I recently finished "Nation" which I would have liked more if I hadn't felt like Prachett was on his soapbox (even if I agree with what he's saying) but the ending made me realize (and I'm sorry, I'm not sure how to make this intro spoiler-free without cutting the whole post) that unconsummated romances are the most tragic, in my book.
I'm not sure why.
However, at the end of this book I was mentally shrieking "but they never even got to kiss" and during the Angel episode "A Whole In The World" I was practically throwing the remote at the screen going, "but Fred and Wesley never even got to have sex!"
I don't know why unconsummated love is so much harder for me to deal with than parting and never seeing each other again (although that can rip out the heart on occasion) or one of them dying or both of them dying (which, actually, I typically don't find tragic at all).
I'm not sure why.
However, at the end of this book I was mentally shrieking "but they never even got to kiss" and during the Angel episode "A Whole In The World" I was practically throwing the remote at the screen going, "but Fred and Wesley never even got to have sex!"
I don't know why unconsummated love is so much harder for me to deal with than parting and never seeing each other again (although that can rip out the heart on occasion) or one of them dying or both of them dying (which, actually, I typically don't find tragic at all).
Tags:
no subject
But I think lovers dying together is not as tragic (or as satisfying, in a way) as only one lover dying and/or unconsummated love.