Hi Niki, thank you for sharing your thoughts on the subject, and I agree that having platonic relationships in books can Be a good thing. For a book I’ve been working on my 2 main protagonists (A guy and a girl) who do care for each other, but are in a platonic relationship because they’ve known each other for so long that they are basically siblings.
Hey, Niki! When you mentioned the not-so-clear dialogue allowing readers to infer what is meant by the gaps, I remembered a book I like where one character sort of mentions this. They say something about being able to figure out what is really being said "by the shadow it casts" I think this is a really good way of putting it, and also highly recommend the book; it is funny, adventurous, and the characters are quite relatable. The book is The Outlaws of Sherwood by author Robin McKinley; and since it is her style, she has at least one romantic pair by the end of the book, but the romance is refreshingly secondary. Two of the characters have known each other since they could walk, and so their love for each other is something that they are unsure about; just like Kimberly and Ronald in the Disney Channel show Kim Possible, which I also recommend.
Hi Heather! I love that "shadow" line-such an elegant way of saying it, and I will absolutely add the Outlaws of Sherwood to my list! I am intrigued by anything with even the slightest Robin Hood vibes. Kim Possible was slightly before my time, but I have seen a bit of it! I'd like to go back and watch more so I can get a better feel for the relationship arc with Kim and Ron. Something else to add to my list, lol!
My book is 90% found family/platonic cuddling/pure, innocent, non-sexual, non-romantic relationships. The romance is background and just there for a little "flavor", similar to cooking, to give an analogy. 😂 I, for one, have physical touch as a love language. It's very much "based on me" that I have a character (one in particular) who is an absolute platonic cuddlebug, not always but when it is appropriate. I wish there was more of this in novels, in my opinion 😅
This sounds so sweet! And it's true-books tend to go straight to the more intense physical affection, but what about good old-fashioned sweet cuddling or hand-holding or HUGGING? I'd like to see more hugs, personally. :)
For a lot of "realism," I like the idea of onset cues. To run with your Robert Jordan example...noting physical appearance the first time one character sees another in a major section of a story is realistic. But, those sporadic experience of character gaze don't need to be repeated EVERY time one character sees another. And the level of detail should be scaled to be sure it doesn't overwhelm other details that might matter, or risk slowing down pace. (Love Robert Jordan, but his level of detail on dresses was notorious for just adding word count and little else.). The same principle could be applied to swearing...a couple of "spicy" words can convey a person's use of language more effectively than 5000 words of profanity laden ranting...
![fellow fellow - PROUD feat. INK WARUNTORN [STRING QUARTET]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/BQrVkMPTdHE/mqdefault.jpg)
![[TH] 2024 PMSL SEA W2D5 | Fall | พลาดวันนี้ จะต้องเสียใจ](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A5-Cuo12p6A/mqdefault.jpg)
Hi Niki, thank you for sharing your thoughts on the subject, and I agree that having platonic relationships in books can Be a good thing. For a book I’ve been working on my 2 main protagonists (A guy and a girl) who do care for each other, but are in a platonic relationship because they’ve known each other for so long that they are basically siblings.
Love it!!!
Hey, Niki! When you mentioned the not-so-clear dialogue allowing readers to infer what is meant by the gaps, I remembered a book I like where one character sort of mentions this. They say something about being able to figure out what is really being said "by the shadow it casts" I think this is a really good way of putting it, and also highly recommend the book; it is funny, adventurous, and the characters are quite relatable. The book is The Outlaws of Sherwood by author Robin McKinley; and since it is her style, she has at least one romantic pair by the end of the book, but the romance is refreshingly secondary. Two of the characters have known each other since they could walk, and so their love for each other is something that they are unsure about; just like Kimberly and Ronald in the Disney Channel show Kim Possible, which I also recommend.
Hi Heather! I love that "shadow" line-such an elegant way of saying it, and I will absolutely add the Outlaws of Sherwood to my list! I am intrigued by anything with even the slightest Robin Hood vibes.
Kim Possible was slightly before my time, but I have seen a bit of it! I'd like to go back and watch more so I can get a better feel for the relationship arc with Kim and Ron. Something else to add to my list, lol!
I really enjoyed this! I think a balance of realism but making the story engaging is the best.
Well, this was nicely put. Good job
My book is 90% found family/platonic cuddling/pure, innocent, non-sexual, non-romantic relationships. The romance is background and just there for a little "flavor", similar to cooking, to give an analogy. 😂
I, for one, have physical touch as a love language. It's very much "based on me" that I have a character (one in particular) who is an absolute platonic cuddlebug, not always but when it is appropriate. I wish there was more of this in novels, in my opinion 😅
This sounds so sweet! And it's true-books tend to go straight to the more intense physical affection, but what about good old-fashioned sweet cuddling or hand-holding or HUGGING? I'd like to see more hugs, personally. :)
Oh, trust me, there's gonna be hugs in the book. Tons of 'em. :)
For a lot of "realism," I like the idea of onset cues. To run with your Robert Jordan example...noting physical appearance the first time one character sees another in a major section of a story is realistic. But, those sporadic experience of character gaze don't need to be repeated EVERY time one character sees another. And the level of detail should be scaled to be sure it doesn't overwhelm other details that might matter, or risk slowing down pace. (Love Robert Jordan, but his level of detail on dresses was notorious for just adding word count and little else.).
The same principle could be applied to swearing...a couple of "spicy" words can convey a person's use of language more effectively than 5000 words of profanity laden ranting...
I agree! (And goodness, yes, the description of people's clothing in WoT was a little much!) :D