yes, but do you *like* me?

Like exists in a sort of sub-category of romantic love. When you are in love with someone, it’s assumed that you also like them. It’s assumed so unconsciously that we almost never think of it, much less question it.

I decided to question it last week. I can’t remember why, exactly. I suspect I was having one of those hopeless personal moments of thinking, Why on earth is special k so sure he wants to be with me forever? I could imagine that it’s mostly easy, that it’s habit to spend a lot of time with me. But I was suddenly curious whether there was more than habit and ease and – yes, and more than love and the kind of loyalty that love breeds. Whether there was an active desire to spend time with me.

So I asked him, “What do you like about me?”

It’s an exposing question. Surprisingly exposing. And of course it’s a difficult thing to quantify. The things you can say – the words you can put to your feelings – are more like roadsigns or clues to feelings than feelings themselves. I tried to answer the question back, and could feel a whole world of feelings that were frustratingly unexpressed. I could see special k’s answers were the same, like suddenly looking at each other across a wide space of things unsayable, but trusting and loving and smiling all the same.

Liking, I discovered, is sometimes more romantic than loving.

Love has a kind of “no matter what you do, no matter who you are” quality about it. It’s what makes families to fraught and so wonderful. But like is specific. It means, “only you, in all the world”. 

In romance, we don’t see people liking each other nearly often enough. There’s quite a lot of admiring or being confronted by qualities in each other. There’s more than a lot of loving no matter how painful love becomes. But hardly any sitting and watching the other person make tea because the particular way they make tea makes you happy inside; hardly any conversations that wind the other person out, then an admission of how very much you like talking to them.

After sketching out the ideas for this post I started reading Cecilia Grant’s A Gentleman Undone. It shouldn’t have surprised me that her characters really like each other – and not only that, but we see them come to like each other. It’s not surprising because Grant’s interested in the personal qualities that make sex important. That is, the physical, animal urge for sex has a short-lived kind of meaning and most mature adults can resist it; when you come to know someone and admire and respect and like them – well, then sex becomes a much more complex thing.

Will and Lydia become friends over a scheme to earn money at the card tables of London. Lydia is a mathematical genius and a card shark – and she tries to teach Will to calculate probabilities.

He surprises her by being quick and intelligent in conversation; she doesn’t have to explain herself to him. He is also respectful and trustworthy despite, by his own admission, being quite desperate to sleep with her.

She dazzles him by being ruthless – by being able to calculate the odds of five hands at a time while cleverly incorporating signals for him into general conversation and flirting ineptly – on purpose – with the gentleman on her other side.

It is such a joy to watch them open more to each other with each conversation. To watch Lydia unfold herself under Will’s attention, because here is a man who actively likes who she is. When they are coming to know each other better, Lydia says:

“Why should you care at all what I think of you?” She all but squirmed in her skin at the notion, and one more fact about her became clear: I want you didn’t discompose her nearly so much as I like you and I want to you to think well of me.

Comments 9 Responses

    1. anna cowan Post author

      oh, that is so gorgeous! Young, sensitive boys :-). I can see why it took him by surprise, though. What I experienced is that you don’t take being liked for granted, even when you trust to being loved.

    1. anna cowan Post author

      While writing this post I kept thinking about Heathcliff digging up Cathy’s corpse just to hold her again. That’s also romantic, in a completely psychotic, angst kind of a way, so romance can exist without liking, but that example is a pretty effective cautionary tale against it!

  1. Jen

    I’m gonna echo everyone and say that I very much enjoyed this post. I feel like I’m eternally searching for a romance that balances out the like and the love and the lust. Too often it’s lust and then, magically, love. Too often I wonder, “What the HELL does s/he see in her/him?” I mean, besides the sexy mouth and washboard abs. I think Kristan Higgins does a really great job of showing two people falling in like, and then love. Her books are so satisfying to me.

    1. anna cowan Post author

      Thanks Jen! So much lust and actively DISliking. (Someone pointed out to me on twitter that the enemies-to-lovers trope is pretty ubiquitous and doesn’t leave much room for liking.) I absolutely agree – the most frustrating thing in a romance is not being able to answer what they see in each other. By the end I want to be able to reel off a list, like Ruthie Knox ;-). I’ll have to try Higgins, don’t think I’ve read anything by her yet.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.