People will really look at a character who was raised to be a doll—a pretty face to dress up, her dreams dismissed to gardens and pretty clothes, and an asset on the marriage market only if her beauty held—who was groomed to accept that her future would be determined by others’ maneuverings rather than her own, and still say:
“Ahh yes, it must be that the future of this character will indeed be defined by her looks in a black dress and by the unbreakable™ bond that was imposed upon her. 😍."
“… Matter of fact, the author was soo clever in making it so that others' superficial assessments of her character hold more weight in the narrative than her own declaration of belonging… its obviously meant to show us that everyone (but her) knows what's best for her; she does belong elsewhere. (Guys… what about someplace subtle, like Spring because flowers? Or Day because flowers need the sun?!)”
“The poor girl just doesn’t know any better: she’s exactly like her far-more-independent-and-headstrong sister who was wasting away in a Court where she was deprived of social interactio—wait, wdym she has a job, friends, is hinted at scheming behind the scenes, and calls the place a home... ? Sure, whatever, it’s clear that it's not significant, she's in denial; plus she can’t have a unique arc full of exploration & adventure unless she skedaddles away from the obstacles I dislike and never returns! Skedaddle to where, you ask? Easy: her mate’s court with her mate’s friends & her mate’s family, where she'll become her mate's High Lady... just like *drum roll* her sister! Notice how we don't question whether her mate's relationships are genuine and whether the life he's built (also ‘off-page’) matters?”
“Speaking of that MATE of hers, she is bound to come around eventually and realize that she was placed where she should be. I mean, he’s so hot, so she’s def super attracted to him and trying not to jump hi—what? You’re saying her body language shows otherwise? I mean how can you know, maybe she’s just hidin—oh... she' shown visible signs of attraction to another male? Enough signs that literally all characters, bar the oblivious one, noticed? Well then, it’s clearly because she’s projecting her longings for her mate onto the bloke; the bond means more than her pesky little rebellious feelings (Elain, we see you girl, no need to be stubborn!)."
“Btw, I cant believe you guys missed the memo, but the thing she had with that other dude? You know, the one the author gave her significant moments with and who did casual things like lending her his most prized possession & following the sound of her laugh & making his nightstand an altar in her effigy? Yea, it’s all a red herring. Turns out the author couldn't decide whether Mr. Distraction would be an incel or a fickle fuckboy, so she just went with both. Entitled, lustful prick—love him though! But SJM really fooled yall, it was all made so that readers (somehow) forget that she has a MATE who she is MATED to because there's this real MATING bond that she 100% cant break and that tells us that her MATE is the endgam—"
"...What are you saying? Are you really suggesting that the label of mates being all it took for many readers to overlook the on-page development of a romantic relationship between her & Mr. not-her-mate, in favour of said label, makes the bond more likely to be the red herring? Well, you're delusional... plus I thought that these two characters shared a brother/sister relationship up until it abruptly turned into "just lust" out of nowhere... right? Right. You probably just think it's a red herring cause her mate is red-haired. Ha!
You people need to understand that MATES are always the answer, period. They mean everything—why would you want a lesser love for your fav? It’s not like the author has put into question the nature of the mating bond & whether it indicates true paired souls, or like she spoke about how interesting she found the idea of bond rejections in her most recent interview—oh... damn. She did? But what about mates and the allegedly un-rejectable bond that could induce insanity by alleged cosmic blue balls?? Surely SJM wouldn't make a blanket statement reinforcing the status-quo of Prythian's patriarchal society just to have one of her heroines redefine it! I mean, let's be real, is Feyre becoming a High Lady despite there having been "no such thing" for millennia, or Nesta reinstating a female warrior force and winning the Illyrian-male-exclusive Blood Rite alongside an Illyrian woman and a ¼-nymph priestess, really THAT important? Why would the 3rd sister follow the pattern and subvert the status quo, when she could just make it easier for everyone & reinforce it by fulfilling the destiny she was groomed into?"
“Elain is pleasant to look at,’ her mother once said, ‘but she has no ambition. She will be an asset on the marriage market for us one day, if that beauty holds, but it will be our own maneuverings, Nesta, not hers, that win us an advantageous match."
Yet, here we are, expecting her story to be about fulfilling that prophecy rather than shattering it.
Elain’s story isn’t about conforming to the expectations placed on her—it’s about breaking free from them. And if you think a mating bond and a pretty dress are enough to define her or her arc, you’ve missed the point entirely.
