Love & Sadness

'Sad' as in the emotion, or 'Sad' as in pathetic?

If the former, I would quickly reckon that a good love story connects with the pain involved with past loves, be it in the form of longing, seperation or having been hurt by past lovers.

If the latter, then it's 'cause love stories are sappy.
 
Sad as in the emotion

If love is supposed to be the greatest thing in the world, why is it that all the stories we tell about it seem to have to do with loss, fultility, and tragedy?

Is it the "News" principle that says that the only things worth reporting are the bad ones? Or is there something we innately perceive as sad about loving someone?
 
What are you reading?

Tragic love stories are sad, but all love stories aren't sad.

The love stories I write aren't sad and most of the love stories I read aren't sad—not unless I'm looking for a good cry. One of my favorite romance writers is Jennifer Crusie, who writes hilarious romantic comedies. And then there's the goddess--Jane Austin. I wouldn't call her work sad.
 
This may be a cromazonal annomally...

Meaning that what might be sad to men isn't sad for women. LOL I've heard more than once men calling a wife the old ball and chain when talking together. If anyone through history has been put in chains by saying those fatefull words; "I do." It sure as hell isn't the men. They never made chastity belts for men, or corrsets, bras, or panty sheaths for that matter. And when's the last time you heard of a husband doing the laundry?:p We wait all of our lives to find the one man that will return our love, and we usually end up with Conan, the unclean Slobarian. Okay, so I'm ranting. The truth is, love hurts from the moment it blums all the way through to the last dying ember. Love is a pain that needs no explanation for tears, and if that's sad, then God help us all.

DS
 
Re: What are you reading?

SexySoBeChick said:
Tragic love stories are sad, but all love stories aren't sad.

The love stories I write aren't sad and most of the love stories I read aren't sad—not unless I'm looking for a good cry. One of my favorite romance writers is Jennifer Crusie, who writes hilarious romantic comedies. And then there's the goddess--Jane Austin. I wouldn't call her work sad.

Well, maybe you're right. Maybe I just don't know the genre, because I never thought of Jane Austin as writing love stories: more like courtship stories. And I think I'm excluding romances simply because romances aren't sad, so I get into a circular argument.

I think it's something similar to why there aren't any "health" stories though. There are a lot of stories about people getting sick; not very many about people staying healthy. Unless you're personally involved in it, love isn't all that interesting itself unless it goes bad. That's when we get interested.

I just know that my last few stories have involved love a lot more than previously, and they always come out sad for some reason, whether I want them to or not. I'm starting to think that there's something inevitably tragic about people being in love.


---dr.M.
 
Of course love has inherent tragedy, we realise as soon as we begin falling it must inevitably die.

Gauche
 
I think this all goes to one of the main elements of good storytelling—conflict. Who's going to want to read a story that's all sunshine and roses? Who's going to empathize with a character with no problems? The reader wants to see the character go through some pain, either because they want to root for them to prevail in the end, or so they can say, "Well, at least my life isn't as bad as that poor slob."

But do I think all good love stories need to end badly? Or any story of that matter? Maybe I'm an optimist, but no. Personally, I like happy endings, so that's the way I write it. I've always written the types of stories I like to read. And I've never really liked finishing a book feeling depressed.

Maybe you just need some happy juice, Dr. M.

And I agree about Florida . . . I hadn't truly appreciated it down here until I idiotically decided to go away to college in Central New York with all that nasty snow.

:cool:
 
Yes you have to know sadness before you can truely appreciate joy.


When i first started going out with my now hubby, i got freaked out and dumped him for a while. That hurt both of us BUT in the end it showed me that he really was the one. I couldn't live without him.


Love is sad, love is excstatically joyful, love is mundane and common place. Love is a bloody hard emotion to pin down.


Love that hurts provokes a reaction from a reader,stories need conflict to work. That is probably why your stories are coming out sadly.
 
scattered thoughts

I have a lot to say, though I could easily have written Gauche’s statement myself, which by the way, gives me pause over the worn phrase, fallen woman. (Sick humor, Perdita.)

I believe it was either Lydia Davis or Jeannette Winterson who wrote, “The measure of love is loss.” Take it or leave it, there’s truth in it.

After having exquisitely fresh and enlivening sex for the first time with the-love-of-my-life, he told me he was in remission from leukemia. I already knew we had no future as I was 22 years older than him and he had plans to leave the area for graduate school within the year. But the moment his words hit—such a perfectly simple sentence it was—my immediate total gut reaction, though unvoiced, was, “Then I can help you die, which is to say I can help you live.”

Recall Tolstoy’s opening sentence from Anna Karenina (this is from memory), “All happy families look alike, each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.” So too with love stories; it’s why literature, not to mention opera and country music, is littered with broken hearts and the sheerest, oft over-exposed emotional pain. We need to not feel alone in our loss and despair.

A word on sadness, but first—Mabuese, please use a dictionary and stop with the faulty logic; you keep missing your own points that way. That’s meant to be helpful, nothing more, and I won't devote time to explanatory samples.

My point: Sadness can be a profound experience, like real grief, but fought against or denied, or even flaunted, it is mere sentimentality or merely self-indulgent.

Last words, I love these lines so much. Rosalind, disguised as a boy, speaks them to the love-sick Orlando as they discuss—what else—love. (If you want to know about any type of love, read Shakespeare, and not just the so-called love stories.)

Men have died, from time to time, and worms have eaten them, but not for love.
- As You Like It, Act IV, scene 1

Ha! What's more real than that?

Perdita - wending her way through Arden. . .
 
What the hell...

I'll say this, but I can't say that I've ever been in love, so my viewpoint might very well be useless.
First off, stories have to come to some sort of conclusion, and "they all lived happily ever after" hasn't worked since we were all seven-year-olds. Love does come to an end, whether it be by death or other means.
Also, few writers wish to write a story about the dull years upon years one mihgt spend with thier wife/husband where the days and nights blend together and everything gets repetitive. Go to work, come home, eat spaghetti, watch "Friends," have sex the same as you did eight thousand times, then go to sleep and start again tomorrow. Love stories those times by jumping to the end before we reach them.
Take Titanic (using this because every living being should have seen it by now): She meets Jack, falls in love, then he dies on the ship. Why? Because they end story while feelings are still high. Is it about loss? Yes, to a point. But mostly it's about conclusion. When Jack dies, that romance is over. Hence, the movie can end.
That of course is a "lovers being in love" type story.
Consider now a different type of love story. Far and Away; Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise. This one's not about them being in love, but about them falling in love and getting together. So when Cruise's and Kidman's characters both live through the end, it works out, because the questions left in the viewer's mind are answered. Are they going to be together? Yes. Period. That's conclusion.
Want a happy ending? Watch Far and Away, or something like it. Otherwise, get out the tissues.
 
I also believe that you can not know love unless you've known the sadness and pain of losing it.

For me personally I always noticed I cared more for the guy when he was gone, than when he was there. Some was of course because of the loss itself, but there was one man when the pain was greater than any other. I had already known I was in love with him a few months down the line, but when losing him, that's when I knew for the first time to what extent I had really loved him.
It was a wonderfully cliches period in my life. I felt like a walking cliche. Thought about him 24hrs/7, could hear his voice, see his smile, smell his scent lingering and so on. The good thing was, now I know what it truly means to be in love, and now I know what I want out of a relationship (and don't want). It made me see things clearer, and the bad stuff happening made me stronger.

Not all love stories end sad, but the ones we remember the best usually do. Why? Because we've all been there, or will be. Perhaps we even want to, as we then have it confirmed we've experienced love at least once.

I think there will be at least two big loves in our life. The one that got away, and the one we finally settle down with.

/LP
 
Love Potion:

You're right about the pain necessarily matching the joy. I've always accepted it, though not always graciously, as the "price" for love that cannot endure in ordinary time; but, I have never nor would ever turn it down for my life's comfort.

This is from Antony and Cleopatra, a great love story (and not so tragc as most see it; I think of it as more a hardcore Romeo and Juliet for mature adults). Cleopatra speaks before receiving the dying Marc Antony:

... our size of sorrow,
Proportion'd to our cause, must be as great
As that which makes it.

Iv.xiv.4-6
 
Hmmm...

Maybe the answer is even simpler than we suspect, Dr. M. After thinking about this one I have to answer by posing a question:

Who wants to be bored out of their skull by a love story about Ward and June Cleaver?

The romance story is the beginnings of love but the love story is the reality of love. The reality is either Ward and June or loss. The loss story is the story that is interesting, not the Cleavers.

My 2 cents anyway.
 
Ward and June Cleaver...

An interesting analogy for the perfect happily ever after. Just what the hell did Ward do to make a living?

DS
 
Sad Love

If it is a penny for your thoughts and you put your two cents in, where is the other penny going?
George Carlin


Anyway DR. M. As to the sadness of love. When you were growing up and you had a puppy and you loved that puppy and it grew and you grew and the dog got older and the dog eventually died, the love was still there but you were sad. BEcause the love of the animal was gone.

Like People we come to know and love, Our hearts nad minds tell us we love them and we do for all it is worth, but when you put time and effort into something you will always come to love it or them. But as time goes on that love that had been so intense to begin with begins to fade. YES you still love them but is it still the same love that you had when you first started?

Different variations of love for different variations on life can make love sad, all begins eventually it does die.
 
Last edited:
Re: Ward and June Cleaver...

Dirty Slut said:
An interesting analogy for the perfect happily ever after. Just what the hell did Ward do to make a living?

DS

He was an insurance salesman for Richard Decon's agency. Any other Leave It To Beaver trivia you want to know?

Beaver Cleaver... always did like that name :D
 
Just a few more thoughts and comments:

It seems to me that it's only young love that's tragic. There's something inherently joyful and warming about two older people falling in love. Even though they know they'll eventually die and their love with them, their love doesn't have that tragic feel to it. If anything, it feels redemptive.

For "middle-aged love", I don't know. Do people still cry at second weddings?

A parent's love for their child is never tragic. The realtionship is subject to tragedy, of course, but the love doesn't have that tragic feel of romantic love.

Of course, romantic love and parental love are very different. Possibly they shouldn't even be called the same thing. Maybe people would be better off if the language reflected that.

I guess what I'm asking about is this: why do people cry at weddings?

Can friendships ever be tragic? Homosexual love? Do people cry at gay weddings?

Very strange.
 
dr_mabeuse said:

I guess what I'm asking about is this: why do people cry at weddings?

Can friendships ever be tragic? Homosexual love? Do people cry at gay weddings?

Very strange.

I have no clue why people cry at weddings. I sure haven't so far. On the other hand, I haven't cried at any funeral either.

I think any type of relationship can be tragic. If I was clear enough in my head I'd come up with a list of reasons, but for now I can only say there are equally many reasons for friendship, relationships between parents-children, homosexual love and platonic love to be tragic, as there is with romantic love.

Why wouldn't people cry at gay weddings? Same people that go to hetero weddings. Same type of feelings.

Why do people cry when a child is born? When they've won a contest?
 
Back
Top