyone want to?

Yes, yes, yes.

[wordsofastory.livejournal.com]

*grins* I'm glad you agree!

[mistressrenet.livejournal.com]

I like watching how the broken parts fit together. And sometimes don't. I mean, I write insanely happy endings most of the time, but...the thought of people fixing each other? No.

[dusk-eyed.livejournal.com]

Got interested in wandering over and gee, I wish I had more time to consider all of this but...I think for me there are really two types of OTP's that I find interesting.

My very favorite is...I suppose in some way it could be called The Beautiful Broken. It's not necessarily about healing but it is about something where one broken person and another broken person somehow fit together and while that maybe doesn't heal the broken bits, it does make the broken bits hurt less.

It's not about pretending they don't have scars but about acknowledging that there can be a kind of beauty IN the fact that they have scars.

I think Tsuzuki and Hisoka are a good example of that. They wouldn't be them without their scars, but it's possible for them to enjoy each other with them. And perhaps be greater than the sum of their two parts because they are scarred.

My favorite pairing that truly exemplify this for me is Ritsuka and Soubi from Loveless. And yes, (as I've argued about ad nauseum at various times) I do see Ritsuka as being the more...er, toppy of the two despite that this breaks all the age tropes. The blonde rule still stands though. At the time of Loveless, Ritsuka is only 12 years old. But, he's no ordinary twelve year old. He's seen, endured, survived things no ordinary twelve year old could. He's been through the fire, literally as well as figuratively and that has tempered him. By contrast, although Soubi is older and more experienced, in a way he's stunted because he's been taught to behave in a certain way for so long.

Point being, again that they are indisputably (imho) broken. Yet, broken doesn't mean destroyed. And together, they make something that maybe has some cracked spots but is still lovely.

I kind of see Gojyo and Hakkai, in the same way. Beautiful and broken apart. Beautiful, broken and yet, right, when they are together.

My other favorite pairing slowly crawling up the radar is Ichigo and Ishida. Yep, broken. Yep, better together. Hee.

I suppose after that it's more the cerebral vs brawn kind of pairing. The iritation that leads to something more, I suppose.

At any rate, very short version of what would have been longer.

Interesting concept here.