An argument in favor of Mileven has always struck me as odd: that they're destined to end up together because their relationship has lasted since the first season, and only for that reason.
I find that strange because never, in any recent series or cultural production, has being together from the first season been an indication that the characters would end up together. In fact, it's quite the opposite: in most coming-of-age stories, the main character rarely ends up with their first love. I can give two examples: Buffy the Vampire Slayer, on the one hand, and Little Women, on the other. Both are coming-of-age stories. In Buffy, all the main characters have at least two loves: Buffy with Angel and Spike, Xander with Cordelia and Anya, Willow with Oz and Tara. For these three characters, these two successive love stories illustrate their evolution, their moral transformation, and their gradual access to maturity: Buffy goes from a man who helps her understand her power (Angel) to a man who proves to be her equal in terms of power (Spike). Xander sets aside his fascination with popularity (Cordelia) to love a less popular, more eccentric woman, but one who is also better able to understand him (Anya). This change of partner is sometimes even accompanied by an apparent change in sexuality: Willow leaves a man who no longer understands her (Oz) for a woman who accepts her completely, including her magical abilities (Tara).
In Buffy, and in coming-of-age stories in general, having loved is not contradictory to loving someone else. Love stories are simply one way among many to illustrate the characters transformations and their access to adulthood. Romantic relationships in fiction are a poetic device: their sole purpose is to tell a story as effectively as possible. And in coming-of-age stories, the aim is to convey that people and desires change as time passes, and that becoming an adult sometimes requires letting go of who you were and accepting change for the better.
The series itself sometimes seems to embody this: Joyce and Nancy each have two love stories. Joyce initially seems to choose comfort (Bob), but ultimately decides to turn to a man who shares and understands her connection to the supernatural (Hopper). Nancy, on the other hand, tries to give the illusion that she is an ordinary woman (Steve), but ultimately turns to a partner just as eccentric as herself (Jonathan).
It would have been perfectly natural for Mike, the story's main character, to also undergo this kind of evolution. Mike's narrative arc revolves around leaving childhood behind, and around his gradual confrontation with evil, the supernatural, and moral complexity. One possible way to illustrate this arc could have been to show Mike evolving from an innocent and pure childhood love (Eleven) to a more complex, mature love, nurtured by long courtship and complete trust, where the two partners function together as a team (Will).
I disagree with those who say that Mike should have only loved Will; on the contrary, I think he could very well have loved two people, and that his love for Eleven wouldn't have contradicted his love for Will. These two stories simply illustrate two successive stages of life, much like in Little Women, when Laurie transitions from a childhood love, essentially built on idealization and admiration (Jo), to an adult love with someone who, unlike Jo, has always loved him for who he truly is (Amy).
Showing this change would have been a mark of quality writing and would have allowed Mike's character to gain complexity and nuance. Ending up with one's childhood sweetheart is far more common in romance than in coming-of-age stories, and Mike ending up with Eleven contradicts both the genre's premise and the series message. Because why freeze these two characters in a relationship that was once happy but no longer suits them? Why not allow these characters the possibility of change?
discoholicmusic
germansingergirl
gamechangershow
andulkaphoto
