This video was sponsored by World Anvil!
Do you think this means they like me? :D Romance is easy. Everybody knows that. There's
nothing simpler and more painless than forging a lifelong mutualistic bond with another human
being and exposing the white-hot core of your fundamental personhood to the unconditional
judgment of someone who will on some level always be a stranger to you. Romance is a well-documented
straight line from prolonged eye contact to happily ever after. And because romance is a
universally easy and painless process, it's only natural that writers will look for anything that
could possibly complicate the process to make even slightly dramatic for an audience's entertainment.
So it makes perfect sense that there's no romance trope more popular than the love triangle.
Now a "love triangle" describes a plot wherein three people are in a romantic arrangement that
is in some way unstable. The most common love triangle structure involves a single node
character faced with two possible romantic interests they have to choose between, who are
often actively competing for their attention. Love triangles exist to cause narrative tension, and do
this by posing a problem with no clear solution. The ideal solution to the love triangle problem
would theoretically make every participant happy, but most love triangles are structured in
such a way that the happiness of one member of the triangle is mutually exclusive with
the happiness of at least one other member. The audience is expected to be invested in the
happiness of at least two-thirds of the triangle reaching a happy ending, and the structure of
the love triangle provides the author with a lot of ways to build tension and make that go wrong.
Now despite the simple name and shape, there are actually a lot of different relationships
described by the term "love triangle." The archetypical structure is the Balanced Triangle,
a love triangle wherein Character A has two competing love interests, characters B and C. A
likes both B and C, and can't decide which one they like more. B and C might both be desirable
love interests for different reasons - for instance, B might be sweet and reliable while C
might be exciting and dangerous. This category also includes what I call the Inverse Balanced
Triangle, where the structure is the same but the focus is entirely on B and C competing for A's
affection - to the point where it might not even be clear what A thinks about any of this, or if A
even actually likes them. This balanced structure is what a lot of love triangles pretend to be, but
is actually quite rare. This might be because a balanced triangle is designed to be incapable
of having a unilaterally happy ending. If B and C are both viable love interests for A, the
audience will probably like both of them, and if A can only end up with one of them, the audience
that wanted the other one to quote-unquote "win" will be very bummed, as will the character
themself. This is why a lot of modern "love triangle" stories resolve the balanced triangle
problem with, you know… polyamory. The simple solution where everyone winds up happy. This
admittedly only works in stories where B and C don't hate each other, which is fairly
uncommon due to the obvious rivalry at play. Most stories with balanced triangles will
instead resolve by making one of the two love interests nonviable as an option, either
by killing them or making them increasingly villainous so that both the audience and the node
character are drawn to conclude that the other option is better. When the story doesn't do this,
it's pretty common for the quote-unquote "losing" option to end up with a consolation prize love
interest so they don't walk away single. The appeal of the balanced triangle is usually not in
how they end, but in the complex back-and-forth between B and C narratively competing to be the
best option, both in the eyes of A and the eyes of the audience. It's like a game, almost - every
move changes the field, every conversation and interaction changes the characters' ranking
on the scoreboard. If A and B have a hugely tumultuous and emotional fight, suddenly C
might look like a much better option and B will have to work pretty hard to gain ground. This
can make for some pretty entertaining stories - or at least that's what I've been told by people
who actually like that sort of thing. There is, of course, the big caveat that this is not at all
how real healthy relationships work, nor should it be thought of that way. Real relationships aren't
competitions and there's no "winning" someone's affection. Just because something makes good
drama doesn't mean it's healthy behavior. In fact, the venn diagram between "good drama" and "healthy
behavior" has a very slim overlap that pretty much exclusively contains "hugging" and "apologizing."
But all that said, this is just one of the arrangements that a "love triangle" can describe.
It is much more common for a love triangle to feature a Vestigial Love Interest. In a love
triangle of this format, characters A and B are mutually attracted to each other and are playing
out a fairly standard romantic subplot, and character C is also there, harboring a one-sided
attraction towards A. There's almost no risk of A and B not ending up together, but C doesn't know
that, and typically believes they're in a balanced love triangle and actually stand a chance. C is
frequently a tragic character in this regard, but they're also frequently at least somewhat
antagonistic just by nature of the story structure - if A and B ending up together is
a presumed component of the eventual happily ever after, C's presence complicates things by
attempting to disrupt that. In some stories, C is more than antagonistic - they're the actual
villain. Now there are also plenty of cases where C is minimally antagonistic, and in those stories
they're pretty unlikely to act on their crush, but we might see them angst about it pretty
heavily in private. They might even act as A's wingman if A's happiness matters more to them
than trying to be with them. The Ideal Happy Ending in this scenario basically leaves A and
B alone and gives C an unrelated happy ending of some kind, frequently a substitute love interest,
and while that's not uncommon, this variant also sees a lot of endings where C dies. This is almost
universal when C is the villain, or even just kind of antagonistic, but even if C is the sweetest
person alive the odds are pretty good that they'll end up dying in A's arms for the angst factor. If
C manages to survive the ending they'll usually either get an unrelated happy ending, typically
a love interest of their own, or they'll realize that they're making A unhappy and prioritize their
happiness over their own by leaving them alone to be with B. When C is the outright villain this is
a pretty common last-minute redemption for them. Now there are a few other fairly common love
triangle types. For instance, in some cases, the node character is Bonded To One But Loves
The Other. A and C are married, engaged, magically bound or otherwise connected into a
lifelong bond, but A is actually in love with B. A and B want to be together, but A's social
bond with C is the primary conflict-driver. Sometimes C might be antagonistic in these
stories, but that's actually not necessary for the plot to work. That's because C's not the
problem here - C is just representative of the social barriers that keep A and B from being happy
together. C might be the nicest person alive and totally dedicated to A's happiness, whatever
that entails, but the mores of their society are what drives the conflict and keeps A and B
apart. While this resembles the vestigial love interest option, this one doesn't actually have
a happy ending as a foregone conclusion. A and B might be able to overcome the limitations of
their society and be together, but if the story is a tragedy it's a lot more likely that one
or both of them are gonna end up dead. In fact, this format almost always has a bodycount; in the
nominal "happiest ending" C is the one who dies, leaving A no longer bound by social protocols
and free to be together with B, but sometimes even that doesn't work for one reason or
another. In a similar structure, sometimes society isn't the problem, but C is; these
stories are of the Loving the Newcomer variant, where A and C are in a committed relationship
of some kind until the new character B shows up, A falls for them instead and A and B end
up together, leaving C in the wind. This is actually surprisingly common in certain kinds
of romance, where the protagonist might start the story off with a schlubby regular boyfriend
but ends up falling for the cool dangerous newcomer and leaving the regular boyfriend behind.
And similarly structured but somewhat backwards, sometimes a love triangle is a case of New
Partner Vs Old Partner. In this structure, A and B are happily playing out their own
romantic subplot, but A's old love interest C unexpectedly returns and starts causing trouble.
A might feel zero lingering affection for C, but it's more common for A to still care about
them, at least a little, which complicates matters. Generally C is still somewhat infatuated
with A, or at least kind of obsessed. Either A or C can have zero lingering affection for the other,
but it's not technically a love triangle unless one of A or C still cares about the other, so
generally there's still some lingering chemistry, even if it's one-sided. And while usually
A and B are still a foregone conclusion, C can still complicate matters, especially if C
is on the more villainous side of things. This can get very hostile, especially since B and C are
typically jealous of each other's relationship with A. It's pretty rare for this plot variant to
have a bodycount unless things really escalate, but you never know with love triangles.
A fairly unusual love triangle is the Conga Line, where A loves B, B loves C, and
C either loves someone completely unrelated or just isn't interested in a relationship
overall. These stories tend to focus on B, because the ideal happy ending in this scenario
depends on B eventually reciprocating A's feelings. Hilariously, a disproportionate number
of superhero stories technically involve this, with the specific complication that A and C are
actually the same person, but C is A's superhero identity while A is their regular secret identity.
And finally there is the rarest love triangle, the Directional Love Triangle, where A loves B,
B loves C, and C loves A. This is quite uncommon because, unlike every other love triangle
discussed thus far, it is impossible for this arrangement to be 100% straight - although if ya
squint, shakespeare did this one in Twelfth Night, so it's not like it's never been done before
now. Depending on how each character feels about the character who likes them, it's possible
for this love triangle to resolve itself to 100% satisfaction via - you guessed it - polyamory.
If that isn't an option, this is one of the messiest triangle arrangements to try and resolve.
Unless someone reciprocates someone's feelings eventually this just leads to infinite pining.
For the record, Shakespeare resolves this by introducing one of the characters' identical
twin brother… and having that character's former love interest just immediately swap all
of her affection from her to him… which doesn't seem like it SHOULD work?? Which is probably why
most people just headcanon that one as gay anyway. Now for the sake of clarity I'm going to divide
all these love triangles into two categories: true triangles and mock triangles. A true triangle
is a love triangle where there is no relationship that is a foregone conclusion; the story does not
telegraph what couple is going to be the endgame, or should be the endgame for a happy ending.
In contrast, a mock triangle is a love triangle that does feature an obvious endgame couple.
Directional and Balanced triangles are true triangles, while conga lines, vestigial love
interests and every variant of "this one's my partner but I really like that one" are all mock
triangles. This is an important distinction, because there are some things you can do in a mock
triangle that are very difficult to pull off with a true triangle and vice versa. Mock triangles
also almost always pretend to be true triangles, and even if the audience can tell who's the
endgame couple, the characters typically believe they're in a true triangle. The "love triangle"
trope most people think of when they hear "love triangle" is a mock triangle, a skewed imitation
of a true triangle where a normal romantic subplot is made needlessly overcomplicated
by the introduction of a romantic rival who doesn't actually stand a chance of being with
the node character, but at least some of the characters will still act like they do. This can
be annoying to an audience, especially if it makes the characters make decisions that the audience
knows are wrong or unhelpful, but it can also enable some unique drama that might not be as
doable in a true triangle. In a true triangle, the ending is not a foregone conclusion; there's
actual tension and drama in the question of who will end up with whom. In a mock triangle there's
no tension or drama in that specific question, but you can get drama from other places -
for instance, from the dramatic irony that the audience knows that one of the love interests
is doomed to fail, but the character doesn't know that at all, and will act as though they're in a
true triangle even if everyone else knows better. Essentially, true triangles feature an
actual "will-they-won't-they" question, whereas in mock triangles… they will, and we all
know it. But there are a lot of tropes like that, and it doesn't always diminish the impact to
know how the story will end. For instance, if the heroes have to save the world from destruction,
the question is not "will they succeed" - because of course they will - the question is "how
will they do it and what will they lose in the process?" Foregone conclusion love triangles are
the same deal. We know they'll end up together, but how will it happen and what will they lose?
In mock triangles, it's actually pretty common for the writer to make the doomed vertex very
likable. A and B are a foregone conclusion, and C is never going to be with A, but that doesn't
stop the audience from liking C and hoping they get a happy ending of some kind (zing) - and that
also gives the writer leverage on the audience, because if we're invested in C's happiness
while also knowing they're basically doomed, the writer can wring a lot of angst and drama
out of that. In the more cheerful and lightweight stories, C might end up with a consolation love
interest of their own, although this rarely plays well with the audience, mostly because their
love interest stands a good chance of being extremely underdeveloped compared to A. In others
C might just…… get over it eventually and end up as A's friend with no lingering drama. But in
more knife-twisty stories C stands a good chance of dying, and frequently suffering the whole way
down. That's a specific flavor of drama you can't get with a true triangle, because if the audience
has no idea how the story is going to end, there's no dramatic irony and no inevitable
doom for either end of the love triangle. Even if one of them is doomed, the audience
doesn't know that. Mock triangles also allow for the characters in the foregone conclusion
relationship to have rather ridiculous fights with each other without the audience worrying
that the actual romance is in jeopardy, whereas in a true triangle if A and B have a huge
blow-up fight that'll look like it's tipping the scales in C's favor. With the stability of a
foregone conclusion, the story can play a little more fast-and-loose with the individual dynamics.
Speaking of, there are a lot of corollary subplots that are frequently found in love triangle
stories, so let's run down a few of them. For instance, A might want to test B's love
for them by trying to make them jealous, and might do so by lavishing disproportionate
amounts of affection on C. In true triangles this is a serious shift in the dynamic, but in
mock triangles this is basically just A using C, which is a pretty dick move that usually has
negative consequences for all parties involved. Similarly, A might be romantically uninterested in
C but still feel the need to offer them a romantic gesture of some sort, often to persuade them
to do something. This is also pretty icky and manipulative, but sometimes A is really just
trying to make them happy and doesn't quite consider the emotional consequences. But it's
not all weirdly manipulative stuff! For instance, sometimes in a moment of crisis A will express
immediate reflexive concern for B's wellbeing, and C will witness this and be bummed that they
weren't first in A's thoughts. Or B and C might decide to compete with some arbitrary gesture to
earn A's favor, triggering shenanigans. In less competitive plots, C might act as A's wingman
to get them together with B while dying on the inside. In more action-y settings, A might find
themselves in danger and B and C will need to put aside their differences to work together and
rescue them, which can honestly be really fun since it gives B and C an opportunity to develop
a dynamic beyond their love-triangle rivalry. They might even end up liking each other! Some stories
will even complicate things by making the Problem Of The Week be the introduction of Character D,
a brand new love interest for A with none of the issues and baggage B and C are lugging around,
causing B and C to unite against the perceived common threat. These subplots often end with
the punchline that D is actually either A's close relative or gay best friend and was never
a legitimate "threat" to the love triangle, ba dum tiss. This structure can also show up in
what I call a "Bottle Triangle", where A and B are playing out a solid romantic subplot with
no triangle involved, but for a single episode a new character is introduced as a secondary
love interest for A and the story speedruns a mock triangle plot before they exit at the end
of the episode and the status quo is restored. They're frequently revealed to be a villain just
to make sure nobody actually worries about the romantic subplot. And while this isn't exactly a
common subplot, sometimes A dies, and B and C end up setting aside their differences to mourn the
loss of the person they both cared about, which can be very tragic and interesting to explore.
Now while this trope has a lot of strengths, love triangles aren't exactly known for
being well-liked. There are a handful of very recurrent problems with this trope that make
it extremely easy to mess up a story with it. The absolute biggest problem is the double-whammy
of entitlement and lack of agency. B and C are frequently driven by a desire for A's affection
that has very little to do with what A actually wants. This is in large part because, in a mock
triangle, A wants to be with B, and if C respected that, there would be no conflict. In many love
triangles A's opinions barely matter beyond "which one they choose", and in some stories it literally
might never be addressed. A will get together by default with whichever of B or C "wins" their
conflict, serving as a walking prize rather than a character. This is the most well-known problem
with the trope and is frequently deconstructed nowadays - dissections of the trope will
frequently center on A being a person with their own desires rather than an object or "a prize to
be won." Some stories will also resolve this by giving the characters thematic significance beyond
their character, so the choice between them means more than just "which one to smooch", like in the
Hunger Games, where Katniss's two love interests basically embody her dueling desires for a
peaceful home life and a violent revolution. This problem can also be solved by letting A, B and C
have characters and relationships outside of the bounds of the love triangle, making them feel more
fleshed-out and less like walking plot devices. On that note, another issue that crops up
with this trope is character assassination. Many of these stories feel the need to justify
their foregone conclusion relationship between A and B by demolishing C's character and making
them increasingly villainous and unappealing so the "choice" becomes obvious. This is a "hand
of the author" situation, since C's slide into villainy might have exactly nothing to do with
their previously established personality and will consequently come across as an unreasonable
swerve for their character to take. In some cases it might seem really obvious to the audience
that the author is trying to artificially tip the scales. It is totally possible for a character
to undergo plausible character development that makes them seem like a significantly less
appealing romantic partner, but if it comes out of nowhere too quickly it'll feel contrived
and undercut the audience's investment in C overall. And since we've established that a
big strength of the mock triangle relies on the audience caring about C, this can undercut
a seriously foundational strength of the trope. And the last problem with this trope is a question
you really don't want your audience to ask: how is ANY of this worth it? If the plot spirals
too far out of control, if the characters just keep hurting each other, if the relationships seem
absolutely needlessly over-the-top dramatic and miserable, your audience may very well start to
wonder why the characters don't just drop it and try doing literally anything else? Now this is a
tricky problem because ultimately it's about the audience's suspension of disbelief. The plot is a
love triangle, so a love triangle has to happen, no matter how dramatic or fraught it gets
- the characters aren't going to bail, because that's not what the story is
about. But that's the doylist explanation; the characters need a watsonian reason to stick
with it, otherwise it feels contrived. This is also complicated by the fact that different
audiences find different narratives believable or compelling, and some people - myself included
- don't automatically find the super fraught love triangle plotlines compelling or relatable because
the concept of anyone putting themselves through that much crap for a love interest is conditional
on the love interest seeming at all worth it, and a lot of these stories seem to assume the
audience will find the love interest "worth it" without actually establishing their relationship
in any grounded way. If all I hear about them is how pretty they are, I'm not gonna conclude that
the protagonist really thinks they're worth going through hell for. There's lots of pretty people; I
want to know what makes this one special to them. This problem can be solved in two ways: one,
establishing the characters with actual dynamics so the audience clearly understands what they
see in each other beyond the surface, and two, by making the conflict more interesting than it
is painful to watch. Some character conflicts can be based on really fascinating clashes of motive
and personality, and if the drama is intriguing to watch that can keep an audience strongly
invested even if it might feel unrealistic that the characters wouldn't have just bailed by now.
And that's honestly a pretty important takeaway, especially for romance plots, which frequently
catch a lot of well-deserved flack for portraying extremely unhealthy relationship dynamics in
glamorous lights. But it's not a bad thing to put bad things in fiction, and not every
story with bad things in it needs a "don't try this at home" disclaimer on the title
card. Stories don't need to be realistic, or healthy, or emotionally well-adjusted, or
good examples for real-world behavior - they just need to be interesting.
So… yeah! And thanks again to World Anvil for sponsoring
this video! As you may have heard, World Anvil is a browser-based writing and worldbuilding tool
designed to help creators write and worldbuild. It’s got all the classic staple features
like family trees, a customizable calendar, custom wikis and multiple visual timelines
you can link to maps to keep track of how everything develops in your story over time.
You can also make your world public if you want to show it off, or keep it private until
you’re sure it’s ready for its big debut! And while that’s already pretty
sweet, they’ve just rolled out a brand new highly requested feature -
an Autolinker that automatically scans through your articles and lets you link all
the pages you’re referencing in your lore drops! It can be pretty tough to keep track
of an entire wiki’s worth of worldbuilding, so this should speed things up significantly!
If only love triangles were so easy to link up… So if all that sounds interesting, check out the
link in the description for more details, and if you want to snag an annual membership, you can
get 40% off with the promo code OVERLYSARCASTIC!
