We had some thought provoking comments on yesterday's blog ;-) as well as a great discussion on Facebook. The three questions we threw out to readers were:
1 – Do you believe a relationship can survive infidelity?
2 – Do you have personal experience with infidelity?
3 – Barring murder, can you think of a worse “relationship
crime” than infidelity?
Share your thoughts in the comment section below and you'll automatically be entered in the giveaway for one of five audio book download codes from Audible.com (good for any of my titles--including the brand spankin' new The Magician Murders narrated by the wonderful Kale Williams).
So here we go!
JL – I’m entirely in
agreement about most readers probably preferring their protagonists’ flaws to
be of the romantic variety. Like those old Mills & Boons where the hero was
temporarily blinded or paralyzed and was a complete asshole because of it (but
then luckily ended up with a miracle cure anyway, so no worries!) Addiction and
alcoholism is a harder sell—and I’m in agreement on that; I will almost never
read a book where the protag is struggling with addiction or alcoholism
(although I’ve got no problem writing such a book). I suspect readers would
prefer to read about a recovering sex addict than a guy who deliberately and in
full control of his senses (if not body parts) chooses to be unfaithful. Thoughts?
DM - I think you’re right. Many readers would prefer to read
about recovering sex addicts and recovering drug and alcohol addicts than, as
you say, someone who cheats ‘in full control of his senses.’ But again, as I
said in the piece, maybe that’s because the flaws we accept in our romance
heroes almost require the hero not to
be responsible as it were? An addiction is something the hero cant help – it’s
an illness (like those Mills and Boon heroes), though done well and with an attention
to the psychology, it can be great (I just read a really great one). I’d say
though, addiction isn’t a flaw in a
hero, so much as a hurdle the couple have to overcome to be together? Cheating is an active flaw. I’d liken it more in Romance hero-active flaw-dom
to being an assassin or a ruthless slave owner. Just, as I said, less
acceptable.
Uh oh. |
The cheating I was talking about though wouldn’t be ‘I fancy
a fling with that very attractive person’ but, for example ‘I’m terrified of
where this relationship is going and how much I’m feeling, so I’m going to
sabotage it’ or ‘I’m miserable and unhappy and so I’m succumbing to temptation’
– both scenarios which would create intense, genuine regret in the culprit and
punishment would be losing something they realize too late they cant bear to
lose. They made a Big Mistake but they
made it as adults. Hence they’d have to face up to consequences. That’s what I
meant about a redemption arc.
Of course, in reality, that’s a romantic best-case take on
cheating, but Id suggest so is every other scenario we talk about in Romance
books, like addiction. Again that my big
question -- if we can romanticize The Mafia, assassination, slavery, rape, torture
and personality breakdown, why cant we romanticize infidelity?
JL – It occurs to me
that infidelity is probably more forgivable depending on subgenre. For example,
it’s rarely a deal-breaker in mystery. Meaning mystery readers might not like
it, but they won’t refuse to read the book. And in historical or, better yet,
spec fiction, it’s probably not nearly as problematical as it is in
contemporary romance.
Anyway, harkening back
to your essay, ludicrous misunderstandings aside, I will say that inability to
communicate is one of the most realistic problems any couple can face, but that
comes more from styles of communication, including the inability to listen
properly—which is tied up in personal history and sometimes education and
experience. When I read a story where two men are struggling to make the other
understand, I really do sympathize. It can be hard to be honest and vulnerable,
even with the people you love most.
DM -Yeah I do agree. That’s actually not that common a trope
in Romance is it? I mean that ‘trying to make the other understand’ but
failing. It’s not really ‘romantic’ as issues go – and in real life, as you
say, it often doesn’t go away for the HEA.
JL – I kind of divide
readers into two camps. (Well, three camps if we include readers just skimming
for sex scenes. ;-D) One camp has
trouble believing in happy endings if the problems between the main characters
are sufficiently painful and realistic. It doesn’t matter how much relationship
work the couple does, these readers always have trouble believing anyone could
surmount big issues like…infidelity. Heck, these readers have trouble with even
the suggestion of infidelity, say a kiss that shouldn’t have happened. The
second camp are the readers who, like you and me, enjoy the struggle to achieve
that happy ending. In fact, I prefer those stories because to me the couple has
been tested through fire and their love is triumphant.
DM - Yes again totally agree! Lisa Horan at The Novel
Approach said in her review of Object of Desire I write ‘Genre Non Conforming Romance’ which was a revelation because-- who
knew? She wasn’t talking about cheating there--there isn’t actually any cheating in OOD or BL. But--she’s right
I think. That’s what I’ve been writing without realizing it, and perhaps what
you wrote, more bravely with Jake Riordan in the brilliant Adrien English
series?
The second part of
the audience you mentioned which includes you and I, may be more open to that
kind of story? We value the struggle and a real fight for a happy ending.
But I also think
people are right to say that Romance is a unique genre in that there is a kind
of contract with the reader. Many people read it to relax--for the joy and security
of knowing what’s coming. That’s what
the contract is. And I totally get that and understand the sucker punch of
being dragged out of that comfort when you didn’t want or expect it, and get
given something different that you didn’t want. I didn’t mean to bend the rules
of the contract guys! It just keeps happening…
JL – One hundred
percent in agreement that, when a book is labeled genre fiction—and regardless
of what that genre is—there is an implicit understanding that writers will
abide by the terms of the “contract” formed with the reader. If the book is labeled
Western, there is an expectation of cowboys. If the book is labeled Mystery,
there is an expectation of detecting—and a solution. If the book is labeled
romance, there is an expectation of true love and a Happy Ever After.
What’s less clear, in
fact, what I find fascinating is how “infidelity”
can be defined, depending on the reader. As mentioned above, there are readers
who get angry if the hero exchanges a kiss or even considers fooling around.
Now in real life, these things happen. They just do. And that should be the
point. Moral fortitude is tested by resisting temptation, not by never being
tempted. It’s like courage. Courage is how you behave under fire, not being
blind to a real and present danger. Also I notice timing is very important to
some readers. I had a character break off his relationship over the phone and
then go have sex with his romantic interest. One reader was troubled by this
“infidelity.” To me, infidelity would have been not breaking the relationship
off. As far as I know there is no official wait period once you’ve ended
things.
DM - That’s a great point. The comfort zone in defining
‘cheating’ differs. For some it’s lying and betraying. That’s pretty clear. But
as you say, for others it’s more… zero tolerance than that? I’m thinking of
Jason in The Monet Murders – he
didn’t half get it in the neck for a one night stand, even though Sam had broken
up with him. He was hurt, he was trying to distract himself, he was
being human. But there’s an element of ‘he has no business being human--he’s in
a romance book’. Same with Ben in Bitter
Legacy and Tom in Object of Desire. It’s how far Romance readers are prepared to
tolerate that kind of ‘humanity’ in their heroes. I come from a fanfic
tradition as you know and it’s definitely redder in emotional tooth and claw
there. Maybe MM Romance comes more from MF romance? Maybe it’s evolving into a
hybrid of both? Or maybe not?
Actually, on this point, I read recently that there’s a sneak
Third Romance Rule (after 1-Happ ending 2- No Cheating) that readers expect to
be followed. Maybe that’s what’s in play here. The love interests must not have
sex with anyone else after they meet in the book, even if they’re in sexual
relationships with other people when they do meet. This applies even if they
don’t commit to each other for some time in the book. For some readers, a
character breaking that rule is tacit
cheating (even if its awkward to call it that)- as Jason, Ben and Tom
discovered. I crashed through that one in both books without knowing it
existed.
JL – Yeah, I would have to say that third rule is
more of a guideline. 😉 If not outright wishful thinking. That said, I’m in complete agreement with
your observations on inveterate cheaters. It’s one thing for extreme
circumstances to result in a Big Mistake. The inability to resist any
temptation…that’s just...ugh. Whether it’s gluttony or sloth or promiscuity or an
addiction to QVC, the inability to control one’s self is something as a society
we really, really look down on. We don’t like weak willed people, so fair
enough that horn-doggery should be condemned in romance.
DM - Yeah I’m with you on that. I talk big about realistic
flaws but in the end, we are talking… carefully chosen flaws. An inveterate
cheat is pretty unattractive imo and one of the most unromantic concepts out
there. Personally, as a reader, I can’t
deal with consensual non-monogamy as an endgame in Romance, so I’m marshmallow
to the my core.
One thing I’d possibly
quibble on is promiscuity as a plot choice (if it’s not some sort of compulsion
I mean). Ben in BL used promiscuity deliberately as a defensive barrier against any
romantic commitment and an emotional distraction for himself–it was a choice, not a compulsion or a helpless
need for rampant sex with lots of men. A lot of readers though were very sure
that he could never change his spots because promiscuity is looked at compulsive
like inveterate cheating–an inability to resist any temptation.
JL – Oh, definitely!
Plus, Ben was NOT in a committed relationship. When you’re young and single, is
fooling around a lot genuinely promiscuous or is it just…normal male-in-his-sexual-prime behavior?
DM - So I think maybe there can be nuance. Ben for example,
now he’s found someone who fits so perfectly what he wants and needs, will be compulsively
faithful. Tom uses sex as part of an avoidance of commitment, sometimes as an
avoidance of confrontation or loss.
On the whole though, yeah – pffft to horndoggery!
JL – You wrote: ‘Redemption and
Forgiveness. Genuine mistakes, genuine
regret. All are powerful drivers of romance for me’.
Ding Ding Ding!!!
This. Like you, physical torture, abuse…that’s a no can do for me. A bad man on
his knees? (Er… ) That’s romance.
DM - It really is. That’s putting it…perfectly!
******
Faithful reader, what do YOU think? Comment below!
Oh, and Dal has a giveaway going too!
a Rafflecopter giveaway
I’m not a fan of cheating in romance. If I know a book has it, I just won’t read it.
ReplyDeleteI have experience with a cheating spouse so I have no tolerance for it. I’ve also known several people who stayed with a cheating spouse but then years later ended up divorced when the spouse cheated again.
Very often it is a deal breaker. Yes. I have a good deal of experience with infidelity from pretty much every angle (other than me being the, er, infidel) so I know it can be weathered. I know of a nearly sixty year old marriage than weathered a series of infidelities twenty years ago.
DeleteI can totally understand and respect that Heather. but someone was mentioning today that there are Cancer survivor romances and endless addiction romances and I wonder if it applies that if these awful things have touched a readers life they cant stand the issue being touched in romance either? Maybe infidelity and these real life agonies are just too close to home for some of us? But not for others who can view them as plot details and grist for a happy ending?
DeleteYes! And the thing is, romance is probably the most personal and subjective of all reading choices. Readers can be turned off by things as superficial as a mustache on a main character! Let alone the nitty gritty topics.
DeleteI’ve run across one or two romances that include infidelity (aside from those listed here), and surprised myself by rooting for the cheating couple. In each case, that’s who I was supposed to root for - they were, after all, the MCs. But in other novels and in real life, I find infidelity at the very least upsetting. I wonder how much of it is dependent on the MCs’ feelings of guilt?
ReplyDeleteThat, and probably also the circumstances. Is retaliatory infidelity as hard to swallow as the original infidelity? Not sure myself.
DeleteThats a great point - why do we root for unfaithful couples if theyre the MCs being unfaithful to other people? I very much agree about the real life reality of it Zoey, as opposed to the romance take on it- but as I said we do use a lot of unpleasant stuff in romance and give it a happy ending I suppose. I think the MCs feelings of guilt are pretty vital for redemption.I read a story not so long ago where the unfaithful guy came back after a few years, never apologised, never explained why he'd done it other than he wanted to, but the hurt party, while still scarred by what happened, went back to him because he couldnt resist the sex and his family were telling him not to be bitter. I found that one hard to cope with I admit. Because thats not a HEA to me.
DeleteARGH. Yes. Remorse is key, I think. The main inflicted on the other character, the more groveling is required for that HEA to be believable. Or at least satisfying.
DeleteYes! There has to be grovelling! Major sustained grovelling!
DeleteTEARS WOULD NOT COME AMISS!
DeleteI'm definitely in your camp when it comes to 'cheating' in romance--although I wouldn't call it cheating, really. Cheating implies lies and deceit, which is hardly romantic. But in the case of Ben and Tom nobody is lying about what they’re doing, but they are knowingly hurting the person they love by sleeping around—and they’re doing it out of a misguided emotional self-defence which is actually sort of romantic once it resolves into a committed relationship. And also, crucially, they are hurting themselves just as much. Possibly, even more. They’re messing up—it’s not behaviour to applaud, and it’s not meant to be. It’s destructive and in the end they have to pay a price.
ReplyDeleteBut romance heroes making mistakes is what romance should be about! But they have to own the mistake and fix it. Darcy is a great example of this. He wasn’t misunderstood by Elizabeth, he acted like a genuine asshole. He realised it, learned from it, and changed. He earned his HEA.
As for what turns me off in romance… Anything where the mystery in a rom-suspense centres on the death of a child would be an automatic no. Too painful. I’m not fond of romanticising PTSD either, especially when it only involves a few bad dreams and is cured by love. Another trope I’m not fond of is when the school bully and his victim meet again and fall in love—bullying is so traumatic and destructive that I find this very difficult to believe, and impossible to romanticise. (Having said that, Alexis Hall’s Pansies is an example of where it did work, but I think it’s a delicate subject that you have to be good to handle.) And ‘low angst’ is a tag that will have me backing away from a romance fast—I mean, what is the point of a romance with no angst? It’s like advertising food as ‘low flavour’.
And now I’m off to eke out the last few chapters of Object of Desire which I’m loving and which I read entirely too fast! :D
God yes. If there's no journey, no character arc, what is the point of the story really? And that's as true in romance as any other genre.
DeleteThats pretty much a perfect comment. It sums up - everything. Maybe we should just go and get drunk now J?
DeleteInfidelity in romance is such a different thing from real life cheating. There are convoluted but exculpatory reasons for cheating in many romances. In real life...there *can* be understandable and sympathetic reasons (the spouse is incarcerated? the spouse is MIA for years? the spouse is unable to function sexually for whatever reason?) but mostly it comes down to simply...straying. And that is not very sympathetic.
ReplyDeleteThats the thing for me. Why cant readers distinguish between reality and fiction in that instance - infidelity - but they can for murder, assassination, organised crime, rape, torture, addiction, slavery/abuse...? What is it about this singular thing?
DeleteI think the point that infidelity means different things in different genres is correct. Jake Riordan from Josh's Adrien English series commits infidelity, rather frequently for awhile. And with Paul Kane! PAUL KANE! And yet, that is not the thing I remember disliking him for. I remember disliking him more for the way he treated Adrien and the way Adrien let himself be treated by Jake. Ultimately, I feel infidelity in literary works is both a writer's choice and a reader's prerogative. Some may find it's okay while others do not. Reading and writing, for that matter, are so intensely personal, that in some ways a general consensus would only last as far as the next reader.
ReplyDeleteIt IS intensely personal, which is why it's impossible to insist people read to order--especially when it comes to escapist fiction. One person's trigger is another person's favorite trope, and that's fine.
DeleteWhat does interest me though is how feelings about infidelity in romance have changed surprising little despite the fact that marital statistics have changed so much. We now take it for granted that people will have serial long term relationships.
Yet the idea of a "soul mate" remains just as popular as ever, I suspect.
I agree Robespierre that tastes in literature are a hugely personal and subjective thing. What you describe there as your reaction to Jake in the Adrien English books is the opposite of my reaction to that exact same scenario. But dyou think it might have something to do with the continuing need for perfection in romance heroes? And that idea of 'soul mates' that means once two people meet they look at no one else in any circumstances? Someone said yesterday that they need their heroes not to have those kind of flaws by which they meant infidelity.
DeleteBut as I said in my initial post, Romance repeatedly uses aspects of real life that would be horrible in reality and absorbs and romanticises (sanitises?) them. Assassins? Mafia overlords? Slave owners? Rape? Personality disintegration? Sexual drives outwith the characters control?My puzzlement lies with why those things arent controversial really in Romance, but infidelity is, even with believable even understandable reasons. Jake in the Adrien English series is human. He makes human mistakes out of fear and self loathing really, and he pays a price for them, as Adrien does. I loved that the character's behaviour was so uncompromising because I understood why he did it and it made his character arc absolutely riveting. But I dont agree that Adrien let him off easily at all. Jake suffered too. The proof for me that the infidelity wasnt some sort of serial compulsion or anything other than situation-driven, was their HEA. I honestly thougth that series for all that the two MCs overcame including all Jake did, to be together is the most romantic out there. and theres a reason its iconic. )Sorry - Im pretty passionate about Adrien and jake. :p) But I totally take your point that its an entirely personal thing, as we both just proved. What I find intolerable or fascinating in a story, you might not, and vice versa :)
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteIn my own experience (I was cheated on once), trust is really fragile, and once it is shattered, there is no way to recuperate it. And I cannot have a relationship with a person I do not trust so... The answer, in my case, would be no, a relationship cannot survive infidelity (unless you never find out, of course). I guess it is the best way to murder a relationship
ReplyDeleteOther than murder, well...you're probably right! It's kind of interesting what we can accept in fiction that would never play out in real life--but then fiction is not real life.
DeleteWell, obviously I don't think promiscuity is a dealbreaker cos I actually published the books we're talking about here. (lol) One caveat though: I wouldn't categorize Bitter Legacy or Object of Desire as a romance. They're thrillers with strong romantic subplots, but don't actually meet the sort of standard criteria for this story structure called "romance." But what's interesting to me is how, for romance readers, infidelity is in a separate category from other ways to break trust in a relationship. I mean, what about a spouse who spends/loses all your money in some irresponsible fashion without consulting you? Is that not also problematic? Selfish? Arguably more damaging thatn having an existential crisis and thinking that finding some strange will somehow cure it? If you're talking about a relationship that is, as the kids say, "endgame" each party is going to really, really fuck up somehow at some point because how can you possibly go 30+ years without making a huge mistake? (Just thinking aloud...)
ReplyDeleteRight. Exactly. The real crime is the betrayal of trust. Sex can be no more meaningful than playing tennis with another partner, depending on what your mind set is--and the mind set of your partner. The physical act...well, it's sacred in books in a way that it is not in real life. But trust actually is sacred in real life as well as in fiction.
DeleteI watch a lot of true crime and it's interesting the number of husbands (and wives) who want to murder off a spouse simply because of financial considerations. Often they pretend to fall in love with new partners who are actually dupes.
You could maybe forgive someone for fooling around or maaaaybe even losing your life savings gambling on horses, but planning to kill you...I'm pretty sure there's no forgiving that one. ;-)
Im in a state of emotional collapse at being told by my own editor (after the second book) that I dont write romance. Pass the smelling salts and call my lawyer. :p I mean - I TRY. *Sniff* Seriously Nikki, I do agree. There are multiple stories too where one main character takes some hugely highhanded decision (usually to dump the other MC to 'save' them, without consulting them ofc, thus causing them huge pain. But that's 'romantic'. In RL it would be appalling Id' think. But the truth is there - that mistakes are inevitable in a long relationship. Its just that one mistake -- choosing even for a moment - someone else- is in a different category from absolutely everything else for romance readers.
Delete@Dal - you mentioned groveling... it took Adrien and Jake 5 books to get their HEA, which perhaps made it more believable to some readers. Did you ever consider writing more than one book to resolve Jamie&Ben's? Although I suppose Ben is still suffering inside, being in a relationship with the man he loves but still experiencing bouts of mistrust and jealousy.
ReplyDeleteMotty - hello! Right - Jamie and Ben. The thing is, Ben didnt really commit infidelity. During the start of their affair, he was monogamous only in Jamies head - he didnt promise a thing. And he went along with Jamies illusions because he didnt want their fling to end.- which was uncharacteristic in itself. He had a thing about being upfront about his unavailability, so I suppose you could say his 'lie by omission' was a kind of evidence that jamie was different. Jamie himself acknowledges that their monogamous love affair was all in his own head. But - I know what you mean. It *felt* like infidelity to the reader because it felt like that to Jamie. The reason I didnt explore Jamie and Bens relationship further in another book was really because I felt I had already put them through so much that challenging their relationship seriously (as one would have to do in a sequel) would not be acceptable to readers. Jamie and Ben really did go through the mill. Ben is still as you say suffering inside, but he probably always will to some extent, because his childhood left permanent scars. Jamie is his perfect fit though - something he never thought to have - and he wont ever risk losing him. Jamie in turn understands Ben well enough to know that he can count on him completely now Ben's taken that leap into trust at last. Imo BL kind of did resolve their issues, because when Ben made the decision to be with Jamie, that was the end of the promiscuity that he'd used as a shield against involvement. From that point their issues have been as you noticed - Bens fear of losing Jamie. But Jamie has no intention of letting him down and Ben does trust him. Jamies a white knight, remember? In a nutshell - they're happy. is that any use as an answer?
DeleteI like the idea of one MC being a "player" who eventually gives up that lifestyle because he falls in love and discovers the appeal of monogamy. I'll always be interested in a story like that. And I'm willing to give a cheater a chance, so to speak.
DeleteBut I have my limits. Ben missed the mark for me, because he knowingly & deliberately misled Jamie, & allowed him to imagine they were exclusive. Only when Jamie had hopelessly fallen for him did he come clean about the fact that he was screwing everything that moved & intended to keep doing so.
That deceit was impossible for me to forgive.
But I love to see authors taking chances with flouting the (old, tired) conventions. Some readers will love it, some will hate it, but in the long run I think it helps keep the genre alive and vital.
Hey Dal, thanks for the well thought-out reply! Being a new fan of the books, after I posted the question I thought - maybe I should look at your old blog posts? And I found "What motivates Ben?". Reading that definitely helped. :) My issue was not really the infidelity, as you said there really was no cheating, it was the way Ben executed his methods to put Jamie in his place. The coke scene was SO HARD to read, in spite of everything I didn't think Ben would be that cruel, but he really went there. And did he really think making Jamie dinner was going to cut it? *sigh* I do love them, but for me personally I think the painful moments in BL are outweighing the good ones (and yes I read the Christmas coda LOL), which is why I still feel like I'm hungry for more validation - does that make sense? Anyway, I hope I'll see more of them in book 3 :)
DeleteI agree that taking chances does help keep a genre vital and the important thing to remember as a writer is that you can never please everyone. I would always defend Ben to the end, because he was so confused and messed up over his feelings for jamie that he was running on instinct. He just wanted to hold on a little longer, though it went against everything he believed he needed to survive -- and given all that happened to him, he *was* a survivor. Ben had ample reason to be determined not to get involved - and thats an understatement. He'd always been upfront before with everyone else, he was scrupulously honest, so his bad behaviour with James at that point actually showed how deeply jamie affected him, even as he fought itand tried to control it. The fact he hadnt done it before was even pointed out by Steggie I think. But people will always see the same thing in different ways. We want different things from our 'heroes'. Its just how we are.
DeleteI like it when individuals get together and share opinions.
ReplyDeleteGreat website, stick with it!
Thanks anon :)
Delete"Music and wood-chopping. What more could you ask for of a man? Besides fidelity, I mean."
ReplyDeleteChristopher Holmes in Somebody Killed His Editor
A very wise man. Though JX may quibble.
Delete1 – Do you believe a relationship can survive infidelity?
ReplyDeleteNo. Absolutely not. So to me relationship that survives infidelity is not at all realistic, just wishful thinking.
2 – Do you have personal experience with infidelity?
No.
3 – Barring murder, can you think of a worse “relationship crime” than infidelity?
Trapping someone with a child. Like if one person doesn't want children, so the other MC somehow makes it so that there will be a child. That plot device is more used in MF.
I can read books with menage, open relationships etc. As long as I am aware what kind of book I'm buying. But if I'm led to belive that there is an established couple or forming of said couple. Then any kind of cheating is out. And I also hate when author breaks up said couple just in order to have one MC "safely" have sex with other person, so that readers wouldn't have basis to complain, since that is not cheating. *eyeroll*
If I know that there will be cheating in a book, I wont bother to read it. To me it's that simple. It's like if I buy a dress online and I get a skirt instead. That skirt may be a fine product, but it's not what I bought.
Spoilers. I don't like it at all, especially not if the book is primarily a romance (I'm more flexible on detective but I still don't like it). I don't have a problem if the mc sleeps with someone else after their break up and actually don't like it if they are then made to apologise for cheating. It's funny what works for different people though. I've listened to the Adrian English series several times but always have trouble listening to the first book again because of that bit at the end where Jake stands there and watches and it's the most uncomfortable thing I've read in any of your books, for me that inaction is worse than cheating because Adrian's safety and mental well being is at stake too. Just my interpretation and obviously not as valid as the authors' opinion but felt the happy ever after for Adrian actually came when he gained a family. He always lived with the idea that his life was short and combined with the hang ups his breakup with Mel had given him ment that initially, he is prepared to grab what moments he can. As his business, writing, family and friendships evolve and he has more to live for and to pass on, he accepts far less. For me Adrian is already living his happy ending in the latter books, he loves and wants Jake but it's Jake that needs him, not the other way around. If anything, for me, having everything taken away, so that he can have a chance with Adrian, is Jake's happy ending, even if he doesn't do much to deserve it. While I like the romance of them being together, I don't trust that Jake has the strength to stay, only that Adrian is strong enough to have a full life with or without him and that Jake is the one who would be worst off without him.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, for me, infidelity is a deal breaker in romance books-- not that I think either Jason or Ben committed infidelity. I disliked their choices for other reasons. But for me, infidelity strikes too close to home. I haven't been cheated on, but my father cheated on my mother. They got divorced (Infidelity wasn't the only problem, but it was the most visible to 14-year-old me.) and we had to move halfway across the country from sunny California to cold and miserable Minnesota. It was the biggest, most defining experience of my adolescence, and not a happy one.
ReplyDeleteSo while I've forgiven and love my father, it's not something I want to read about in my escapist romance. I'll never run into a serial killer (fingers crossed) or even an FBI agent or fashion photographer, but infidelity is so very common that I don't want to read about it.