there's something that bugs me about this "new" trend of gothic/dark romance enthusiasm – a genre as old as time, ik, i'm a huge fan too, but i'm speaking about a particular phenomenon i've observed in the last few years. it's the flattening of every dark/gothic/batb-adjacent pairing into, it seems, pure aesthetic and vibes and little else, so they're all so disappointingly similar there's hardly anything new or radical or subversive to them, or even to enjoying the genre in the first place. (i'd argue the romance genre has never been more commercially successful – see the whole romantasy mania - so how can it be inherently subversive if it's everywhere?
example: what do del toro's elizabeth and the creature have that is actually, genuinely gothic, even remotely comparable to other classic or more recent pairs of this genre (i’m talking heathcliff/cathy, erik/christine, dracula/mina, orlok/ellen etc.)? imo, in gothic romances, even when the male "suitor" (i’m speaking of het pairings because it's what i read the most, and so what i'm most well-versed in) is not expressly a villain or an antagonist (see rochester, just to give a famous example), there's a clear undercurrent of danger to the character. he may even be — and often is — harmful to the heroine. this love either turns into a destructive force or a redemptive one, or more rarely both, like in le fantôme de l’opéra. that’s not the case for elizabeth/the creature: she’s kind and compassionate and a bit weird (complimentary), clearly an outsider but still in a conventionally pretty and feminine way; he’s deformed but still hot, kind (“a good man”), a victim of ~evil abusive victor, and turns to violence mostly out of self-defence. he’s not a threat to her in any way, and most importantly, she never even thinks he may be. they meet like, three times (the third time, she gets accidentally murdered by ~evil abusive victor and dies), and they’re already soulmates according to Voice of God.
this has almost nothing of the gothic or of what is associated with the gothic, except the setting and the creature’s nature; their dynamic is mostly batb/star-crossed almost-lovers, which is a compelling trope per se, with sumptuous, beautiful, sometimes slightly pretentious visuals and dialogues. they’re sweet and pure and tragic – the world is the real antagonist here, and victor in particular is both the film’s real (anti?)villain and his own worst enemy, though it takes him a long time to understand that.
and yet, they lack what imo is the most essential, classical quality of batb romance, aka metamorphosis. i don’t mean a physical transformation (i’ve read stories where the beast/ugly character doesn’t turn into a human being or beautiful – hell, i’ve read iterations where the beauty turns into a beast, angela carter docet!), but an inner transformation, happening in the souls and minds of the characters. the beauty is almost always terrified, suspicious, often angry or unable to even look at the beast; but something happens, or there’s a gradual shift, and she understands his inner kindness/value, or witnesses his transformation into a better human being than most “normal” people. still, both change. for elizabeth and the creature, there’s no need for that – it’s the world that must change. which i understand is the whole point, but it’s something GDT has been portraying for many years in his movies (and imo more subversively in the shape of water). it’s nothing new or particularly groundbreaking – and it doesn’t have to be, of course. but then… what do they actually share with most gothic romance pairings we can think of? is really it that grandiose, if it's the usual minestra riscaldata in a different coat...?
what i'm getting at is: when you flatten the whole genre into a catchy mix of tropes/alluring visuals, all couples become interchangeable, and you lose sight of the themes, the whys and hows, the build-up and development of dark romantic dynamics in favour of – what, essentially? hashtag aesthetic? that's an obnoxious pet peeve of mine, of course, but i'm nothing if not cerebral or maybe i'm getting old. now, book!elizabeth/the creature would be real gothic. GDT made almost a (albeit bloody and tragic) fairy-tale of it all, which obviously was the intention from the start; note the conveniently cast-aside symbolism of the creature as both adam and the fallen angel. i'm not saying that if you're into actual darker stuff you can't be into them too (there are no rules!), but i like to state what things are and what they aren’t. heathcliff and cathy are defined by their shared childhood/abusive environment/they’re both cunts (complimentary/derogatory); jane/rochester is a very different kind of story, and so is erik and christine's etc.
it's important, or else you find yourself surrounded by (i can't stress this enough) generic Tall Monster/Villainous Guy x Petite Pretty Pure but Plucky White Woman pairings, lacking any depth or real artistry in their writing. it’s as if this kind of pairings wear a small tinkling bell and when they appear people latch onto them, regardless of characterisation, themes, execution, roles in the story etc. and no, again, idt they’re as subversive as they appear, or we wouldn’t be inundated with dark romance/enemies-to-lovers romantasy books. and it's a shame, really, because at its best this genre is a compelling challenging of gender norms, social roles etc.
tl;dr: i'd prefer if people didn't associate something with the gothic label just because the aesthetic appeals to them (and yes, it is appealing) + i wish there was more variance and diversity in the genre. that's all.
