Most of my criticisms of what can make a bad subplot here can be applied to most subplots actually, but more importantly. Quote mining. I'm at work again? We used to have to go through publications and find out what they wanted to omit with the [...] known as in our class "DCDs" (Death of Credibility Dots). Ok lets go through them one by one, because 100% honesty, I forget about posts like an hour after I make them. So I'll take your advice then and "do me". You know this is actually pretty much my irl job. Quote one "It really shouldn't be added in unless its relevant to the plot. They so often become a time sink [...]" Well yeah actually this one captures most of what I was trying to say. Like the example I gave in that post. That plot would have been best without it. Justifying why you NEED one goes a long way to determining whether a subplot of any kind is of use, romantic or not. Quote two "its best not to spend time on a romantic subplot [...] excluded unless you don't have a better candidate available at this time." Ok now lets put the sentence back together. Its best not to spend time on a romantic subplot unless you don't have a better candidate available at the time. As we can see, I did not say not to make a romantic sub plot. I simply said to cover your other bases first so its not forced past other relevant subplots. Quote three "there is rarely a reason to have a romantic plot that exists for its own sake. I mean, if you want that then write a romance. excluded Your genera should determine what elements get sacrificed for the sake of what other elements." Ok I'm sure I don't have to put that together for anyone. So I wasn't saying that you should not have romantic sub plots, but that it should serve another purpose and is genera dependent. But yes, put down the pick ax please. I'd like to close this quote mine before things get out of hand. I'm sure its already dry though because this quote Was me talking about the human and elf story lines in LOTR and hand nothing to do at all with romantic plot lines. That was subplots in general. Now I'll leave it there because I have a court order to stay 500 yards away from miners.
For me, there's a couple of differences between romances I liked and ones I hate. The ones I didn't just like, but genuinely loved were Vin and Eland from Mistborn, Senua and Dillion from Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice, Rapunzel and Flynn from Tangled, Mary Jane and Peter Parker from Spider-Man comics and Odysseus and Penelope from The Odyssey. These romances have all sorts of differences between them. Some of them are from fantasy, some from mythologies, some were comedies, and at least one is an absolute tragedy. But they all involve characters who are likable. They're depictions of good people. They have their flaws and they have their hardships, but yet they are genuinely trying to do good things. Their relationship is an extension of the characters' goals and motives. We live in this age where we say you shouldn't do that because it's a bad example to have characters who live for each other, but the reality is that there's nothing unhealthy about that. What's unhealthy is when it's one sided where only one party in the relationship makes that commitment. But that's not what we're seeing here. These are parties with an equal commitment and devotion to each other. These characters are also faced with difficulties that are outside the relationship itself. All of them deal with a much bigger conflict that tends not to have anything to do with their relationship, but still threatens it. The romance becomes the more personal reason why a character is involved in the conflict they are in, while the wider conflict is still happening. The ones I genuinely disliked was Ian and the Wanderer from The Host, Katniss and Peeta from The Hunger Games, Anakin and Padame from Star Wars, Peter Parker and Mockingbird in the current Spider-Man comics. So here, the relationships don't necessarily involve likable characters. Spider-Man comics at this time are currently in the hands of the most inept writers in history and the result is both Peter Parker and Mockingbird being just completely unlikable. They're jerks! There's also not an equal level of commitment to each other. Anakin and Pademe felt more like a mother/spoiled son relationship then they did two people committed to each other. They don't feel like an extension to a character's goals and motives. Sure Hunger Games tried to tell you that Katniss's relationship to Peeta was an extension of her motive to survive, but you don't really feel that. Partly because Katniss wasn't a team player in the beginning of the story, nor was she by the end. Yes, she went through other changes, but that wasn't one of them. So the relationship just didn't feel genuine.
I don't know what makes a good romance, but If I can say anything about romance, I hate the unrealistic part about it. Purpose of life itself is to procreate even by human nature. Even Harry Potter and Hermione scene where they were dancing together, was more of those moments of hooking up. I was like, you two going to make out? there is a bed *cough right next to your Harry make the move. Not having them as a couple was really a big mistake, that was my 2 cents, then Harry gets with Ron's little sister? Can you imagine your Best Friend dating, getting with your little sister won't go well. I believe the Author even admitted she made a mistake of not having Harry and Hermione as a couple. I started writing my Sci Fi thriller and I slowly intertwined romance subplot between the characters, but went back re-evaluated the MC. I made it where he was obsessed with a girl in his past life and ends up meeting a girl similar to her. As a surprise plot twist, after the MC gets with her she happens to be his niece.
