Does a good love triangle plot exist?

[Ionathus]

I was thinking about this lately after finishing a YA series with a hamfisted romance plot, but it's not limited to just that. I feel like the love triangle is a common piece of so many works, both written and filmed, and I simply can't think of a single time I've ever seen it improve the story.

It tries to create tension, but I'm always just frustrated at the characters' wishy-washy behavior or terrible communication skills. It tries to create pathos but I feel so manipulated by the setup that it pulls me out of the world instead of sucking me in. It tries to create an interesting story, but every love triangle feels like the same thing -- jealousy, conflicted feelings, comparing the two suitors, intelligent people all acting irrationally for no reason, overwrought declarations of love, and a pointless ultimatum. None of it is new or interesting, so love triangles become this quagmire that can suck in and kill off an otherwise interesting, unique fictional relationship.

Those are just my feelings, though. Maybe there's something I'm missing? Maybe there's a work of fiction that plays the love triangle in an interesting way that improves the story -- if so, I'd love to hear about it. What do you all think?

[Peelee]

I'd say Jane the Virgin, but that's kind of cheating, since the whole show is ludicrously (and intentionally, to great effect) telenovela'd up.

[truemane]

I thought the Korra/Boleyn/Asami triangle was quite well done all in all. Each iteration of the dynamic had stakes and emerged organically from the narrative and no given shift was made for stupid or prurient reasons. It did what a good romance (of any geometric shape) should do: provided a platform for revealing and developing character.

And the fact that ...

Korra and Asami canonically wound up in smoochville at the end

...just made it all the sweeter.

EDIT: couple others that I just thought of.
Mariko, Blackthorne and Buntaro in James Clavell's Shogun
David, Stevie and Jake on Schitt's Creek
About 40% of the screentime of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. All of it hopelessly regressive in retrospect, of course, but at the time of its release, it was all quite groundbreaking
About 60% of the running time of True Blood, just as regressive as Buffy, not as groundbreaking, but with a great deal more nudity
Kim Novak, Jimmie Stewart and Kim Novak (but dead) in Vertigo
Viola, Duke Orsino, Lady Olivia, and the pageboy Caesario (who is also Viola) in Twelfth Night (Spoilers for Twelfth Night)

The problems with love triangles are just extreme examples of the problems with all forms of romance in television and film (and, to some degree, tropes of all kinds): the structure all by itself will generate an impact, so that's what people do. It's the writing equivalent of dropping a macro into a spreadsheet, knowing that, while the macro can't do the job as well as you can, it does well enough for the people who asked for the data, and you can move on to other things.

[warty goblin]

A substantial portion of Arthurian legend concerns love triangles and their inevitable, disastrous fallout. Depending on how you choose to interpret Helen, so is the entire Trojan War. I'd consider both good stories.

Thomas Hardy's Far from the Madding Crowd is an excellent novel, in no small part concerned with a love... irregular polygon is probably the best term.

Can they be tedious and samey? Sure. So can everything else. Even a slightly competent version of a love triangle however comes with interesting stakes, since it involves multiple people running the very real risk of serious and painful emotional damage and the destruction of existing, valuable relationships. They can also contain a reasonable amount of uncertainty in outcome; which I would note puts them solidly ahead of like 99% of all action scenes ever.

As to them containing people behaving jealously, irrationally, and communicating badly, these are all things people do. Relationships have very high emotional stakes, which creates both an incentive to be dishonest, and powerful feelings that cloud people's judgement. It seems very odd to criticize a story for depicting actual, pretty common, human behavior.

[truemane]

It seems very odd to criticize a story for depicting actual, pretty common, human behavior.
I don't want to speak for the OP, but I think their complaint isn't about the presence of those emotions, it's the skill with which they're used. Sure everyone gets jealous sometimes, but jealousy in a narrative should be emblematic of character, not a replacement for it.

The line there can be hazy and razor thin at times, but for sure there is a line.

[Clertar]

Sure it can. Casablanca has a classic well-done love triangle.

[Willie the Duck]

Han-Luke-Leia in the first movie worked well enough.

[Lord Vukodlak]

In Baldur’s Gate 2 you can have a love triangle between
The PC, Aerie and Haer’Dalis.
In sure your thinking so what lots of games have two NPCs competing for the PC.
Well this is different because you are competing with Haer’Dalis over Aerie.

And you can lose the triangle. Most people had no idea this conflict was even possible. Due to timing issues in their recruitment. Once Aerie is in the party if you wait to long to recruit Haer’Dalis the conflict won’t occur.

[LibraryOgre]

I thought the Korra/Boleyn/Asami triangle was quite well done all in all. Each iteration of the dynamic had stakes and emerged organically from the narrative and no given shift was made for stupid or prurient reasons. It did what a good romance (of any geometric shape) should do: provided a platform for revealing and developing character.


I think you mean Mako, or at least Bolin (https://avatar.fandom.com/wiki/Bolin). Boleyn (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Boleyn) would be a very different love triangle.

Part of the problem with most love triangles is that they're not TRIANGLES. They're angles, two lines converging on a point. LoK's triangle was actually a triangle... Korra to Mako to Asami, then Mako to Korra, then Korra to Asami. Three points, three lines. If you don't have the third line, you lose a lot of the drama, because then it boils down to who and why the vertex chooses. The tension is all on the vertex, rather than having it exist between all of the players (the rivals situation between the two lines doesn't count, because that's still pressure on the vertex).

LoK does this by having the tension shift over time, emphasizing different verticies as time goes on. At first, Mako is the vertex. Then the Korra/Mako line gets longer, and the vertex shifts to Korra and her relationship with Asami which is, at this point, not romantic. When Mako tries to return to Asami, the vertex goes to her, and then we have the focus on a strong line between Korra and Asami. Throughout, the length and strength of the lines shift, but there's always the three lines and three points.

[Psyren]

As a polyamorous person, I find almost all of them to be some degree of irritating, because the triangle is usually there as a cheap source of drama or even a Moral Event Horizon that destroys one of the characters if the feelings of jealousy and neglect reach a fever pitch. So for me, the best "triangles" are the ones that end up coalescing/evolving into a nontraditional relationship structure, like Wheel of Time Rand al'thor + Min/Aviendha/Elayne.

Sadly, those are vanishingly few compared to the negatives like Warcraft Jaina / Arthas / Kael'thas, ended with Jaina alone and both male characters going off the deep end, The Witcher Geralt + Yennefer + Triss, where the latter takes advantage of the former's amnesia for her own desires, though my understanding is the games and books approach it slightly differently and Catherine (just, the whole damn game).

Even the ones that are arguably done well, like Harry Potter Snape + Lily + James just feel like wasted potential for me. That was the rare instance of the unrequited love redeeming a character but it was still too late to actually save the love interest.

[Brother Oni]

The Isamu/Myung/Guld love triangle of Macross Plus is used to great effect, especially with the further information on their shared history during their childhood, leading to significantly different interpretations of scenes on a second watch through.

And since Myung's mind is used for the basis of Sharon, Sharon is also in love with both Guld and Isamu, leading her to take over the SDF-1 Macross itself in order to help them fulfil their respective desires.

[Ionathus]

Thanks everyone for your responses!


I'd say Jane the Virgin, but that's kind of cheating, since the whole show is ludicrously (and intentionally, to great effect) telenovela'd up.

I've put that one off several times: should I finally give it a watch?


I thought the Korra/Boleyn/Asami triangle was quite well done all in all. Each iteration of the dynamic had stakes and emerged organically from the narrative and no given shift was made for stupid or prurient reasons. It did what a good romance (of any geometric shape) should do: provided a platform for revealing and developing character.

David, Stevie and Jake on Schitt's Creek
About 40% of the screentime of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. All of it hopelessly regressive in retrospect, of course, but at the time of its release, it was all quite groundbreaking
Viola, Duke Orsino, Lady Olivia, and the pageboy Caesario (who is also Viola) in Twelfth Night (Spoilers for Twelfth Night)

These are good examples and I agree for the most part! Especially the Twelfth Night example...I love how something extra and fun is done with the dynamic with Viola playing two roles, almost a You've Got Mail situation going on (which, depending on your definition, could almost also be a love triangle).

I wasn't particularly taken with any of Legend of Korra's triangles, although the individual relationships were pretty workable on their own. Mako makes some biiiiiig oopsies and the story gives those mistakes a meaningful weight, and even shifts his character arc away from romance, which was very nice to see.


The problems with love triangles are just extreme examples of the problems with all forms of romance in television and film (and, to some degree, tropes of all kinds): the structure all by itself will generate an impact, so that's what people do. It's the writing equivalent of dropping a macro into a spreadsheet, knowing that, while the macro can't do the job as well as you can, it does well enough for the people who asked for the data, and you can move on to other things.

Yeah, this is my main issue with the love triangle: that it's a narrative shorthand and writers very rarely seem to do any extra work beyond that.


A substantial portion of Arthurian legend concerns love triangles and their inevitable, disastrous fallout. Depending on how you choose to interpret Helen, so is the entire Trojan War. I'd consider both good stories.

Also a great example! I have been meaning to read true Arthurian literature for a long time now -- The Fionavar Tapestry counts, right?


Can they be tedious and samey? Sure. So can everything else. Even a slightly competent version of a love triangle however comes with interesting stakes, since it involves multiple people running the very real risk of serious and painful emotional damage and the destruction of existing, valuable relationships. They can also contain a reasonable amount of uncertainty in outcome; which I would note puts them solidly ahead of like 99% of all action scenes ever.

As to them containing people behaving jealously, irrationally, and communicating badly, these are all things people do. Relationships have very high emotional stakes, which creates both an incentive to be dishonest, and powerful feelings that cloud people's judgement. It seems very odd to criticize a story for depicting actual, pretty common, human behavior.


I don't want to speak for the OP, but I think their complaint isn't about the presence of those emotions, it's the skill with which they're used. Sure everyone gets jealous sometimes, but jealousy in a narrative should be emblematic of character, not a replacement for it.

The line there can be hazy and razor thin at times, but for sure there is a line.

Yep, truemane's got it. I have no problem with characters being petty, irrational, jealous, and overwrought - that can make for a great story when it's built up with care and respect for the character's personality. But when love triangles are concerned, it feels like all of that work often gets cheated, and the writer says "she loves two different guys and choosing stuff is super hard, what more do you want from me? Emotional stakes? Grounded characterization? Actual narrative work?"


Sure it can. Casablanca has a classic well-done love triangle.

Another one I've gotta get around to checking out one of these days.


Han-Luke-Leia in the first movie worked well enough.

It's been awhile since I watched the first movie, but as I remember it that relationship felt very playful, and Leia/Luke didn't really have that much substance -- just some lighthearted flirting -- whereas Leia/Han was very fiery and they clearly were invested in each other. But maybe there's something I've forgotten.

[Fyraltari]

Eowyn/Aragorn/Arwen? Then again Arwen is in the book so little, that triangle looks almost like a line. Eowyn's all like "I love you, but you love another, how tragic!" and Aragorn is all "Lady, we've barely met! Ypu're not in love with me, you just want to leave your ****ty situation" and then she's like "Wait, that's true." and she moves on with her life.


Warcraft Jaina / Arthas / Kael'thas, ended with Jaina alone and both male characters going off the deep end,
Does this really count as a love triangle plot? Jaina and Arthas are introduced as former lovers who more or less rekindle their relationship before everything goes to hell in a handbasket. Then Kael'thas backstory has it that he had a crush on JAina way back when, but she never had nay romantic attraction for him. And ultimately this relationship is utterly irrelevant to Kael'thas' story (like once he mentions "other insults" of Arthas's and that's it, while for Arthas and Jaina it's played as a "tragic love" story.

The Witcher Geralt + Yennefer + Triss, where the latter takes advantage of the former's amnesia for her own desires, though my understanding is the games and books approach it slightly differently
I have not played the games, but in the books, Geralt briefly dated Triss for a little while when he and Yennefer where on break-up #27 but they broke up amicably and while it's clear she still carries a torch for him, at the end of the books he and Yen are married in all but name. Also he ded.

[Ionathus]

In Baldur’s Gate 2 you can have a love triangle between
The PC, Aerie and Haer’Dalis.
In sure your thinking so what lots of games have two NPCs competing for the PC.
Well this is different because you are competing with Haer’Dalis over Aerie.

And you can lose the triangle. Most people had no idea this conflict was even possible. Due to timing issues in their recruitment. Once Aerie is in the party if you wait to long to recruit Haer’Dalis the conflict won’t occur.

Fun fact, I've played BG2 off and on for 20 years but have never been daring enough to put Aerie & Haer'Dalis together! Too afraid to lose a party member in the ensuing kerfuffle. But I should give it a try in my next playthrough (cannot in my current one, as a Neutral Evil dwarf woman :smallbiggrin:). I am not a fan of any of the PC-focused triangles, because the writing is just so aggressively catty. It smacks of the stereotypical male gamer fantasy of an elf harem arguing over you. Some peak early-00's misogyny from what I recall.


I think you mean Mako, or at least Bolin (https://avatar.fandom.com/wiki/Bolin). Boleyn (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Boleyn) would be a very different love triangle.

I believe she was part of a love heptagon, yes? With an extremely high mortality rate


Part of the problem with most love triangles is that they're not TRIANGLES. They're angles, two lines converging on a point. LoK's triangle was actually a triangle... Korra to Mako to Asami, then Mako to Korra, then Korra to Asami. Three points, three lines. If you don't have the third line, you lose a lot of the drama, because then it boils down to who and why the vertex chooses. The tension is all on the vertex, rather than having it exist between all of the players (the rivals situation between the two lines doesn't count, because that's still pressure on the vertex).

LoK does this by having the tension shift over time, emphasizing different verticies as time goes on. At first, Mako is the vertex. Then the Korra/Mako line gets longer, and the vertex shifts to Korra and her relationship with Asami which is, at this point, not romantic. When Mako tries to return to Asami, the vertex goes to her, and then we have the focus on a strong line between Korra and Asami. Throughout, the length and strength of the lines shift, but there's always the three lines and three points.

Emphasis mine -- this is all very insightful and helpful for me! I couldn't quite put my finger on the most galling part of a cliche love triangle, but you're exactly right: the pressure focused on the vertex often restricts the opportunity for relationships to be explored between all three. Thank you for pointing this out. And your analysis of Korra's relationships actually make me appreciate the Korra/Asami/Mako triangle quite a bit more.


Even the ones that are arguably done well, like Harry Potter Snape + Lily + James just feel like wasted potential for me. That was the rare instance of the unrequited love redeeming a character but it was still too late to actually save the love interest.

Also a great example! While I don't think the character quite "redeems" themselves in the way that many fans claim, I do think the story is told in a compelling way and the three characters are all definitely connected by competitive romantic desire.

Thinking more about this, I'd also throw in Alexis/Mutt/Ted from Schitt's Creek seasons 1 & 2. Specifically because it fails horribly, and Alexis is such a horrible human about the whole thing (Mutt & Ted don't really come out squeaky clean either). But it works for the show. No spoilers please, I'm currently in season 4:smalleek:

[Peelee]

I've put that one off several times: should I finally give it a watch?

It's a super fun show that I totally recommend. It's the best kind of "turn your brain off" show - you're not turning your brain off because of bad writing or inconsistencies that break down if you think about them at all, but just the amount and level of coincidences that are the stuff of soap operas and telenovelas. And those are only there because it's a send-up of telenovelas and all the coincidences exist because it's entirely parody. Other than that, everything makes sense as they present it and the writing is fairly quick and witty.

From the very beginning, the narrator being a silky and sultry deep latino voice lets you know exactly what kind of show to expect, and it's amazing. I love the narrator so much.

Also, I looked it up right quick, and it's apparently classified as an American telenovela. Which is pretty accurate, even if they didn't put "parody" in there as well. I also haven't really thought about it since i binged through season 1, looks like it's over, I need to get back in and finish it.

[Tvtyrant]

Lot of Hitchcock's movies involve at least one love triangle.

[Lord Vukodlak]

I think you mean Mako, or at least Bolin (https://avatar.fandom.com/wiki/Bolin). Boleyn (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Boleyn) would be a very different love triangle.

Part of the problem with most love triangles is that they're not TRIANGLES. They're angles, two lines converging on a point..
That’s what a love triangle is. Most don’t have equal sides.

[Peelee]

That’s what a love triangle is. Most don’t have equal sides.

A triangle has three lines and three vertices. A likes B, B likes C, C, likes A. Triangle. Each point connects to the two other points.

Bob likes Alice. Cathy likes Alice. Alice has to choose between Bob and Cathy. Three vertices, but only two lines. Only one point connects to two other points. That's not a love triangle, that's a choice.

I agree that they shouldn't be called "love triangles". The geometry is all wrong. It's more like a "love corner".

[Eldan]

Eowyn/Aragorn/Arwen? Then again Arwen is in the book so little, that triangle looks almost like a line. Eowyn's all like "I love you, but you love another, how tragic!" and Aragorn is all "Lady, we've barely met! Ypu're not in love with me, you just want to leave your ****ty situation" and then she's like "Wait, that's true." and she moves on with her life.

Does this really count as a love triangle plot? Jaina and Arthas are introduced as former lovers who more or less rekindle their relationship before everything goes to hell in a handbasket. Then Kael'thas backstory has it that he had a crush on JAina way back when, but she never had nay romantic attraction for him. And ultimately this relationship is utterly irrelevant to Kael'thas' story (like once he mentions "other insults" of Arthas's and that's it, while for Arthas and Jaina it's played as a "tragic love" story.

I have not played the games, but in the books, Geralt briefly dated Triss for a little while when he and Yennefer where on break-up #27 but they broke up amicably and while it's clear she still carries a torch for him, at the end of the books he and Yen are married in all but name. Also he ded.

Witcher game summary:
The witcher games are set after the books, or at least those that were out at the time.

However, Witcher 1 was a weird game. It almost seemed like they didn't want to introduce too many characters from the books, or at least use them much. So Geralt wakes up after seemingly having been killed in a riot, with total amnesia and conveniently doesn't remember most of the other characters from the books. Vesemir and Eskel briefly show up in the tutorial to tell Geralt to use his Witcher skills, then mostly leave the story too. A few other characters Geralt knows show up, like Dandelion, but they mostly keep it as cameos.

Except Triss. She's in Witcher 1 and 2 quite a lot, and honestly if you know the backstory, it's kind of super creepy. You can basically see her think "Oh, Geralt has Amnesia and Yennefer isn't around? JACKPOT!". Then she goes "Oh hey Geralt, it's me, Triss, your one true true love, sure you remember me?", which leads to a passionate relationship in Witcher 2. Because she keeps lying to him.

In Witcher 3, it seems they felt confident enough to bring more book characters back and basically everyone shows up. Ciri, the Aen Elle, and Yennefer. At which point, they turn this into a love triangle.

[Anonymouswizard]

I like the love triangle in Girl Genius. Mainly because as a poly person I like that most of the tension is between 'hinge or triad' rather than 'who will she choose'.

What, you say that Gil and Tarvek are both trying to get into an exclusively relationship with Agatha? Poppycock I say, they are clearly two drinks away from winding up in the same bed! Even if you're not a Gil/Tarvek shipper though it seems clear that Agatha doesn't want to choose and does want a relationship with both.

Plus the series balances it with the amazingly mature Zeetha/Higgs pairing.

[Rakaydos]

Beastars: Legosi/Louis/Haru/Juno?

[Lord Vukodlak]

A triangle has three lines and three vertices. A likes B, B likes C, C, likes A. Triangle. Each point connects to the two other points.

Bob likes Alice. Cathy likes Alice. Alice has to choose between Bob and Cathy. Three vertices, but only two lines. Only one point connects to two other points. That's not a love triangle, that's a choice.

I agree that they shouldn't be called "love triangles". The geometry is all wrong. It's more like a "love corner".

Look you might not agree with the definition but it’s the definition.
What you describe could be called the love wheel. Which can be made more complicated by adding more people and spokes crating triangles within the wheel.

[Scarlet Knight]

...
It tries to create tension, but I'm always just frustrated at the characters' wishy-washy behavior or terrible communication skills. It tries to create pathos but I feel so manipulated by the setup that it pulls me out of the world instead of sucking me in. It tries to create an interesting story, but every love triangle feels like the same thing -- jealousy, conflicted feelings, comparing the two suitors, intelligent people all acting irrationally for no reason, overwrought declarations of love, and a pointless ultimatum. None of it is new or interesting, so love triangles become this quagmire that can suck in and kill off an otherwise interesting, unique fictional relationship...

Jealousy and conflicted feelings are the reason you bother to write a love triangle, for the tension. If they are intelligent people, they will compare the suitors. Acting irrationally and overwrought? It is love; how do you expect them to behave? Pointless ultimatum? There are plenty of romance novels where the sad, broken hearted spouse puts up with a cheater because they hope the cheater will come to his senses.

Love triangles usually are not there to improve the story; the triangle usually is the story...or at least the motivation. Helen, Paris, & Menelaus, Venus, Mars, and Vulcan, Zeus, Europa, and Hera.
It sounds like you would like "The Harem of Aman Akbar" where his wives band together to save the title character.

As for me, I performed in a local production of Verdi's Aida a few years ago. That contains one of my favorite love triangles.

The director told us at the beginning: "Remember, there are no bad guys in this opera."

[Peelee]

Look you might not agree with the definition but it’s the definition.

Never said it wasn't. I even shortish it was when I said "it shouldn't be".

[Ionathus]

Jealousy and conflicted feelings are the reason you bother to write a love triangle, for the tension. If they are intelligent people, they will compare the suitors. Acting irrationally and overwrought? It is love; how do you expect them to behave? Pointless ultimatum? There are plenty of romance novels where the sad, broken hearted spouse puts up with a cheater because they hope the cheater will come to his senses.

As I said to warty goblin earlier in the thread, my gripe is not that these emotions are bad or unrealistic -- it's that they are always the exact same. As soon as I see a cliche love triangle, I know how the three involved characters are going to behave. The jealousy never makes their dynamics more interesting, it turns them into simplified caricatures. The contrived plot points required to keep the average triangle shambling along can only work if the characters (who may have previously been intelligent, empathetic people) are suddenly reduced to making asinine, petty, even out-of-character decisions. It takes an interesting dynamic and jams it into a mold, trimming away much of what interested me in the process.

As for the "it's love, what are you gonna do?" argument, I call BS. It is possible to write a romantic story that treats your characters with narrative respect. It is possible to write a love story (comedic, tragic, or something in between) in which the irrationality of love flows naturally from who the lovers already were as individual people. Characters acting foolishly I can accept, because often the writer has shown us their various flaws and foibles and the mistake makes sense in that context. But with love triangles, the author so often seems to just cram them into the roles of a love triangle and go "easy pathos, Character A has to choose, I don't need to make this any more unique."

Tropes are not bad. But I think it's disproportionately easy to misuse this one.

[Psyren]

As I said to warty goblin earlier in the thread, my gripe is not that these emotions are bad or unrealistic -- it's that they are always the exact same. As soon as I see a cliche love triangle, I know how the three involved characters are going to behave. The jealousy never makes their dynamics more interesting, it turns them into simplified caricatures. The contrived plot points required to keep the average triangle shambling along can only work if the characters (who may have previously been intelligent, empathetic people) are suddenly reduced to making asinine, petty, even out-of-character decisions. It takes an interesting dynamic and jams it into a mold, trimming away much of what interested me in the process.

As for the "it's love, what are you gonna do?" argument, I call BS. It is possible to write a romantic story that treats your characters with narrative respect. It is possible to write a love story (comedic, tragic, or something in between) in which the irrationality of love flows naturally from who the lovers already were as individual people. Characters acting foolishly I can accept, because often the writer has shown us their various flaws and foibles and the mistake makes sense in that context. But with love triangles, the author so often seems to just cram them into the roles of a love triangle and go "easy pathos, Character A has to choose, I don't need to make this any more unique."

Tropes are not bad. But I think it's disproportionately easy to misuse this one.

Very elegantly stated.


Witcher game summary:
The witcher games are set after the books, or at least those that were out at the time.

However, Witcher 1 was a weird game. It almost seemed like they didn't want to introduce too many characters from the books, or at least use them much. So Geralt wakes up after seemingly having been killed in a riot, with total amnesia and conveniently doesn't remember most of the other characters from the books. Vesemir and Eskel briefly show up in the tutorial to tell Geralt to use his Witcher skills, then mostly leave the story too. A few other characters Geralt knows show up, like Dandelion, but they mostly keep it as cameos.

Except Triss. She's in Witcher 1 and 2 quite a lot, and honestly if you know the backstory, it's kind of super creepy. You can basically see her think "Oh, Geralt has Amnesia and Yennefer isn't around? JACKPOT!". Then she goes "Oh hey Geralt, it's me, Triss, your one true true love, sure you remember me?", which leads to a passionate relationship in Witcher 2. Because she keeps lying to him.

In Witcher 3, it seems they felt confident enough to bring more book characters back and basically everyone shows up. Ciri, the Aen Elle, and Yennefer. At which point, they turn this into a love triangle.


Ugh. So much cringe. Thank you for the synopsis though, I do appreciate it.


Beastars: Legosi/Louis/Haru/Juno?

Another annoying one with an easy resolution (Either just form a polycule, or commit definitively to Legosi+Haru / Louis+Juno) but then the series would be a third its length and already wrapping up. Not to mention the massive dollop of queerbaiting (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queerbaiting) between the male leads to boot :smallsigh:

[Tvtyrant]

One if the fundamental issues with love triangles in my opinion is they get dragged out. They are really common in real life but usually resolve themselves quickly or are in the deep back burner, like "waiting for a relationship to dissolve and everyone knows it" scenarios.

[GloatingSwine]

Another annoying one with an easy resolution (Either just form a polycule, or commit definitively to Legosi+Haru / Louis+Juno) but then the series would be a third its length and already wrapping up. Not to mention the massive dollop of queerbaiting (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queerbaiting) between the male leads to boot :smallsigh:

That would require Legoshi to get his **** together. And spoilers Legoshi will never get his **** together.

[2D8HP]

For films:

1942’s Casablanca

1945’s Brief Encounter

1946’s The Best Years of Our Lives

Notorious

and The Strange Love of Martha Ivers

1950’s Night and the City

1958’s Vertigo

1965’s Doctor Zhivago

1998’s Rushmore

2016’s Twentieth Century Women

2021’s The French Dispatch

all featured love triangles of one sort or another and were all excellent

[Azuresun]

Yep, truemane's got it. I have no problem with characters being petty, irrational, jealous, and overwrought - that can make for a great story when it's built up with care and respect for the character's personality. But when love triangles are concerned, it feels like all of that work often gets cheated, and the writer says "she loves two different guys and choosing stuff is super hard, what more do you want from me? Emotional stakes? Grounded characterization? Actual narrative work?"

The thing that really annoys me about a typical love triangle is that most of the time, there's not even a choice at the end from the focal character that might risk angering the shippers. One of the competitors conveniently dies, abruptly realises they're in love with someone else, or suddenly turns out to be a jerk, no choice necessary.

[warty goblin]

These are good examples and I agree for the most part! Especially the Twelfth Night example...I love how something extra and fun is done with the dynamic with Viola playing two roles, almost a You've Got Mail situation going on (which, depending on your definition, could almost also be a love triangle).

There's also the evolving chaos of A Midsummer Night's Dream, if you're feeling Shakespearean.


Also a great example! I have been meaning to read true Arthurian literature for a long time now -- The Fionavar Tapestry counts, right?

The great thing about Arthuriana is that it's a giant living tradition devoid of actual canon, so sure.



Yep, truemane's got it. I have no problem with characters being petty, irrational, jealous, and overwrought - that can make for a great story when it's built up with care and respect for the character's personality. But when love triangles are concerned, it feels like all of that work often gets cheated, and the writer says "she loves two different guys and choosing stuff is super hard, what more do you want from me? Emotional stakes? Grounded characterization? Actual narrative work?"


That seems mostly like a complaint with super trope driven work, the sort of novel where the point of the story is that it executes certain tropes in a predictable and reliable fashion because that's what the audience wants. I think most genres have this sort of 'genre service' writing, but both romance and YA (and definitely YA romance) are extremely prone to it. I finally reached a point a number of years ago where I decided that I was just going to stop reading YA by and large, and as a policy I think it's served me very well. At some point the solution to unenjoyable writing is to just stop reading things that are highly likely to be unenjoyable; also based on this strategy I've been not reading Brandon Sanderson for a decade now and I'm pleased to report it's kept my life 99.5% free of his unbearably tepid prose.

[Dienekes]

I would probably say, the act of one person having the oh so terrible situation of having two potential suitors has never been interesting.

However, the fall out from that situation can be. All of Robert’s Rebellion and therefore all of A Song of Ice and Fire, the fall of Camelot, Odysseus getting ganked by a long forgotten son, Theseus abandoning Ariadne, the jealous fueled murder of Herakles. That stuff can be quite fun and good drama.

[tiornys]

As a polyamorous person, I find almost all of them to be some degree of irritating, because the triangle is usually there as a cheap source of drama or even a Moral Event Horizon that destroys one of the characters if the feelings of jealousy and neglect reach a fever pitch. So for me, the best "triangles" are the ones that end up coalescing/evolving into a nontraditional relationship structure, like Wheel of Time
If you're interested, there's a pretty good trio in Knight of Ghosts and Shadows by Mercedes Lackey.
Unfortunately that's the only one I've come up with outside of Wheel of Time, at least in terms of prominent relationships. There's pretty good poly representation in the setting of The Murderbot Diaries (Martha Wells), where the existence of such relationships is just part of standard society. However, as the viewpoint character isn't much interested in romantic relationships aside from noting their existence, those relationships mostly just exist in the background.

[Rakaydos]

Having recently discovered that 2 books have come out in the decade + since I last read them, I've started rereading the Sholan Alliance (https://www.amazon.com/Sholan-Alliance-3-Book-Series/dp/B01MXHKVKU) novels, and triangles and polycules start being major plot points starting in book 2 and growing in significance (and number- each one a separate triangle) as the series goes on. There is also telepaths involved, limiting the ability to let resentment fester without being addressed. Also catfolk aliens. Mostly catfolk aliens, some humans.

[Glorthindel]

I'll toss Final Fantasy 7 out there; generally it works because none of the participants are being entirely honest with the others (or more precisely, with themselves). I am intrigued to see where the Remake takes it, since the first part has made it clear they are happy to diverge from the original plot, but the core arcs of the relationships seem to be following the same paths.

[Scarlet Knight]

I like the love triangle in Girl Genius. Mainly because as a poly person I like that most of the tension is between 'hinge or triad' rather than 'who will she choose'...

When people refer to "The Love Triangle" in Girl Genius, they often mean Agatha-Gil-Tarvek.

But honestly, there are so many it's hard to keep up. Which are badly written in most people's opinion?

Agatha-Gil- Tarvek.
Agatha- Gil-Miss Thorpe
Miss Thorpe - Wooster- Rakethorn
Miss Thorpe - Wooster- Lesbian Pirates
Lucy- Klaus- Bill
Aldin-Larana-Jiminez
Violetta - Snaug - Moloch
Moloch- Snaug- Sanaa

[Ionathus]

There's also the evolving chaos of A Midsummer Night's Dream, if you're feeling Shakespearean.

That's my secret, Cap: I'm always feeling Shakespearean :smallcool:

[Manga Shoggoth]

Aldin-Larana-Jiminez

That one wasn't a love triangle - Aldin and Larana were working together and Jiminez just misunderstood. You'd be closer with Larana-Jiminez-Colette (except Colette isn't interested in Jiminez)


Violetta - Snaug - Moloch
Moloch- Snaug- Sanaa

These aren't love triangles. They are disasters waiting to happen - I mean, what with Ms Baumhund (https://www.girlgeniusonline.com/comic.php?date=20180418), Moloch seems to be moving out of triangle terratory into the platonic solids. At least, I suspect he'd prefer if they were platonic...

[Anonymouswizard]

Yeah, Moloch is in less of a love triangle and more of a Murderous Castle Harem Comedy.

[Fyraltari]

That one wasn't a love triangle - Aldin and Larana were working together and Jiminez just misunderstood. You'd be closer with Larana-Jiminez-Colette (except Colette isn't interested in Jiminez)



These aren't love triangles. They are disasters waiting to happen - I mean, what with Ms Baumhund (https://www.girlgeniusonline.com/comic.php?date=20180418), Moloch seems to be moving out of triangle terratory into the platonic solids. At least, I suspect he'd prefer if they were platonic...

Hey, if Agatha can get a "marry them all*" ending, why couldn't Moloch?

*Except poor Lars of course.

[LibraryOgre]

Unfortunately that's the only one I've come up with outside of Wheel of Time, at least in terms of prominent relationships. There's pretty good poly representation in the setting of The Murderbot Diaries (Martha Wells), where the existence of such relationships is just part of standard society. However, as the viewpoint character isn't much interested in romantic relationships aside from noting their existence, those relationships mostly just exist in the background.

I'm not going to spoiler this, partially because it's broad, and partially because the book is old enough to drink in the United States.

I'd say the Kushiel series largely qualifies. The central relationship is between Phedre no Delaunay and her consort, Joscelin Verreuil. Joscelin is a former monk of the Cassiline Brotherhood, while Phedre is a working courtesan (though, by the end of the first book, she's also a hero of the Realm and very, very, expensive).

They have a developed relationship, where Joscelin is pretty much celibate-except-for-Phedre, and she has several relationships, plus her assignations... it's less a love triangle than a love n-ellogram. :smallbiggrin: It shows Joscelin's varying responses to her various relationships; he's largely accepting of some of them, he's more neutral on others, and he absolutely hates one of them (she's got a connection with Melisande Shahrizai, who kinda betrayed the kingdom then tried to have them killed).

[Scarlet Knight]

I'm not going to spoiler this, partially because it's broad, and partially because the book is old enough to drink in the United States.

I'd say the Kushiel series largely qualifies. The central relationship is between Phedre no Delaunay and her consort, Joscelin Verreuil. Joscelin is a former monk of the Cassiline Brotherhood, while Phedre is a working courtesan (though, by the end of the first book, she's also a hero of the Realm and very, very, expensive).

They have a developed relationship, where Joscelin is pretty much celibate-except-for-Phedre, and she has several relationships, plus her assignations... it's less a love triangle than a love n-ellogram. :smallbiggrin: It shows Joscelin's varying responses to her various relationships; he's largely accepting of some of them, he's more neutral on others, and he absolutely hates one of them (she's got a connection with Melisande Shahrizai, who kinda betrayed the kingdom then tried to have them killed).

"Never fall in love with a woman who sells herself. It always ends bad!” - The Unconscious Argentinean

[Mechalich]

I would probably say, the act of one person having the oh so terrible situation of having two potential suitors has never been interesting.

However, the fall out from that situation can be. All of Robert’s Rebellion and therefore all of A Song of Ice and Fire, the fall of Camelot, Odysseus getting ganked by a long forgotten son, Theseus abandoning Ariadne, the jealous fueled murder of Herakles. That stuff can be quite fun and good drama.

The drama of the 'love triangle' has always been in the consequences of the choice. This is also why love triangles are far more prominent when dealing with female leads, because historically the consequences of a male - especially a male in any kind of an elite position - having multiple wives/concubines/lovers have been much lower ranging from zero in openly polygynous societies (historically the majority), to modest as long as the issue isn't shoved in the face of the religious authorities (the ones people in the Anglosphere are most familiar with). The consequences for women, by contrast, have been much, much higher, ranging from ostracism to death.

Therefore, traditionally, a woman in love with multiple men must choose one or face destruction, which attaches all kinds of drama to that choice. Many of the failures of modern love triangles is that the authors base them off traditional examples - especially 18th and 19th century writers prominent in the English canon - but they place them in a modern context where the consequences have been largely eliminated.

[Peelee]

I'd say the Kushiel series largely qualifies. The central relationship is between Phedre no Delaunay

OK, now you're just making up words.

[LibraryOgre]

I'd say the Kushiel series largely qualifies. The central relationship is between Phedre no Delaunay and her consort, Joscelin Verreuil. Joscelin is a former monk of the Cassiline Brotherhood, while Phedre is a working courtesan (though, by the end of the first book, she's also a hero of the Realm and very, very, expensive).



OK, now you're just making up words.

Seriously, man. One of the core ideas of the world is that, more or less, there's an entire nation of aasimar where France is in our world. It goes HEAVILY into BDSM.

[The Glyphstone]

And thats about as far as we can probably safely discuss it here, sadly...

[Ramza00]

Yes I answer in Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick-ian. Yes Desire Triangles exist, and can improve the story.

Remember though the desire triangle is not literally just about romance but is often work on a second layer, like a man or woman has two drives inside of them and like all humans are full of contradictory drives. Or Human vs X such as the famous 6 or so levels of conflict (there are more than these 6)

Human vs. Self, Human vs. Human, Human vs. Society, Human vs. Nature, Human vs. Technology, and Human vs. Fate (or the Supernatural.)

————

Hegel the philosophy Walmart guy that everyone borrows from loved his contradictions. His big starting point is that man is full of at least two contradictions, the animal part of our brain thinks in necessity, and the human part of our brain is capable of Will / Choice (aka free will has the ability to resist necessity), the tension between these two then drive other things. Desire is not that much different of a thing, it is the tension of multiple things held simultaneously, and thus we get our desire triangles.

This is why all the famous love triangle stories that are often considered good is not a simple story of one human desiring two different humans, no it always operates at multiple levels. Take for example A Tale of Two Cities, Wuthering Heights, of James Bond Tomorrow Never Dies, all of these stories it is not just about the romance but another layer of those 6 Humans I pointed out earlier.

Or put another way, invoking the same example someone pointed out earlier.


I would probably say, the act of one person having the oh so terrible situation of having two potential suitors has never been interesting.

However, the fall out from that situation can be. All of Robert’s Rebellion and therefore all of A Song of Ice and Fire, the fall of Camelot, Odysseus getting ganked by a long forgotten son, Theseus abandoning Ariadne, the jealous fueled murder of Herakles. That stuff can be quite fun and good drama.

In A Song of Ice and Fire (tv it was called Game of Thrones) we got a constant theme of Love vs Duty, aka two simultaneously Drives, two desires, and how dozens of characters were put into tensions when they had to make choices of which desire they considered more important. Did the Hound return to his youthful idealism, or his youthful fear now that he is a powerful man with a burned face? Is Arya a noblewoman or a water dancer who chases cats? So on and so on.

With Ned aka Eddard Stark he must choose his family in the North or his love for his man crush Robert Baratheon, a character who was his best friend and literally in the first two hundrend pages Robert said why don’t we run away together and be happy, away from our women, away from our responsibilities, let’s be free. The conflict of the first novel is Ned feeling compelled to go to King’s Landing and be Robert’s plaything for he fears the jealousy and envy from his boyhood friend from which they loved. Now that the surrogate father figure Jon Arryn is dead these two best friends can be together again, or can they? Can Ned / Eddard let the king down gently when he is man full of almost infinite desires, who is so hungry to fight his other fears, can you say no to a fantastical Henry the VIII?

That is the romance triangle driving the inciting incidents of a very large book series unlikely to ever be finished :smallsmile::smalltongue:

[warty goblin]

Seriously, man. One of the core ideas of the world is that, more or less, there's an entire nation of aasimar where France is in our world. It goes HEAVILY into BDSM.

This description is like 300% more engaging than the actual book.

[LibraryOgre]

This description is like 300% more engaging than the actual book.

It's also a lot less progressive than you would think. I wrote a tumblr essay on how the society remains pretty heteronormative and patriarchal, despite having a lot of queer women and being sex-worker positive.

[warty goblin]

It's also a lot less progressive than you would think. I wrote a tumblr essay on how the society remains pretty heteronormative and patriarchal, despite having a lot of queer women and being sex-worker positive.

Mostly I remember being bored. I think the book really suffered from Carrey trying for a very lush, pseudo-Gothic prose style, and not really being able to pull it off. Instead I remember her crash landing somewhere around stodgy purple prose, and not even the fun kind of purple. Still better than Banewreaker, the other Carrey novel I read. That felt like somebody had a bad breakup in the middle of reading the Silmarollion, drank a few too many bottles of cheap red wine, and got Morgoth mixed up with their horny anime OC who is totally not Sephiroth. And then wrote a novel about it.

[Manga Shoggoth]

If anyone is interested, Overly Sarcastic Productions just covered the subject: Trope Talk: Love Triangles (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZylCbao4wA)

[Psyren]

If anyone is interested, Overly Sarcastic Productions just covered the subject: Trope Talk: Love Triangles (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZylCbao4wA)

I love this channel and came here to post this :smallsmile:

[Fyraltari]

Who better than a proud ace to be objective on the subject?

[Aedilred]

Witcher game summary:
The witcher games are set after the books, or at least those that were out at the time.

However, Witcher 1 was a weird game. It almost seemed like they didn't want to introduce too many characters from the books, or at least use them much. So Geralt wakes up after seemingly having been killed in a riot, with total amnesia and conveniently doesn't remember most of the other characters from the books. Vesemir and Eskel briefly show up in the tutorial to tell Geralt to use his Witcher skills, then mostly leave the story too. A few other characters Geralt knows show up, like Dandelion, but they mostly keep it as cameos.

Except Triss. She's in Witcher 1 and 2 quite a lot, and honestly if you know the backstory, it's kind of super creepy. You can basically see her think "Oh, Geralt has Amnesia and Yennefer isn't around? JACKPOT!". Then she goes "Oh hey Geralt, it's me, Triss, your one true true love, sure you remember me?", which leads to a passionate relationship in Witcher 2. Because she keeps lying to him.

In Witcher 3, it seems they felt confident enough to bring more book characters back and basically everyone shows up. Ciri, the Aen Elle, and Yennefer. At which point, they turn this into a love triangle.

There is, however, a twist at the end (depending on player choices) which almost makes it all worthwhile:
In Witcher 3, you have the option to pursue a romance with Triss or Yennefer, or both. For most of the game, you're dealing with each of them separately, but eventually they do meet. If you choose both, and take it far enough with each of them, then eventually they invite Geralt to a threesome, tie him to the bed... and then tell him he's a scumbag who doesn't deserve either of them and leave.

For some reason though they're only bothered by each other, and Geralt is free to bang anyone else in the game without it altering their opinions of him. The game's handling of "romance" isn't exactly great.

[Eurus]

If anyone is interested, Overly Sarcastic Productions just covered the subject: Trope Talk: Love Triangles (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZylCbao4wA)

That video was a pretty great summary! I thought it was really interesting how she broke down the potential narrative benefits of "mock triangles" since I'd been inclined, like some others in this thread, to view them pretty negatively. Just because they're often used badly doesn't mean they're inherently bad...