i saw yet another post about how the literacy crisis means readers are less equipped to read between lines and pick up on implication (duh), but i've been thinking about that in relation to flirtation and yearning in fiction. as always, this braindump is more for my benefit than anything and is specific to my creative approach, so ymmv.
with the rise in purity culture and reading comprehension being... tenuous across today's general audience, i think authors are more expected to make the terms and conditions of their character's romantic relationships explicit and above board. the range of what can be reasonably implied such that a majority of the audience can pick up on it has narrowed. an increasing number of readers want their hand held and get agitated when they're left with questions or room for interpretation. which means there's increased pressure on writers to tell, not show, in exact detail that the characters are in love and in what way.
but flirtation is so much more than what's made explicit for me. good flirting depends on a doubling of conversation. the heat comes when each party is able to intuitively, improbably recognize the desires the other has left unsaid. yes, voicing your desires directly can be wildly attractive. but that vague inkling the characters have before outright confirmation—when the attraction is clear but they're still in orbit—is where the tension's at. that gray space of implication is where good banter thrives and chemistry is made. and, imo, great smut/romance writing makes this doubling clear while leaving just enough room for the reader to experience the excitement of connecting the dots themselves.
i've noticed an increasing number of writers who—whether by a lack of confidence, pressure from their audience, or maybe even shortcomings in their own literacy—opt to over-explain moments of attraction or relationship milestones between their characters. it'd be disrespectful to cite specific examples (i might look through my own writing to find some scenes i'm unhappy with eventually), but resolving major conflicts with conversations that are almost too comprehensive in addressing misunderstandings between characters come to mind. it's tidy. it's clear. often, it makes a case that the relationship being portrayed is healthy and admirable because hey, anything that could've caused a problem has been squared away! but when you present the reader with a resolution that neat, they're less inclined to read further. that's why romances tend to lose readers after the leads finally get together, or why stories end at happily ever after. unless the author leaves room for conflict, there's nowhere for the relationship to progress.
ambiguity is compelling. mess is compelling. it's propulsive. and the increased aversion to both in romance, both in plot and craft, is, i think, one of the reasons why i've seen some people struggling to find or write "good yearning" in fiction. characters yearn when they lack clarity. they sense, subconsciously or not, what's being left unsaid. the attraction underlying their interactions should make the yearner hyperaware of the possibility of reciprocation, but the path towards realizing it is hazy. whether by a emotional or concrete obstacles, they're unable to decisively act on their feelings. they're stuck in orbit and can't close the gap.
idk i might sit down and dig into this more deeply at some point. i've been meaning to make sense of my creative approach to writing yearners and maybe this is the bump i need.