Martha Mihalick » relationships

Top Ten TV Couples

Martha — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 01:11:58 +0000

Angie posted this meme earlier this week, and how could I resist? Compile a list of your top 10 favorite TV couples to share. These are in no particular order.

1. Josh & Donna, The West Wing

2. CJ & Danny, The West Wing

3. Bartlet & Abby, The West Wing

What West Wing fan didn’t feel all warm and fuzzy when Josh and Donna finally became a couple? I love watching the banter, the way they know each other so well, and the way neither lets the other get away with any crap. They can make each other laugh, and they are always there when needed. Josh is brilliant but arrogant, and a good friend; Donna is gullible yet savvy, smart, and can see right through him. A good tv couple, in my opinion, has loads of tension and what-if build-up. And two characters who challenge and complement each other.

And that’s why two more of my favorite couples also come from West Wing. CJ and Danny circle each other more obviously, maybe, than Josh and Donna, but the connection is still complex. And they are still two smart and funny people who get each other.

Then there’s the President and First Lady. Some of the best scenes in the show are when they’re fed up and yelling at each other, because it shows a strong relationship many years in, and with many problems and strains. They push each others buttons, but they, too, know that underneath everything is support and strength.

4. Veronica and Logan, Veronica Mars

This clip says it all, doesn’t it? Epic, volatile, dangerous, yet also vulnerable and sweet.

5. Rory & Jess, Gilmore Girls

Jess might be my favorite tv bad boy. He’s always been my favorite of Rory’s boys. He’s smart and is a reader, so can meet her on an intellectual level, but he challenges her goody-goody nature. And he just always kept coming back. In my mind, at the end of Gilmore Girls, Rory went off with Obama’s campaign, saw Jess during a stop in Philly, and they live happily ever after.

6. Ally McBeal & Larry, Ally McBeal

The favorite TV couple from the college years. Robert Downey, Jr. playing Larry completely won the hearts of me and my roommate. He and Ally are just so adorably crazy, in such compatible ways.

7. Scarecrow & Mrs. King, Scarecrow & Mrs. King

How can you not love an ’80s spy couple?

8. Roger & Joan, Mad Men

They’re funny, they’re challenging to each other, and they always know where the other stands. And who doesn’t love Joan?

Bromances. Sometimes the best couples are friendships rather than romances.

9. Seth & Ryan, The O. C.

I never really watched much of The O. C. because I couldn’t stand the girls. But every once and a while I’d turn it on and would be totally charmed by the friendship between Seth and Ryan. They’re hilarious, and such terrific friends.

10. Stefan & Damon, The Vampire Diaries

They so often make me laugh! I think their banter may be one of the main reasons I have gotten so into this show.

Adversaries, take 2. The nicer take.

Martha — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 00:57:00 +0000

“This isn’t romance. This isn’t a declaration of love or affirmation of friendship. This is something more.” –Melina Marchetta, Jellicoe Road

It occurred to me after reading the couple of comments on the adversaries post that the same dynamic is important in non-opponent relationships, too. Finishing Jellicoe Road recently also underscored it, as I watched how Taylor and Griggs’s opponentship and relationship unfolded.

The people who a protagonist spends time with, whether as friend, enemy, family, or love, have to be people worth that time for both the character and the reader. The king and queen of Attolia are one of literature’s greatest couples because they challenge each other both as opponents and as lovers. Nick and Norah (of the Infinite Playlist) work because they challenge each other. Mildred and Jacob in Me and the Pumpkin Queen are such great friends because they understand, support, and complement one another. The same with Billy, Tommy, and Ernestine in Tracking Daddy Down. And Toot and Puddle. The most compelling relationships are the ones in which the characters are different, but equal.

Maybe this is the germ of a future conference talk, but I’d love to hear what others have to say.

Adversaries, opponents, archenemies, nemeses

Martha — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 03:42:00 +0000

Ever since I went to see Frost/Nixon a few weeks ago, I’ve been thinking about adversarial relationships. (In fiction, of course.) The movie is brilliant all around, and of course, the focus is on a series of confrontations between David Frost and Richard Nixon. Each is trying to get the best of the other, each trying to come out on top. But only one of them can win. They are two very different people, yet also similar in ways, too. They both want to be in the spotlight of their circle. They both crave “ratings” of a sort. They’re both able to captivate other people; they’re both charismatic. And though it seems like Nixon should be able to easily win in this confrontation, Frost, in the end, has equal strength.

That’s what makes for a worthy opponent–someone who is equally strong, or witty, or what-have-you–and I think that often lies in the similarities between two adversaries rather than their differences. Some amount of sympathy for the other is necessary, too. In Frost/Nixon, we can see that Frost does feel for Nixon by the end, and even that Nixon sympathizes with Frost. We couldn’t have had James Reston opposite Nixon because Reston didn’t see Nixon as human; to him, Nixon was purely bad. And we couldn’t have had Frost opposite Jack Brennan because Brennan saw Frost as a joke.

It works the same way in any story, I think. There has to be equal strength, wit, intelligence, and each has to be able to see the other as a person–at least a little bit. Vulnerabilities and flaws in counterpoint to strengths and attributes make characters more interesting and complex, whether they are protagonists or antagonists. The Dark Knight also sparked this thought last summer, during that scene when the Joker outlines how he and Batman aren’t so different deep down. (Which is an admittedly chilling thought.)

Anyone else have great examples of worthy adversaries in books? Harry and Voldemort, obviously. And I’d say the king and queen of Attolia have one that’s breathtaking (and romantic, too!). Blair and Serena in Gossip Girl? Who else?

All You Need Is Love

Martha — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 00:42:00 +0000

I am a sucker for a good romantic story. Good, believable, subtle, difficult, imperfect, sincere, understated romance. Sometimes this is the main plot of a story, but most often, it’s the secondary one. At any rate, in honor of V-Day, here are my favorite love stories.

For the grown-ups:
The English Patient by Michael Ondaatje
The Time Traveler’s Wife by Audrey Niffenegger
Sexing the Cherry by Jeannette Winterson
Written on the Body by Jeannette Winterson
Possession by A. S. Byatt
Persuasion by Jane Austen
Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen
Much Ado about Nothing by Shakespeare

For the teens:
Nick & Norah’s Infinite Playlist by David Levithan
Boy Meets Boy by David Levithan
Graceling by Kristen Cashore
Beauty by Robin McKinley
Sunshine by Robin McKinley
The Queen of Attolia by Megan Whalen Turner
The Truth about Forever by Sarah Dessen
Enna Burning by Shannon Hale
Howl’s Moving Castle by Diana Wynne Jones
Song of the Lioness quartet by Tamora Pierce
Criss Cross by Lynne Rae Perkins

Making choices

Martha — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 02:38:00 +0000

Every once and a while, I notice a theme in my reading, and usually it’s completely accidental. This fall it’s been books (and a few manuscripts) about choice. Which, okay, is an underlying theme in a lot of teen books, since it’s a big teen concern–choosing who to be, how to live life, how to be independent. But my fall reading has very much been about characters whose main conflict is the choice between being true to themselves, following their dream or passion or being in love. I’m so glad that there are these books for teen out there. They are important, because they show that it’s not all about the boy (or girl, if the protagonist is a boy). Part of me wonders if the novels about these concerns lately have been reactions to Twilight, in which Bella does pretty completely lose herself for Edward.

The novels that have struck me most are The Disreputable History of Frankie Landau-Banks, The Forest of Hands and Teeth, and Graceling. I really liked them all for their strong female characters and their approaches to how these young women see their choices. In Disreputable History, Frankie has to deal with getting the guy she’s had a crush on, but him not seeing all of her, seeing her only as adorable, rather than the brilliant, challenging person she is. She has the thought in one situation, reflecting on how she’s proud of herself for confronting someone, “At least I wasn’t someone’s little sister, someone’s girlfriend, some sophomore, some girl–someone whose opinions don’t matter.” And later, “She will not be simple and sweet. She will not be what people tell her she should be.” In The Forest of Hands and Teeth, Mary lives in a world overrun by zombies, where humans are only safe in a fenced off village. But Mary’s heard of the ocean, and believes in it, wants to find it. She, too, ends up struggling with her love for a boy and her wish to see the ocean, to believe that more exists outside their fences. “Ever since that day on the hill, ever since he promised he would come for me, this was always supposed to be our dream, together. It was never supposed to be about having to choose one or the other,” she says at one point. It’s fantastic that teens have strong characters like Frankie and Mary who are confronting these sorts of conflicts, so that readers can see how these young women decide, deal with it. So that they see that being conflicted like that is okay. That they shouldn’t lose themselves for someone else. The only quibble I have is: why does it have to be a choice? Why can’t they be true to themselves and their dreams and have love? Of course, maybe the key there is that neither Mary nor Frankie have met the right guys, the ones that get them, and really see them. Which is part of what I adore about Graceling. Katsa has the same trouble– “She loved Po. She wanted Po. And she could never be anybody’s but her own.”–but she finds a way to have both. She’s able to remain thoroughly herself, but also to love and be loved, however unconventionally.

Katsa reminds me a little of Alanna from Tamora Pierce’s Song of the Lioness quartet (which have been my favorite books since I was ten) in how she reconciles having her freedom and her love. The Alanna books were among the first of the “kickass girl” books, in which the hero is a girl, not a boy, along with Robin McKinley’s The Blue Sword and The Hero and the Crown. So, twenty-ish years later, and there are many, many more books showing girls as heroes, as strong, independent people. But still facing the same choices and problems. I’d like to think that these days, though, these aren’t feminist issues, but people issues. And I do think there are boy books about the same themes.