Romantic comedies and the normalisation of limerence
The neuroscience of infatuation and its implication in modern relationships.
It all started after my birthday (which marks the end of Halloween and beginning of Christmas), when I felt that annual urge to watch 2003 Christmas Classic ‘Love Actually’. As a person who doesn’t even celebrate Christmas, I still take joy in watching any film with Colin Firth and Hugh Grant.
It’s gotten to the point where I now acknowledge most 2000’s romantic films for what they are (unrealistic and mostly written by men who already have a failed narrative of women). However, rewatching this film for the umpteenth time, I recognised the presence of limerence in the character of Juliet (Kiera Knightley) and Mark (Andrew Lincoln). Let me just start off by fully proclaiming my great dislike for the character Mark (you can tell I have no intention of making this article impartial). The man either ignores or is cold towards Julie for the entire movie only to betray his best friend and confess her love to her at the end (knowing there is nothing that can happen but regardless) . Needless to say, my article isn’t about shaming Mark. Instead, it is a justification of his actions as a result of limerence presented in that relationship.
According to Dorothy Tennov, limerence is “state of mind which results from a romantic attraction to another person and typically includes obsessive thoughts and fantasies and a desire to form or maintain a relationship with the object of love and have one’s feelings reciprocated”. It is evident in Love Actually when Mark’s fixation on Julie reveals itself in the creepily obsessive footage of the wedding video where he only records her. A video that literally cuts out everything but his own narrow depiction of Julie. The idea that he was unable to move past his limerence even after she got married is a sign of trouble itself. Alas, his character is rewarded for this behaviour at the end of the film and gets a kiss from Julie herself.
As lover of romcoms, I tend to remove my “political” goggles when watching things of the past that I once enjoyed. Nonetheless, after The Take explored the movie in detail in relation to Tennov’s work, I was left with a desire to explore the effects of limerence and its footprints in modern relationships.
What are the consequences of limerence in cinema?
In his research paper, Wellington argues representation of limerence in cinematic resources has led to the encouragement of audiences attempting to draw meaning from these experiences. Classic critiques of romantic comedies include the representation of obvious fantasies that include ‘everlasting love brought about by sheer force of passion, persistence or destiny’. Wellington contends that underlying themes of these rom coms actually carry a deeper meaning that end up relating to a sense of political selfhood.
As we watch these films, we adopt the desires and goals of the protagonist. Consequently, there has a been a normalisation of certain practices in these films that reflect on contemporary society. One example being the oversimplification of complex emotions we experience. In the romantic comedy film, limerence is most often taken to be a reliable precursor to genuine commitment,which is why these films coincidentally finish when the characters end up together. The idea that disappointment and failure might loom during an extended period of doubt mid-narrative is removed from the plot. Unfortunately this can lead to unrealistic expectations or even definitions of what love is in a relationship.
Similarly, the potrayal of limerence in rom coms have lead to the normalisation of unhealthy actions and behaviours. Mark’s character aside, many movies include main characters engaging in stalkerish behaviours as a means of professing their love and affection of their infatuation. Annie Lead in ‘Sleepless in Seattle’ decides she’s madly inlove with a man after hearing his voice on the radio and then flies across country to follow him about and spy on him and his young son. ’27 Dresses’ Jane is stalked by James Marsden’s Kevin, a journalist who steals her Filofax and aggressively and repeatedly tracks her down in every event she attends. (More examples can be found here).
As an audience, we justify the creepy behaviours these characters make in pursuit of finding their happiness. Naturally, these feelings seep into our romantic lives. Whilst in university, I once heard a girl say how romantic it was that her boyfriend (who she fought with at the time) went to her location after finding it on snapmaps, only to check that she wasnt cheating on him. In that moment, I couldn’t relate to what she thought was a romantic gesture eventhough I could see how her view of love may have been misconstrued by movies that she watched as a child.
Additionally, limerence can often celebrate the ‘nice guy’ trope. This is not to be confused with a nice guy (that is, a person that is nice), but rather someone who has ulterior motives. They believe that because they behave in a certain way the world owes them for their actions. Most commonly found in men, he doesn’t make it clear what he desires from the beginning and becomes angry when he doesn’t get what he wants. Common nice guys in television include Ross’s character from friends, who you may perceive as romantic and passionate, but actually turns out to be manipulative and controlling towards Rachel’s character (sending lots of things to her office so her coworkers know she’s in a relationship and don’t hit on her). A female version equivalent is Sierra Burgess in ‘Sierra Burgess is a loser’. She sabotages the reputation of a cheerleader friend, sexually harasses a guy and then makes a song (that is unfortnuately her redemption ark in the film) about how she is treated differently due to how she looks (even though she has never confessed her feelings to the guy she likes). The use of limerence along with the ‘nice guy trope’ in men has led to a population thinking the most attainable way to get a womans attraction is through sheer persistence in the hopes that she will say ‘yes’ in the end. More importantly, these women/men that are pursued by the protagonist we seem to root for are always an unhealthy depiction of what this character imagines rather than the sheer reality of the individual they are somehow ‘inlove’ with (500 days of summer, Paper Towns, There’s something about Mary etc.).
Extensive data about the effects of pornography on men has been published but little consideration has been given to the effects of romantic comedies in women. I only paid attention to this after watching Don Jon, which draws a correlation between romantic comedies and pornography. The main character in the film Jon suffers with a porn addiction while his girlfriend Barbara enjoys one too many romantic comedies. Barbara has expectations of how her and Jon should both act, feel etc. He, because of what he watches, believes that a relationship is supposed to be all fun and no work. Both of the characters are dissatisfied with their relationship because it does not fit the specific molds that the romantic comedies and porn have created for them (Nicholson, 2013). Both pornography and romantic comedies create unrealistic expectations and have harmful effects on relationships. Melissa Gepford explains that pornography is problematic because it creates a barrier in the relationship by being simplistic and objectifying the individuals portrayed. She highlights that although the impact of romantic comedies to be equal to porn, that they do similar things to a relationship and should be taken in very small amounts with caution (Gepford, 2016).
Conclusion
As someone who enjoys this genre, I am here to say that this article is not about convincing you to stop watching these films. I am also not here to shame these films. As a previous INLOG (I’m not like other girls), I was ashamed of liking romantic comedies because like most things feminine, they aren’t considered very cool. However I’m here to tell you there are plenty of things in Hollywood that are unrealistic (especially with movies that see boys/men as their demographic) but that does not mean they should not be consumed. Infact, one of the most unhealthy depictions of limerence include Shakespreare’s tragedy ‘Romeo and Julliet’ that is celebrated in the masses (and not just by women). As someone who enjoys romantic comedies, I’ve learnt to acknowledgde that the idealised depiction of romance in them is created for entertaintment purposes and should play no role in how I should view relationships, and you should too.
Useful references:
Gepford, M. C. (2016, September 21). Rom-coms are perverting how we think about love. Relevant Magazine. Retrieved on September 28, 2016.
Nicholson, J. S. (2013, September 30). Unrealistic relationship expectations: Learning from Don Jon. Psychology Today. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/theattraction-doctor/201309/unrealistic-relationship-expectations-learning-don-jon.
The emotional politics of limerence in romantic comedy film by Wyatt Moss-Wellington. Available: shttps://mediarep.org/bitstream/handle/doc/4938/NECSUS_2019_8_1_191-209_Moss-Wellington_The_emotional_politics_of_limerence_.pdf?sequence=6
The Effects of Romantic Comedies on Relationship by Lacey Greenwell. Available: shttps://mcstor.library.milligan.edu/bitstream/handle/11558/1585/Greenwell_Lacey_20161206.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
