<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.4" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Horror of Love Words</title>
	<link>http://writerunboxed.com/2008/02/05/the-horror-of-love-words/</link>
	<description>About the craft and business of genre fiction</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 08:00:15 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Katy</title>
		<link>http://writerunboxed.com/2008/02/05/the-horror-of-love-words/#comment-60333</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:57:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://writerunboxed.com/2008/02/05/the-horror-of-love-words/#comment-60333</guid>
					<description>I absolutely cannot believe that EW did not include any lines from Twister. That movie, for me, is like a train wreck in terms of dialogue (equally as hard to not watch as well; my husband teases me incessantly about this). My favorite is when Bill Paxton's fiance says to him, "When you used to tell me that you chase tornados, deep down I thought it was just a metaphor."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I absolutely cannot believe that EW did not include any lines from Twister. That movie, for me, is like a train wreck in terms of dialogue (equally as hard to not watch as well; my husband teases me incessantly about this). My favorite is when Bill Paxton&#8217;s fiance says to him, &#8220;When you used to tell me that you chase tornados, deep down I thought it was just a metaphor.&#8221;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: jd fox</title>
		<link>http://writerunboxed.com/2008/02/05/the-horror-of-love-words/#comment-59110</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Feb 2008 14:56:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://writerunboxed.com/2008/02/05/the-horror-of-love-words/#comment-59110</guid>
					<description>I vote in favor of your assumption that EW writers are anti-romance. As so many people profess to be. Something that's always defied my comprehension. Isn't romance the biggest seller in the publishing world? Yet fans describe it as guilty pleasures, fluff, cheese, dime-store books, etc. Men never admit to enjoying a romantic comedy. They call them chick-flicks, and only a chick could have made them watch it.

Yet most of the men I've known are very romantic. Even more so than women, it seems. They bring the flowers, and buy the sweet cards, and take their lady out for romantic dinners and on romantic vacations. It's very possible that they use romance as a prelude to sex, but even so, why would they scoff at romance novels and movies? 

Love is universal. Most people want romantic love from puberty. It's justifiably in almost every story ever told. So why is it treated like a nasty word?  

That said, I do have a favorite "groan" moment. It's in The Sound of Music when Gaylord tells Maria that he loves her and she breaks into song.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I vote in favor of your assumption that EW writers are anti-romance. As so many people profess to be. Something that&#8217;s always defied my comprehension. Isn&#8217;t romance the biggest seller in the publishing world? Yet fans describe it as guilty pleasures, fluff, cheese, dime-store books, etc. Men never admit to enjoying a romantic comedy. They call them chick-flicks, and only a chick could have made them watch it.</p>
<p>Yet most of the men I&#8217;ve known are very romantic. Even more so than women, it seems. They bring the flowers, and buy the sweet cards, and take their lady out for romantic dinners and on romantic vacations. It&#8217;s very possible that they use romance as a prelude to sex, but even so, why would they scoff at romance novels and movies? </p>
<p>Love is universal. Most people want romantic love from puberty. It&#8217;s justifiably in almost every story ever told. So why is it treated like a nasty word?  </p>
<p>That said, I do have a favorite &#8220;groan&#8221; moment. It&#8217;s in The Sound of Music when Gaylord tells Maria that he loves her and she breaks into song.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Richard Mabry</title>
		<link>http://writerunboxed.com/2008/02/05/the-horror-of-love-words/#comment-57702</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 18:04:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://writerunboxed.com/2008/02/05/the-horror-of-love-words/#comment-57702</guid>
					<description>It's so much easier to write action dialogue than something romantic. My solution has been to have my wife act as first reader. I find that her edits seem to hit the mark much more often than mine. 
As for movie dialogue--since my idea of an ideal movie is "Blues Brothers," I'll disqualify myself from voting.
Thanks, Teri, for the post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s so much easier to write action dialogue than something romantic. My solution has been to have my wife act as first reader. I find that her edits seem to hit the mark much more often than mine.<br />
As for movie dialogue&#8211;since my idea of an ideal movie is &#8220;Blues Brothers,&#8221; I&#8217;ll disqualify myself from voting.<br />
Thanks, Teri, for the post.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Cath</title>
		<link>http://writerunboxed.com/2008/02/05/the-horror-of-love-words/#comment-57701</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 17:58:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://writerunboxed.com/2008/02/05/the-horror-of-love-words/#comment-57701</guid>
					<description>I think romantic lines are so hard to write because romance is so subjective. It's hard to make a line authentic to every single member of an audience. I'll bet even Shakespeare had his "dialogue" critics back in the day. But anyone who doesn't recognize the brilliance of "The Princess Bride"...well, all I can say is "INCONCEIVABLE!"

Oh, and "Love means never having to say your sorry," was crap 30 years ago. And it's still stinkin' up the joint. But that's just my subjective opinion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think romantic lines are so hard to write because romance is so subjective. It&#8217;s hard to make a line authentic to every single member of an audience. I&#8217;ll bet even Shakespeare had his &#8220;dialogue&#8221; critics back in the day. But anyone who doesn&#8217;t recognize the brilliance of &#8220;The Princess Bride&#8221;&#8230;well, all I can say is &#8220;INCONCEIVABLE!&#8221;</p>
<p>Oh, and &#8220;Love means never having to say your sorry,&#8221; was crap 30 years ago. And it&#8217;s still stinkin&#8217; up the joint. But that&#8217;s just my subjective opinion.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Elena Greene</title>
		<link>http://writerunboxed.com/2008/02/05/the-horror-of-love-words/#comment-57678</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 16:47:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://writerunboxed.com/2008/02/05/the-horror-of-love-words/#comment-57678</guid>
					<description>Interesting.  Some of those lines were howlers but some I didn't think so bad.  The line from PRETTY WOMAN probably worked well for most of the target audience.  I doubt there is any sort of romantic dialogue that will work for a viewer or reader who is not in the right mindset.

Anyway, one choice that puzzled me was the line from DIRTY DANCING.  Yes, it was cringe-worthy and embarrassing.  But I thought that was the point.  It was the sort of thing a young girl who is out of her element but trying to fit in might blurt out and instantly regret.

Not all characters are going to be clever and witty all the time.  Which goes back to your point about Shakespeare and truth.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting.  Some of those lines were howlers but some I didn&#8217;t think so bad.  The line from PRETTY WOMAN probably worked well for most of the target audience.  I doubt there is any sort of romantic dialogue that will work for a viewer or reader who is not in the right mindset.</p>
<p>Anyway, one choice that puzzled me was the line from DIRTY DANCING.  Yes, it was cringe-worthy and embarrassing.  But I thought that was the point.  It was the sort of thing a young girl who is out of her element but trying to fit in might blurt out and instantly regret.</p>
<p>Not all characters are going to be clever and witty all the time.  Which goes back to your point about Shakespeare and truth.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: NS Foster</title>
		<link>http://writerunboxed.com/2008/02/05/the-horror-of-love-words/#comment-57670</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 16:36:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://writerunboxed.com/2008/02/05/the-horror-of-love-words/#comment-57670</guid>
					<description>My theory would be that love is too damn complicated to encompass in a few lines.  We try and break it down and end up with the frothing and bubbling philosophies like those in A Walk to Remember.  Trying to make it too simple make your characters sound like idiots ("I'm just a girl, standing in front of a boy...").

To make it more difficult, love is the eternal theme, it comes up in nearly every story in history.  We're all looking for a fresh angle, and then there are turkeys and corn involved.

However, I recently saw The Prestige and they got an angle masterfully.  Two of the characters who are married have a fight in which Christian Bale's character says, "It'll all be alright.  Because I love you."  His wife looks into his eyes and says, "No, you don't mean it today.  Some days you do and some days you don't and I like to be able to tell the difference."  True for love universally?  No.  True for this couple's turbulent relationship?  Definitely.  Perhaps the key is in capturing the truth of the individuals (For instance, I agreed with the Han Solo example above).

PS - My second-favorite Legolas line is from Return of the King.  "A diversion!"  It's a good thing you're pretty, honey.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My theory would be that love is too damn complicated to encompass in a few lines.  We try and break it down and end up with the frothing and bubbling philosophies like those in A Walk to Remember.  Trying to make it too simple make your characters sound like idiots (&#8221;I&#8217;m just a girl, standing in front of a boy&#8230;&#8221;).</p>
<p>To make it more difficult, love is the eternal theme, it comes up in nearly every story in history.  We&#8217;re all looking for a fresh angle, and then there are turkeys and corn involved.</p>
<p>However, I recently saw The Prestige and they got an angle masterfully.  Two of the characters who are married have a fight in which Christian Bale&#8217;s character says, &#8220;It&#8217;ll all be alright.  Because I love you.&#8221;  His wife looks into his eyes and says, &#8220;No, you don&#8217;t mean it today.  Some days you do and some days you don&#8217;t and I like to be able to tell the difference.&#8221;  True for love universally?  No.  True for this couple&#8217;s turbulent relationship?  Definitely.  Perhaps the key is in capturing the truth of the individuals (For instance, I agreed with the Han Solo example above).</p>
<p>PS - My second-favorite Legolas line is from Return of the King.  &#8220;A diversion!&#8221;  It&#8217;s a good thing you&#8217;re pretty, honey.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Kathleen Bolton</title>
		<link>http://writerunboxed.com/2008/02/05/the-horror-of-love-words/#comment-57621</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 13:48:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://writerunboxed.com/2008/02/05/the-horror-of-love-words/#comment-57621</guid>
					<description>My prize for worst line in a movie: "Legolas, what do your elf-eyes see?" Aragorn to Legolas in the Two Towers.  The whole theatre groaned.

Honestly, I don't know why romantic lines are so groan-worthy.  Maybe because it's hard to come up with something pithy in a fresh way, and so its the cliche that ends up being used.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My prize for worst line in a movie: &#8220;Legolas, what do your elf-eyes see?&#8221; Aragorn to Legolas in the Two Towers.  The whole theatre groaned.</p>
<p>Honestly, I don&#8217;t know why romantic lines are so groan-worthy.  Maybe because it&#8217;s hard to come up with something pithy in a fresh way, and so its the cliche that ends up being used.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
