Entry tags:
A random comment on Rivers of London
No spoilers for the new book (I'm only about halfway through it anyway) but I guess I'll cut anyway - am I the only one who really just can't get into Peter/Beverly as a ship?
I find it hard to put my finger on why, although I think it comes down to something I was talking with![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
rachelmanija about recently in the context of a different book series, which is that you never really get a feeling for why these two people are into each other specifically, other than just "because they find each other hot." They have great sex, and they do generic couple stuff, but beyond that ... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯?
I think the one moment in the whole series I've had of really shipping Peter/Beverly was that bit where she showed up with the train. That was great. But otherwise it's just like ... I find them actively ANTI-interesting. Which is a problem I don't normally have with canon ships - at least, it's usually just there and I can accept it if I see that the characters really like it and are into it. But I'm not even sure I get that feeling off Peter and Beverly. Like, that post I made awhile back about characters referring to each other when the other one isn't around ... Peter doesn't really do that with Beverly (that I've noticed). Granted, Peter, as a narrator, is fairly emotionally low-key about everything. But I never really feel like she's a major part of his life when she's not actively involved in a scene. He rarely seems to be reminded of her or want to get her little things or so forth - heck, I think he thinks about the dog more than he does Beverly. And it's equally hard to figure out how Beverly feels about Peter - if she really likes him or if she just thinks of him as a dalliance/flirtation/mortal toy.
I think I liked them better when she was this strange and powerful being who he had an on-again/off-again flirtation with, rather than as an established couple who share a house and do normal couple things.
I find it hard to put my finger on why, although I think it comes down to something I was talking with
rachelmanija about recently in the context of a different book series, which is that you never really get a feeling for why these two people are into each other specifically, other than just "because they find each other hot." They have great sex, and they do generic couple stuff, but beyond that ... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯?I think the one moment in the whole series I've had of really shipping Peter/Beverly was that bit where she showed up with the train. That was great. But otherwise it's just like ... I find them actively ANTI-interesting. Which is a problem I don't normally have with canon ships - at least, it's usually just there and I can accept it if I see that the characters really like it and are into it. But I'm not even sure I get that feeling off Peter and Beverly. Like, that post I made awhile back about characters referring to each other when the other one isn't around ... Peter doesn't really do that with Beverly (that I've noticed). Granted, Peter, as a narrator, is fairly emotionally low-key about everything. But I never really feel like she's a major part of his life when she's not actively involved in a scene. He rarely seems to be reminded of her or want to get her little things or so forth - heck, I think he thinks about the dog more than he does Beverly. And it's equally hard to figure out how Beverly feels about Peter - if she really likes him or if she just thinks of him as a dalliance/flirtation/mortal toy.
I think I liked them better when she was this strange and powerful being who he had an on-again/off-again flirtation with, rather than as an established couple who share a house and do normal couple things.
no subject
Sorry. I know that's not what you asked.
no subject
I think I'm bouncing off it because I don't even do friendships that way - I mean, it's not that I cling to my friends 24/7 or anything, but I think about them and email them links and jokes that remind me of them or whatever (I've pretty much spent this entire morning in a series of concurrent email/chat/DW-comment conversations with friends, tbh, in and around the other stuff I'm doing).
(ETA: I guess I should say - how it's coming across to me in the book; this isn't meant to be a statement on your relationships or even on the fictional one necessarily, but I guess it's more that my relationship expectations aren't being met by what the book is showing, is the problem for me, really ...?)
And I really, truly get wanting fictional depictions of relationships where they aren't the focal point of each other's lives, as you said, because I want that too, but I think for me this particular example goes too far the other way and reads like they aren't really important to each other's lives at all, and I do want some sense of that lingering importance from any fictional relationship I'm invested in, not just romantic ones. YMMV though!
no subject
no subject
no subject
Uh.
...they have entirely separate lives? Other than living together, they share nothing except the fact that they both know about the secret magic world. Unless there's River-related trouble, Beverly doesn't get involved in Peter's work, and he doesn't really get involved in hers? And I know he's police and she couldn't tag along on stakeouts or whatever, but.
Ahhhh there's a part that I don't know if you've read yet but where Peter does spend some time you would think would be introspective, and I swear he mentions caffeine more than Beverly.
I don't know what to do with this, because like you, I find it ANTI-interesting, and it lessens my enjoyment of the book to sit through scenes with them when I am all but why are you even in this relationship??.
I fear it's one of two things:
a) Happy domesticity is what the author is going for, and he thinks he's hit the right note
b) Something terrible will happen to the relationship (I don't think Ben would fridge Beverly...?), thus adding some drama and conflict to Peter's life
The problem with a) is that I'm al blaah about their scenes here. The problem with b) is that I don't WANT relationship drama or Beverly-related angst!
no subject
YES. THAT. THAT IS THE PROBLEM I HAVE. XD Like I was saying above, I don't mind that they aren't the focal points of each other's lives; I actually like that! But I want some indication that they are important to each other's lives - it doesn't have to be much, just little things like them texting each other or having in-jokes or doing SOMETHING together other than just typical relationship-requirement couple stuff. I think I liked the train scene so much because a) it involved Beverly getting dragged into Peter's work stuff (or possibly vice versa; it's complicated with them), and b) it showed that she really cared and was willing to do something dramatic to prove it. FWIW, it's not just that I want that with Beverly, but I feel like we get that much less with Beverly than with most of Peter's other important relationships, Nightingale and Abigail and even Toby. I think he's spent way more time in this particular book thinking about Lesley than about Beverly, and on the one hand, Lesley is a big part of this case, but on the other hand, it makes Beverly feel like an afterthought when you get pages and pages of Peter talking to, and thinking about, and speculating about, characters like Lesley or Casey, and then an occasional mention of Beverly when he goes home.
And it's not that I want the book to be 24/7 Peter/Beverly either, let alone P/B romantic angst, but but why are you even in this relationship?? is TOTALLY my reaction and it shouldn't be.
It's nice know I'm not the only one though. *clings*
no subject
But then again, I don't think there's a good romance in the entire series. I'm glad Peter has someone, if only because it keeps him from getting involved with anyone else he doesn't have chemistry with. ^^;;
no subject
no subject
It also really warps the weight of the emotional dynamics, given Lesley's and Beverley's respective places in his life. It makes his and Beverley's relationship seem even more thin and pasted on.
no subject
That's exactly it, yeah. She shows up when it's plot-convenient, which to me is different from a relationship where the people live separate lives, or one where they're separate but think/talk about each other, &c &c. They are really different, but it seems like Peter has more of a connection to and understanding of Molly than Beverley.
Ahhhh there's a part that I don't know if you've read yet but where Peter does spend some time you would think would be introspective, and I swear he mentions caffeine more than Beverly.
HAH
YEP
Happy domesticity is what the author is going for, and he thinks he's hit the right note
Based on two very spoilery moments in the book, I think Aaronovitch is presenting this as basically the Good Happy Domesticity. Which makes me sad because at her best Beverley is a lot more interesting than that, even if just potentially. (BA has....never thought of the power exchange potential, really?)
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
I think it's a combination of the fact that BA is crap at writing romance and also that there's so much going on in the books, especially as the series grows, that he can't figure out how to give much attention to the romance. I mean, for all that it was ridiculous, I felt like I got a much stronger sense of Peter's romance with Simone than I did with Bev, and it's notable that there was a lot less going on and fewer characters around in that book than in the most recent couple.
no subject
I like Peter/Bev. It feels like a established relationship to me. The kind that is past the first butterfly in belly and nerves and OMG there they come stage. They like each other, are attracted to each other, know each other's secrets (which given who they are and what they do is not a small thing) and accept the fact that they have different priorities and hobbies.
I find that a good basis for a realistic relationship in real life, if you're looking for a partner to rely on and not the next installment of Romeo and Julia without the tragedy. It's just that most books and fanfics seldom portrait relationships that way.
no subject
no subject
But I do think the interesting thing about Peter/Beverley (related to Aaronovitch's interesting relationship with pacing generally...) is that we got the very early relationship bits where there's chemistry and they're thinking about it, and then we skipped right to settled, established relationship where they're living together and the only real drama is the in-laws. So we don't get any of the getting-together, new-relationship-energy parts of the story; we didn't really get any of the standard romance novel storyline for them, it just got skipped over between books, and we don't really get any of the kind of ongoing relationship drama that would foreground it in the novels.
And I actually think that's why I like it so much? I mean, partly because I like Beverley in general, but when a canon relationship is all drama and tempest and obsession I tend to kind of want them top back off a little, and I feel like I get enough of the romance plotlines in romance/fanfic and am happy to for once get something that feels like a real boring established relationship between two people who get on well.
That said, I can absolutely see it ending with the two of them deciding it's not an epic love story after all and turning into an on-again-off-again casual fling and really driving Tyburn up the wall with it.
no subject
Several people have mentioned, in the comments, the books skipping the intermediate part of Peter/Bev, which might be part of why it's pinging me a bit oddly. (I didn't notice as such, because I have been reading the books as they come out and haven't done a full reread - therefore it's usually a year or more between books for me, and the finer points of relationship continuity tend to be lost.)
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Yeah, I don't find them very shippy. They're into each other because Aaronovitch says they are.
I mean, Meg/Dek is 100 times sexier. Hell, Py/Khym is 50 times sexier.
no subject
The Hellburner characters are such a great example of that, because Meg and Dek's relationship feels very well developed to me despite getting very little actual page time and playing out in a much more low-key way than a typical romance. The whole thing starts with no-strings-attached banging because they find each other hot, then they go off and do their own thing in different parts of the solar system. (I mean, it's obviously more complicated than that, but still - they clearly have their own lives and prioritize their own lives.) And yet, I always found them incredibly hot and sweet, the way they deal with each other is so tender, and even though they're very different people with different lives and like a 20-year age difference, it's easy to see what they have in common and what they bond over, plus you get things like the letters they exchange to indicate the relationship is very meaningful to them even though they're not precisely in love as such. I realize I'm biased here, but I think all the relationships in those books are so well done.
no subject
no subject
I also find it useful from a writing standpoint to look at it analytically and try to figure out why it's not working for me, because it's helpful in figuring out how to make my own character relationships compelling.
no subject
I think you're right that he never thinks much about her -- his mum, and Molly, and Lesley, and other women he knows come up a lot more often! The train scene was great, yeah. But I really don't get a sense of why they like each other besides "you're hot, let's bang" and while the power inequality between a mortal man and an immortal fairly removed river deity could be fascinating, Aaronovitch is So Not Going There, it's not even on his map. (And the big showdown Peter had about that kind of thing was....with Beverly's sister, and Isis and Oxley seem to disprove that anyway?) There was the bit in Foxglove where she had him scream and cry and beat up the tree....Foxglove was the shippiest, really, and it was also not set in London, so maybe that's part of the problem. IDK.
no subject
You know, I remember feeling in earlier books like Bev's powers and particularly her ability to manipulate people were a much bigger thing, and then that aspect just seems to have sort of ... vanished, at some point, and definitely doesn't seem to be an issue in this book. I wonder if that's one of the reasons why they feel so oddly flat to me in this book - I mean it's not that I've ever been super into the Peter/Bev ship, but in past books I got the feeling that Peter had some qualms as well (there was a certain underlying potential fucked-upedness to the relationship, at least I got that feeling in earlier books, which was actually one of the more - I'm not sure if I'd say appealing aspects, but it definitely made it interesting, and in particular the "can they find a way to make this work for them?" question was interesting even if I was never really that into the ship). But unless I missed something, they never DID work it out, it just vanished, and now it's all straightforward domestic tranquility and cute River cousins being charming.
It's frustrating because this ship has a lot of things I like (I DO like ships that are very much in the background and not really a big thing for the characters!) but it seems to have gone together into a shape that I find completely uninspiring and it's interesting to try to figure out why.
no subject
Yeah, I don't think she ever put a glamour on him, but there was that very weird bit with the fucking in the river? newborn river pool? thing (LOL, I should look it up properly) that seemed rather dubcon. And given that fandom as a whole seems to've gone "Oh yeah, she whammied him" about the siren in Moon Over Soho, there's just some interesting stuff about Peter as a human mortal man messing with all these often female deities that just....doesn't come up. (And see the end of the very first RoL book, where he flat out wins over Ty -- mostly because Mama Thames lets him, but still.) Again, that kind of got shunted off to Ty and her husband, in her big confrontation with Peter. But Peter and Beverley don't seem to have ever discussed it, and it feels like a big thing that's going to affect them. Or, just....maybe not!
(there was a certain underlying potential fucked-upedness to the relationship, at least I got that feeling in earlier books, which was actually one of the more - I'm not sure if I'd say appealing aspects, but it definitely made it interesting, and in particular the "can they find a way to make this work for them?" question was interesting even if I was never really that into the ship).
Oh, that definitely made it more appealing to me, LOL. But BA really isn't going there. (I agree with other people that -- sorta like JKR -- he's good at writing friendship, but not convincing romance.) But yeah, it does feel like he skipped at least some important scenes or conversations and now everything's kind of smooth sailing. I'll be interested to know what you think of the book's ending and whether or not it supports that view or not....
no subject
Hahaha, this is a good way of putting it. I haven't read this particular book (maybe I should) but this description and everything I read about the pairing on here reminds me of my current feelings about Tony/Pepper (esp the caffeine remark in the above comment threads.)
(sorry)