CONVERSATION: Fake Dating and Marriage of Convenience
Book Reviews / Conversationsarranged-marriage / believability / fake relationship / forced proximity / high stakes / marriage-of-convenience / maturity / motive / tropes23 Comments
Janine: In our April open thread I lamented the omnipresence of fake relationships in contemporary romances so this seems like a good time to have a conversation about the trope. I’ve sometimes seen it discussed along with the marriage of convenience trope (readers compare them or group them under the same umbrella) so I want to discuss the two tropes together.
Here are my questions to start us off:
Are these tropes you like a lot? Why or why not? How would you compare / contrast the two tropes? What are your favorite and least favorite aspects of them?
Kaetrin: Fake relationship is one of my favourite tropes.
Jennie: I think my first reaction is that I like marriage of convenience plots and don’t like fake dating plots. But that’s just sort of my knee-jerk reaction. I would say it’s because I associate MoC with: historical romance, angst, and a slow buildup to love and desire, which are all things I have traditionally liked in a romance. Whereas I associate fake dating plots with, “my sister is marrying my ex-fiance and I need my hot neighbor to pretend to be my boyfriend for the wedding.” I know that’s oddly specific, but it’s what comes to mind, and on the surface it’s just not my thing. These books (in my mind) tend to be contemporaries, zany, light, and full of misunderstandings (but not in the angst way I love!).
Janine: My first response is somewhat like yours, Jennie. Any trope can be made to work and I have loved and disliked books that fall into both categories, but as a general rule I am much fonder of the marriage of convenience trope than of the fake relationship. It’s one of my top three tropes.
For one thing, marriages of convenience actually existed in the past and in many cultures they still exist. I have never known or heard of anyone, either today or in past centuries, who pretended to be in a relationship with someone and was not. I’m sure they existed, but even then, I think most were not of these fake relationships weren’t romantic. They are more likely to have been friendship situations where one or both parties were queer and closeted because of society’s intolerance for queer relationships, but wanted to present themselves as part of a couple.
Sirius: I think I agree with Jennie. Marriage of convenience plots work for me when well executed (like any trope really), fake relationships more often than not do not and I will not seek out fake relationship storyline usually.
I agree that I also associate the marriage of convenience with historical romance, but more often than not, I can just believe in it easier, because marriages of convenience actually happened in many countries in the past and do happen now. Does it make sense? I am not exactly talking about *realism* in romance, I just have an easier time swallowing it and fake relationship to me, is just well, fake. I just have more trouble imagining two people pretend to date, so the superficial set up makes it harder for me to believe in romance.
Layla: I love marriage of convenience in romance, especially historicals. Fake relationships in contemporaries work well also. I think it’s one of the strongest ways to ‘introduce’ or get two totally different people into a relationship that might not otherwise be together. I like how it allows for forced intimacy and ‘dating’ or getting to know each other.
One caveat is–while I adore marriages of convenience in historicals, in real life I dislike the practice. My mom had an arranged marriage and it was horrible and devastating–and I know many many Arab women that suffered through this practice too. Of course, for every unhappy marriage of convenience, there are stories of happy successful ones.
However, I don’t read historical romances for unhappy marriages. I love how women authors sensitively and carefully craft stories where women, while disempowered, find strength and courage and often love too and some measure of power. I find that deeply romantic.
Kaetrin: I love this trope. For me, the fake relationship is the modern version of the MOC. Depending on the setting it can be a much harder sell an MOC in a contemporary setting.
I tend to lump both MOC, arrange marriages and fake dating into the same general trope and what I like about them is that the couple are forced to spend a lot of time together and they’re forced to cooperate – either to make the relationship work (MOC/arranged marriage) or to make the relationship look real (fake dating) which circles back to them spending time together. Lots of the MCs on page is what I’m looking for in romance and this trope generally gives me exactly that.
Janine: Marriage of convenience romances have higher stakes, I feel. These two people married as strangers and are now tied together. They live together and plan to raise children together. Who is this person I married? What did I get myself into? Since the books are often set in times when divorce was unthinkable for most people, the stakes don’t get much higher than that. I love that they are already committed when they have to figure this person out. I don’t find that in fake relationship romances so I don’t agree that the tropes are similar.
Kaetrin: MOC is higher stakes I agree, particularly in historicals where there’s no easy way out if things don’t work.
Janine: A fake relationship *could* have high stakes, but often it’s treated as a fluffy and lighthearted thing. In my experience, the people that the couple lied to rarely find out they were deceived (often it isn’t even treated as a risk), and not a lot is hanging on pulling off the deception, either. So I’m less invested in turning the pages to find out what happens next.
A fake relationship can also strike me as immature behavior for adults (and therefore works better for me in YA novels). The familiar setup Jennie mentioned where they get someone to pose as their boyfriend to show up at the wedding where they don’t want to appear alone makes me think of junior high school. Mature adults don’t usually care so much about other people’s opinion that they will go that far. It’s also reprehensible to lie to so many loved ones (parents, relatives, friends). But of course, if the motive is strong enough, this trope can be made to work for me even in adult romances.
Jennie: I also can handle a plot that seems sillier, like fake dating, better when the characters are younger and less mature. Whereas adults engaging in the same behaviors feels unrealistic and also makes the characters less appealing.
Ideally, in fake dating contemporaries, the conceit allows the h/h to become friends before making the fake relationship a real one. I really do enjoy friends-to-lovers when it’s done well, particularly when you get to watch the protagonists slowly come to see each other in another light.
Janine: In contrast to fake dating, a marriage of convenience is often presented as a responsible and honorable choice in historicals, made to aid one’s family members or to save an estate or childhood home, and thus the jobs of the people who work there. It often comes across as mature—the protagonists putting other people’s needs ahead of their own.
Jayne: I can generally tolerate a MOC for protection or honor. I don’t care for revenge ones as it’s getting harder for me to excuse the one seeking revenge. I dislike MOC books with (generally) an older family member putting pressure on someone to marry – often for business or inheritance purposes. I don’t seek out MOC books but if I like the sound of the rest of the plot, an MOC won’t stop me from reading it.
Sirius: I think that marriage of convenience works for me best when it accompanies an enemies to lovers storyline. I am not really interested in two people who don’t dislike each other getting married for whatever needs (political etc.). It is usually boring to me.
Kaetrin: There are many tropes I love but MOC/fake dating are definitely near the top of the list for me. The ones which don’t work for me are not generally because of the trope but because I dislike the writing or the characters or some other aspect of the story.
What do you think, readers? Do you like the marriage of convenience and fake dating tropes? Is there one of the two you’re more drawn to? How would you compare and contrast them?
(Check back in a few days to see our recommendations for fake relationship and marriage of convenience romances.)
Hmm. I don’t seek out either of these tropes, but neither would I dismiss out of hand a book that that contains one. (Naturally I can’t think of examples, but) I’ve read and enjoyed both. My major concern with the fake dating trope is the lack of honesty which is almost always discovered and the fact that I dislike books (movies, television shows) that give me a feeling of impending doom.
The MOC has been my favorite trope since I first started reading romance decades ago. I like it in both HR and CR. A recent one I enjoyed was Homecoming King by Penny Reid.
The more recent fake dating works sometimes but I think the abundance of it’s use in CR has ruined it for me. Finding a truly special one seems impossible. Of course, I say that and then remember I just read one, The Bodyguard by Katherine Center hit all the right notes for a fairytale romance. It was a delight.
I can’t wait for y’all’s list!
I don’t mind MOC or fake dating, but don’t seek out either. I agree that MOC is more realistic, but I expect the relationship to unfold over a longer time in such novels.
Mary Balogh’s Slightly Married is a really well-done MOC, and I think A Summer to Remember can be seen as fake dating. It’s been years since I read it, but I’m pretty sure I liked it at the time.
There is way too much fake dating in contemporary romance. Seriously, just go to the wedding without a date! It’s allowed! A recent one that did work for me is Against the Wall by Cate C. Wells (which Janine did not like, sadly) – but it’s pretty clear that it’s one-sided fake dating and Cash is totally into Glenna.
I agree with a lot of what has been mentioned here.
I don’t dislike either of these tropes but don’t actively seek them out either. Of the two, I think I like MOC more.
I do think fake dating in contemps feels like they’ve gotten more pervasive along with the rise of the rom-com-like marketing of the newish illustrated book covers. That may not necessarily be factually correct, but it feels like it.
I also agree that MOC in historicals work better than in contemps because it can be hard to believe that a loveless marriage is the only thing that can solve whatever problem that arises that any other modern day solution that can’t. I will say I did a trawl through some of my books and one modern day MOC I did like the set up for was Susan Elizabeth Phillips’ KISS AN ANGEL where the heroine was being threatened with jail/cut off of money or marry. But then I think most of my enjoyment of that book was the circus setting. One of my all time favorite hist rom books, MORNING GLORY by LaVyrle Spencer is a MOC. The sheer pragmatism of the two lonely people who marry to help each other ends up being so poignant and romantic.
As far as fake dating, it is funny that Jennie’s prime example right off the bat was the ‘need a hot guy to go to a wedding with’ was the very first example that popped in my head when I saw the trope. Most of the time if I am reading one, I just go with it but it can become predictable. I think fake dating works best for me if the reason is to help build the heroine’s (usually it is the heroine) self esteem after a humiliating or terrible break up. Like a way to stick it to an awful ex. SLEEPOVER by Serena Bell was a good use of it, imo. The heroine’s ex is 100% terrible and her hot neighbor coming to her rescue to be her date to her ex’s awful wedding was satisfying. But that book had other stuff going on too so it didn’t hang solely on the fake dating. I will say I did like the set-up reason for the fake dating in The UNHONEYMOONERS by Christina Lauren. They had to pretend to take advantage of the free Hawaiian trip. I could really get behind that as a reason to fake date. That book, of course, hit the trope trifecta with not only fake dating but enemies to lovers and forced proximity.
@TinaNoir: This is my sense too! I also don’t know if it stands up to a serious data analysis (which is making me giggle) but it sure does feel like the two are connected. Fake dating is definitely a rom-com type trope.
This is interesting. I agree with a lot already said.
I don’t tend to seek out tropes when I’m choosing a romance, but I find that both MOC and fake dating can give me the type of romance that I like best – where the main couple not only falls in love but figures out together how to make their relationship work. I also like it when they help each other come to terms with their families and/or past, and both MOC and fake dating tend to involve their families.
I don’t mind fake dating as a trope – if it’s done well, I can really enjoy it. I think it usually works better for me if the author is obviously playing with tropes or it’s an homage to rom-com movies or something like that. I think Boyfriend Material by Alexis Hall falls into that category for me. As well as D’Vaughn and Kris Plan a Wedding by Chencia C. Higgins (f/f fake dating for a reality tv show). (and both of these are contempories with illustrated covers)
To my mind, the MOC trope is simply part of the broader fake relationship trope; and I think of the fake relationship trope as being an umbrella for several sub-tropes:
1. The “regular” fake relationship: MCs enter a fake relationship (including marriage-of-convenience) for reasons. During the course of their fakery, they fall for each other.
2. The fake relationship where one of the MCs has been secretly pining for the other for a long time. It differs from the regular fake relationship trope because the MCs’ feelings start out as unequal…and it takes most of the story for the other MC to catch up feelings-wise.
3. The fake relationship where one MC (almost always the heroine) enters into a fake relationship for reasons, but then finds herself attracted to another man (sometimes, but not always, the fake boyfriend’s brother or friend) but, because of the fake relationship, can’t tell the object of her affections that she’s not in a real relationship. BEARD by Molly Joseph and ACTING LESSONS by Katie Allen (aka, Katie Ruggle) are examples of this. I think a couple of Jana Aston’s books might also fit this bill.
4. The fake relationship where only one MC is actually aware that the relationship is fake—usually because there’s a business arrangement at stake—and the other MC (almost always the heroine) believes she’s involved in a love match. In the course of the fake relationship, the “uninvolved” MC starts to have feelings for their partner. Naturally, the fakery is exposed, and the loving MC is devastated, requiring a massive grovel from the MC who entered into the relationship in bad faith. This sub-trope is a fixture of the Harlequin Presents universe, but I think the best example is the uber-angsty THE UNWANTED WIFE by Natasha Anders.
@Kareni: Yeah, I end up getting anxious waiting for the other shoe to drop when the characters or one of the characters has a secret. So I relate to that aspect of not loving fake dating.
(I think some said it better in the actual discussion, but I’m just sort of twigging how different MoC and fake dating stories are in that sense – while it makes sense to lump them together, most often real MoC don’t necessarily involve deception, whereas fake dating stories by definition do. Hmm.)
@DiscoDollyDeb – I think one of common reasons for the regular fake relationship is meddling matchmakers. Maybe a matchmaking elder required the h/h to get married in their will or the h/h decide to fake a relationship to thwart matchmakers or whatnot.
One version of the fake-dating (or fake-married) trope that I love is SPIES. Undercover married! Pining! Assuming the other person is only flirting because of the job! It’s so good for slow-burn. I find it more often in fanfiction than in romance novels, though (possibly because most of them would be thrillers; what I like about the fanfiction is that the spying is secondary to the Feelings).
@Kareni: Hmm interesting that you feel the lie is almost always discovered in books with fake relationships. Kaetrin said something like that. My experience has been very different from that–usually I see them in contemporary romantic comedies and then it’s very light, “be my date to the wedding” or whatever, and it’s a lighthearted, fun (in the best cases) book, with nothing too confrontational in it.
@Jenreads: The MOC is one of my all-time favorite tropes too. The only other one I can think of that I like as much is redemption/reparation. Hmm, we should do a conversation about that one sometime.
I agree the fake dating trope is being overused. I do love some books that employ this trope, absolutely. but it’s too ubiquitous right now. As I said in the April Open Thread, it’s a real struggle to find a contemporary romance that isn’t enemies/rivals-to-lovers or fake dating. These tropes can be good, but give us some other tropes too, please.
@Rose: Those two Baloghs are mentioned in our upcoming recommendations posts. As I was recommending Slightly Married, I realized that a twist I love on the MOC trope is where one of the people who enters the marriage of convenience is in love with someone else. Usually it has to be someone unworthy of them for this to work, but when they are hung up on the person they can’t have and then they slowly realize the worth of the true treasure they have in their hands instead, it’s so satisfying to me.
LOL!
@TinaNoir: I haven’t read that SEP but I remember that Jennie liked it a lot. I think maybe it was her favorite SEP. Am I remembering right, Jennie?
I really liked Morning Glory too. It’s a classic.
Sleepover sounds really good. I can’t remember if I’ve read Serena Bell. I think maybe I tried a novella once. but I’m not sure. But there’s an old category romance, The Wedding by Emma Darcy, that is a bit like that. It’s a boss-secretary story (funny to remember how popular those used to be, in the days before #metoo) although he’s the big boss and not her normal boss, so she doesn’t know him. They are on a business trip just after she has caught her fiance cheating on her in her own bed. Naturally, the business trip takes place somewhere sunny with a beach nearby, and naturally the hero and heroine decide to to have a fling in between working (there is some actual competence porn in this book). She has the time of her life but then turns him down after they get back, when he asks to continue the relationship, but eventually changes her mind. It’s neither fake dating nor marriage of convenience, but the heroine’s sharp, critical mother keeps trying to persuade her to take back her cheating ex-fiance, and then the hero shows up in a limo and the mother has to eat her words. It has that whole “rescued from a bad breakup” vibe and is such a satisfying example of that trope. I really loved it back in the day.
@TinaNoir and @cleo: I have the same sense re. fake dating and illustrated covers.
@TinaNoir, I’m also a longtime fan of MORNING GLORY by LaVyrle Spencer.
I’ve enjoyed all the comments and look forward to the next post with the recommendations.
@Janine: It might have been; I know I liked it a lot. (I don’t think that some SEP’s have aged that well, and KaA is one of them. There’s a lot of humiliation of the heroine, IIRC, with very little reason. The heroine is flighty and spoiled – I think? – and her father somehow enlists the hero to take her down a peg or ten. It would probably piss me off a lot today. It’s appealingly angsty, though.)
@cleo: I really like the teamwork trope also, but I prefer it when the couple are on some kind of mission (it can be physical or intellectual).
@DiscoDollyDeb: Of the possibilities you enumerate, I really like #2 . Pining for someone who doesn’t think of you that way is always a good one for me, whether or not it involves fake dating or an MOC (those are completely different tropes for me, funny how people differ on that).
#3 is an interesting one and I think it would only work for me in a contemporary setting because divorce is possible now. Back in the mid 2000s, I started to write a historical with a marriage of convenience like that but I gave it up because I couldn’t see a happy way to resolve it for both parties. Divorce was just too destructive in some eras and I didn’t want to kill off the heroine’s gay spouse. Even though this was before I was aware of the problematic tragic endings for queer characters trope, it just seemed wrong to me. He was a nice guy and didn’t deserve to be killed off. I didn’t want to make him a villain either (gay villains was a trope I was very aware of and really disliked).
#4 is one that sounds great in theory (I love angst and redemption) but when I’ve tried to read them, they haven’t worked for me. The balance of power was too pronounced and there was too much hurt, anger and bitterness for me to enjoy the books.
@Arch: Yes, spies fake dating is a great sub-trope! I love this premise too. Off the top of my head the only one I can think of is All the Queen’s Men by Linda Howard. However that has a crazysauce rapey sex scene and in other parts of the book the plot stalls and the pacing lags. Still a good concept, though. Are there any you can recommend?
@Janine – Jane Feather’s A HUSBAND’s WICKED WAYS is a fake dating (well fake betrothal) AND marriage of convenience — they end up having to get married … for reasons. But they are also spies. Well he is a spy and he trains her to be a spy and their fake betrothal is a cover for him teaching her spy stuff and him gaining entree into her social circles. I rather liked this one.
@TinaNoir: Thanks! That sounds like it has potential. I read another Feather (one of her V books) once where the hero trained the heroine, but in this case to help him get revenge on someone through becoming that person’s wife/mistress/whatever (I’m fuzzy on the details, but some kind of lover). Of course he falls in love with her himself and has to change his plans. I was not crazy about that one, this type of revenge isn’t a favorite trope for me (other types may be, it’s one of those tropes that can really work for me in the right hands but often falls into the wrong hands, it seems). Spying is a much better premise for training that results in a romance.
@Janine: the reason I tend to group MOCs with other forms of the fake relationship trope is that MOC stories usually involve “faking” of one form or another. Generally, as in other fake relationship stories, the MCs in an MOC are trying to convince others that theirs is a “true” marriage or love match. Even if the couple are acknowledging to each other (and maybe to their closest friends) that they’re marrying for non-romantic reasons, they usually have to keep things “loving” to the rest of the world. I agree that not all MOCs will meet that criteria, but enough do that I’m ok placing MOCs under the fake relationship umbrella.
@DiscoDollyDeb: Hmm. I get what you’re saying but I don’t see that kind of face saving as a fake relationship. A marriage of convenience in romance frequently represents a genuine commitment, if not to love each other then to live together or to raise children together. Often that includes sex as well (and with someone you may not know, that’s not nothing). Putting on a good face makes sense in that circumstance, and it doesn’t negate, for me, the genuineness of the commitment that the couple have made to each other. Even if that commitment isn’t yet a romantic one, that doesn’t mean it isn’t meaningful.
This reminds me of a conversation I had with Layla about the meaning of the mating bond in the Patricia Briggs universe. We were chatting about how Bran and Leah don’t love each other and haven’t even treated each other lovingly, but there is nevertheless reciprocity and responsibility in their relationship. Leah has certain duties within the pack that she performs as part of this tie, and Bran feels some kind of attachment through his wolf that makes it hard for him to kill her even when he thinks she’s a traitor and has killed others in the pack. There’s a connection there, emotional and real; unloving at times, but nevertheless always there.
To expound on this in regard to romance in general– in a nineteenth century context, where divorce carries a heavy penalty, it seems to me that a marriage of convenience is often a more meaningful commitment than an exchange of “I love you” statements in our own era. Not to say that declarations and confessions of feelings can’t be genuine and mean a lot too, but it doesn’t require putting skin in the game to the same extent.
I’m a “put your money where your mouth is” person–gestures mean more to me than words or physical affection. If a hero is marrying the heroine to help her protect her sisters and she’s marrying him so he can have her dowry to be able to maintain an estate that employs faithful retainers, they are both already showing each other generosity and good faith.
I guess it boils down to stakes for me! If you haven’t staked a lot that matters to you, or planted a stake in the ground that is this connection, however new and unknown, then that can be called a fake relationship. But when someone has done that, there is already something very real there.
@DiscoDollyDeb: I’ve thought of another reason why I don’t apply to “fake” to MOCs. The characters in an MOC aren’t together to present a false front, unlike fake relationship protagonists. They enter into their marriage (in a good book) for reasons that aren’t superficial. So the kind of face-saving you refer to is for me just a way of protecting what they have and each other. The details of their marriage aren’t anyone’s business and they are putting that marriage first when they don’t let strangers stick their noses into it.
To my mind fake relationship and marriage of convenience are completely different. A MoC is a real relationship and a FR is pretend.
As a rule, I don’t like fake relationships though I will read them if there’s a compelling reason for the subterfuge and it’s mostly for the benefit of the general public. I loved Act Like It where they’re basically forced into it by their boss, and I’m fine with it if a bodyguard is posing as a significant other for safety reasons or something similar. What I don’t like is the casual deception plots where the deception is aimed at their friends and family because they’re tired of being set up on blind dates or they want to win a contest and being in a relationship is one of the requirements.
On the other hand, I’ve always really liked marriage of convenience. I like the idea of a backward relationship where they’re bound together and then have to get know each other and navigate a relationship. It’s sort of the ultimate in forced proximity I think.
@MaryK:
Yes!
I disagree on Act Like It though. I know a little bit about the theater (I did a journeymanship with a professional repertory theater company when I was nineteen). I assure you, theater actors would never need to pretend to date for such a reason. It would have no impact on ticket sales.