Building and Breaking Romance in little Women
One of the most difficult things to do as any writer with your characters’ relationships (specifically romantic ones), is to put them together and take them apart while arriving at a conclusion your readers don’t curse you for. Granted, people have their preferences so you will be cursed (it’s one of the fun things of being a writer) no matter what. Because someone always isn't happy with the way things turned out: many people wanted Buffy with Spike, some people wanted Black widow with Captain America, others cough* wanted Nikita Meers with Owen Elliot–and NO ONE WANTED BARBARA FROM STRANGER THINGS TO DIE. Little Women was possibly the first movie that made me entirely invested and rooting for one thing, while then presenting me with a story in which I was satisfied with a shift. How do we achieve this in our own work, and how did Alcott do it? Let’s dive in.
Go 110% for everything you do and deal with the repercussions: What does this mean? Basically, don’t have characters do things half heartedly. Sometimes writers (myself included) are afraid to have character A be really in love with character B because as the writer, maybe you know they won’t end up together. So you reason “why waste time on this relationship when it won’t go anywhere, and it'll hurt more when character A gets rejected?”
But good writing it supposed to be ridden with truth, reality–and in reality we don’t always know who we're going to end up with, and when we’re stuck in emotions it's 110%. For example, look at the motives and the goals of characters in Little Women (romantically) from the start:
Laurie is completely enamored with Joe from the moment he meets her. In the book, and pretty much every cinematic adaptation he has zero other ambitions besides that of winning Joe March. His interest in her becomes the only thing that drives him.
As sad as that is for Laurie and Joe, she couldn't help rejecting him, and his character had nothing else to motivate him besides her so he quit on life in general.
Amy has been in love with Laurie since she met him despite him being much closer with her sister Joe. This doesn't change even after they grow up and Laurie is rejected, or even when he becomes more degenerate–Amy still loves him.
Joe is best friends with Laurie, but for many reasons (there's debate over why and we’ll get into some of my interpretations), she wasnt ready or willing to marry him at the time he proposed. Still, the consequence of refusing him meant losing a dear friend . But if that was where Joe’s character was at that point in time, as a writer you have to be faithful to it no matter what the consequences.
Basically, making the characters be where they are in that moment in time–faithfully, and adhering to what they would do right then. Don’t write based off what will make an easier, more clean cut story that will leave your characters the most unschathed–write good characters, and then make them true to themselves and deal with the consequences. Even if it means more than one character has to suffer a broken heart.
Show the readers why things turned out the way they did: So, this goes back to not everyone will love what you write, but you as the writer have to ABSOLUTELY believe in your own choices. Mistakes happen, but most of the time if we’re clear headed and think things through we can arrive at a solution that satisfies us. Using another relationship as an example, I’m a fan of Buffy and Angel (the people who want her with Spike can disagree but they’re wrong). However, going back and watching the show I can see in seasons 1-3 the problems with their relationship and why it wasn’t potentially what Buffy needed at that point in her life. Doing that with couples is tricky when people are really invested in them, but we can do our best. Let’s take a look at the couples and how Alcott put them together and broke them up, as well as why the way she did it was the best possible way.
Joe and Laurie: I love the relationship between Joe and Laurie. When they meet is one of my favorite scenes in the 2019 film and the book. I thought Winnona Ryder was nuts for turning down Christian Bale in the 1994 film. However, I think part of the reason I did, was because the director didn’t do a fair enough job of showcasing the right aspects of the relationship or of giving Amy equal screen time. The beauty of Joe and Laurie’s relationship is that they were best friends, like minded, he was close with her sisters. And even if it wasn’t in the way he wanted–Joe does love Laurie. But in the books and in the film some of the issues with their relationship are clearly shown through actions of the characters.
When Laurie confesses his feelings for Joe, in both the book and in the 2019 film, he admits that there were disreputable things he could have been doing or would have been engaging in. But he hasn't, because he wanted Joe to love him. When she rejects him, he engages in all these things because she was his only anchor, and seemingly the only reason to pursue a healthy life.
This might be the poster YA love confession that all girls 13+ love, that you are the man’s reason for everything he does and without you he doesn't exist–but it isn’t the symbol of a well established morally grounded adult. A grown man is not only prepared to confess feelings, but take whatever answer he gets with dignity, ownership, and he won’t use rejection as an excuse to forsake his obligations. Laurie loved Joe, but he wasn’t a man prepared to take on all the responsibilities and duties required like Meg’s husband John Brooke.
Joe rejected Laurie for the wrong reasons. Joe gives every excuse in the book as to why she shouldn’t be with him, “you’re much too good for me,” “you’d hate my scribbling,” she doesn't mention that he isn't ready to take on the responsibility of a family or doesn’t have a plan, a career, ect. Laurie mentions no plans for work since his wealthy grandfather has been taking care of him his whole life.
Another reason Joe was afraid to marry Laurie is because she doesn't want childhood to end. Her sister just got married, and she’s afraid of the family being torn apart and she’s afraid of adulthood–but she doesn't tell him that. Thus leads into the next reason why they wouldn't have been suited at that point in time.
Joe is a well established person, ambitious, a dreamer, a provider, she takes care of her family even when everyone else in her family seems to be breaking apart. Amy gets the trip to Europe Joe wanted, but she still doesn show bitterness against her sister for it. Meg gets married and moves away, Joe still keeps writing to provide for the mother, Beth, and stays in touch. Even when Joe’s dreams are crushed, she doesn't quit. Joe is a morally stronger person than Laurie and keeps trying even when she loses. Laurie quits.
In Defense of Amy: I know so many people call her the least favorite March sister, but in the book and the 2019 film my fondness of Amy as a character grew dramatically. I like the character of Amy for many reasons (“great or nothing” is one of them) but I’ll stick to why she was the right wife for Laurie in the end.
Joe loved Laurie too much and was too close with him to tell him what he really needed. Amy loved Laurie, but she wasn't his best friend. When you’ve laughed, played, and been like siblings with someone your whole life it’s VERY hard to give them tough love. In the books this is delved into more deeply, but Joe had an almost unfounded respect and admiration for Laurie. She wants to be his friend instantly, thinks very highly of him, and they play like big children. But she cared for his feelings too much to reject him honestly, instead she gave a self-deprecating answer.
Amy is the one who gets Laurie to have a little self respect, ambition, and actually become a self-reliant adult after he’s been wallowing in misery from Joe’s rejection.
Amy has a strong enough personality to combat Laurie’s while still showing him affection. Amy is just the personality type Laurie needed to pick him up because she always saw his inherent worth and potential, but she wasn't going to overstep or try to be with him when she saw how close he was with Joe.
Even when Amy loses what she wants (because she witnesses Laurie chasing Joe when she’s secretly in love with him), she still maintains dignity and attempts to pursue her own future.
“I would be respected if I couldn't be loved,” -Amy.
Joe and Professor Bhaer: Disclaimer, I’m going to ignore the age difference because it ruins it for me–in the book and the 1994 version. The 2019 film was the first one that made me like Joe choosing the Professor, I read the book shortly after and my opinion was reaffirmed. The reasons they worked:
The Professor is a well established person with integrity. In the book this is expounded upon more (as always because in a book you have chapters and in a movie you have minutes).
When Joe moves to the city there are a number of people trying to make her question her upbringing and values. Bhaer reaffirms her foundations and helps her to see that their ideas of moral relativism are wrong. He sees Joe is a good young woman and doesn't want her to fall away from her roots.
The Professor is aware he’s older and more experienced in life than Joe, and therefore doesn't want to be selfish by pursuing her himself. He’s willing to step aside because it might be best for her. But he still sees and encourages her inherent talent.
Characters all have Peace by the end: One of the most important things about arranging relationships in your story, whether your building or tearing them down–is that by the conclusion (if you want the viewer/reader satisfied), make people look like they really have moved on. Now, if your writing a tragedy, or if one unlucky character is just permanently in love with another and is never meant to move on cough* Marvel’s Scott Summers–then there are exceptions. But if you want to break apart couples and make new ones, you really need to show the characters have gone from point A to point B. Show them develop, grow, change, and therefore show why the people they are by the end of the story end up with their right partners. Ask yourself:
Where did my characters start?
How have they changed over the course of the story?
As the people they are now, do they have peace with where they are and the choices they’ve made?
This is one of my favorite things about Little Women, characters grow, change, develop, and by the end they’ve matured:
By the end of the book, Joe reconsiders maybe she should have chosen Laurie because she’s lonely and seems to be losing everything else. But when Amy shows up married to him, she forgives them, which shows to me she wasn't really in love with Laurie because of how quickly she manages to make peace with the idea. “Life is too short to stay angry at one’s sisters,” -Joe March
Laurie returns married to Amy, and admits his love for her is different than his feelings for Joe. He’s clearly moved on because he’s ready and willing to chase down Professor Bhaer for Joe to make her happy.
Joe initially hates the idea of Meg marrying John Brooke because he’s taking her sister away. After a while she grows and accepts him as a brother-in law and has peace with the new way her family has come together.
The takeaway: write intricate characters who are completely invested in their motivations during each phase they have. Allow them to grow and to change, and show the readers how those changes happened and why they needed to. Basically, study and break down books or movies that did this well. I chose Little Women to tackle this topic, because it did it excellently.
-Jubilee