See HERE for previous posts
I don't like
When I cannot tell whether a love triangle is coming…or not.
I don't know if it's strategic marketing, but I've found books that clearly contain triangles, which only mention one love interest in the descriptive copy. On the other hand, I've also seen books that don't feature any sort of love triangle, which allude to multiple love interests in the blurb. Why is cover copy deliberately misleading? Why does it appear that some publishers want to downplay the triangle angle, and others want to create one that isn't there? I get that sometimes it's a spoiler (though I always want to know either way), but sometimes it seems purposefully confusing.
Or, really, it would just be easier if all love triangle books featured three people on the cover, and arrows explaining the relationships…just kidding (sort of). And while we're at it, it would be tremendously helpful to me if all first-books-in-a-series stated right on the first page whether they are planning on adding a love triangle in the second book. I got blindsided again this week by a series that has added a different love interest in book two when there was no triangles even hinted at in book one. Why does this keep happening?
Does this bug you too?
What's something you dislike about love triangles?
I've been "trapped" too many times lately and starting to get annoyed! Either the triangel comes in the second book or without any warning already in the first.ReplyDelete
You're abosulutely right, it's like a minefield out there! And it's exhausting when having to dodge all the time. I just want to enjoy a good book without the triangle jumping out of the cake suddenly and shouting "Surprise!"
See if I'm warned before hand about there being a love triangle, I can mentally prepare myself for it and go through the story. But the surprise ones that come out of nowhere in the second book of a trilogy or something like that really annoy me.ReplyDelete
I think warnings about LTs should be a thing, to warn people. Everything is about marketing these days!
Oh, wow, THIS. So many books now have this problem and it's extremely aggravating. It's those not a love triangle...but maybe is. You get hints and you have a feeeeeeling, but it's not right out there and the main character is oblivious to her future. But we all know. WE KNOW.ReplyDelete
Maybe we should come up with a little symbol that the pubs/ authors could use to signal that, even if it's not on the blurb, there's a triangle inside. I've read a couple books recently where it seems like there's going to be a triangle (with three MCs) but then there ISN'T ONE and I've spent the whole book biting my nails, hoping one doesn't develop. *sigh*ReplyDelete
Misleading cover copy is definitely a problem (and a royal pain in the neck). I got blindsided the other week by Winterspell. :(ReplyDelete
This is probably what bothers me the most. I hate to invest time in a book, only to find out that later on there will be a love triangle introduced. Why do authors/publishers find this so appealing? To make readers invest in a relationship and then turn it on its head and dismantle it in the next book. At least with books like the upcoming Lailah, the love triangle starts in the first book, so I know to avoid it. I really wish authors who are planning to introduce a new love interest in the sequel(s) would just say so.ReplyDelete
Ack. Amazing post, as always, Lauren. <3 And omg. Yesss. I so agree with you. I HATE that. It is just so unfair. I need a warning, so that I can stay away from the book, lol. And when I read book one, which is perfect and no love triangle, then book two comes along with a triangle. UGH. Just so annoying and it makes me very hateful, lol :) Thank you for sharing sweetie. <3ReplyDelete
I don't mind the misleading information that much, but I do mind when a triangle is formed in book two and it comes out of the blue for "OPTIONS" when we all know that the only option is the original guy so please, dear author! Don't give us options that aren't options. UGHHH. Especially if it's a duology >.<ReplyDelete