A Year in Review

 I used to do these little survey things in the days of LiveJournal. It's been a few months since my last entry, so I thought it might be fun to do one here.

What did you do in 2021 that you'd never done before?
I got a book deal!

Did you keep your new years' resolutions, and will you make more for next year?
I'm not sure if I made any new year's resolutions last year. I had a few goals for this year, which was to complete my second manuscript and edit my first. I accomplished both of those.

Did anyone close to you give birth?
Not that I recall.

Did anyone close to you die?
Not that I recall.

What countries did you visit?
I was supposed to go to Argentina this summer, but COVID prevented the trip.

What would you like to have in 2022 that you lacked in 2021?
My book published. 

What date from 2021 will remain etched upon your memory, and why?
November 1st: The day I received the offer letter on my book deal and November 29th, the day I was allowed to announce my book deal.

What was your biggest achievement of the year?
Getting a book deal, and getting a promotion at work.

What was your biggest failure?
I don't know that it's a failure, per se, but I would have liked to have an agent to help with the book deal. I'm not upset that I didn't have one, but I'd like to get one before I move forward on my next book. 

I would also say it was a slight failure, to me, that I only lasted roughly 5 months in the job I moved to in July. I'm going back to my old group at a higher grade, which is great, but I do wish it had worked out a little differently.

Did you suffer illness or injury?
My migraines seem to have gotten worse, but otherwise, no.

What was the best thing you bought?
Probably the two pieces of writing software that has helped me to edit my manuscripts.

Whose behavior merited celebration?
Kiddo has been doing really well with virtual school, and I'm very proud of her. Eric has been so supportive of my writing and my book deal.

Whose behavior made you appalled and depressed?
I was a little disappointed with how my previous supervisor behaved after I announced my intention to leave. So far, my current supervisor has taken my news of the promotion in stride, though I know she's unhappy.

Where did most of your money go?
Paying down debt, though I've also managed to save quite a bit.

What did you get really, really, really excited about?
My book deal!

What song will always remind you of 2021?
I got really into Taylor Swift's Folklore album, especially The One and Exile as they really helped me shape my second manuscript.

Compared to this time last year, are you...
Happier or sadder? Happier. This year was a really awesome one for me. I got a book deal, a promotion, and things are looking up in spite of the ongoing pandemic.
Thinner or fatter? about the same. Weight loss was put on the backburner, especially after I started the new job in July.
Richer or poorer? A little richer, though soon I'll be a lot richer when I start my promotion.

What do you wish you'd done more of?
Worked out, for sure. I also wish I was better at celebrating my accomplishments, both big and small. The pandemic definitely impacted that, but I'm also just never sure what to do to celebrate.

What do you wish you'd done less of?
Stressed over things out of my control - this was last year's answer, and I think it's still true. I wish I could let things go, especially other people's reactions to things I'm excited about.

How will you be spending New Years Eve?
Probably at home. I don't know that we have any specific plans.

Did you fall in love in 2021?
I fall in love with my husband every day.

How many one-night stands?
none

What was your favorite TV program?
I've continued to enjoy Hallmark shows and movies, but I also watched You on Netflix and the entirety of the Big Bang Theory on HBO.

Do you hate anyone now that you didn't hate this time last year?
I've moved beyond hating people. I've been disappointed in a few people this year, but overall, I haven't been overly bothered by anyone's specific behavior.

What was the best book you read?
Oof, I read so many books this year, including pre-published beta reads. I'm not sure I could pick just one book that was the "best." I really enjoyed For the Wolf, by Hannah Whitten. I'm not usually a fantasy reader, but I loved the way she incorporated the woods as a character. I also enjoyed the light hearted romcom "The Ex Hex" by Erin Sterling. 

What was your greatest musical discovery?
Hmmm, I was already a fan of Ron Pope's A Drop in the Ocean, but I downloaded a bunch of his other songs and have enjoyed what I've heard so far.

What did you want and get?
A book deal!

What was your favorite film of this year?
I think the most recent movie that I enjoyed that I can think of is Red Notice with Ryan Reynolds and Dwayne Johnson.

What did you do on your birthday, and how old were you?
My husband picked up Cheesecake Factory, but I spent most of the day editing my manuscript before I sent it to the publisher who ultimately gave me the book deal.

What one thing would have made your year immeasurably more satisfying?
Hmmm, finding an agent or finding a job that I truly enjoy. I'm hoping my promotion will make me happy.

How would you describe your personal fashion concept in 2013?
Jeans, t-shirts, hoodies when it's cold. I haven't been to the office, aside from one day this summer, since March of 2020.

What kept you sane?
Social media, my family, and writing.

Which celebrity/public figure did you fancy the most?
There were a few actors I started following on instagram after seeing them in various movies/shows. 

What political issue stirred you the most?
Probably the current supreme court cases regarding abortion, though I will admit, I haven't been as focused on politics as I've gotten older. Somehow arguing with people on the internet just feels like a waste of time.

Who did you miss?
My mother this year especially. Next Monday will be the 19th anniversary of her death and I was 19 when she died, so I will officially have lived longer without her than I did with her, and the thought is heartbreaking.

Who were the best new people you met?
I've met so many awesome people in the writing community via social media.

Tell us a valuable life lesson you learned in 2021.
There are many roads to publishing. Just because you take a different one doesn't make your route any less valid.

Quote a song lyric that sums up your year:
I have been blessed with so much more than I deserve.

Stereotypes in Writing

 After being overly frustrated by some of the responses I received from my MFA professors, I hired a developmental editor to get some feedback from someone actually well versed in romance. Overall, I think her comments and suggestions were helpful. She provided a really good way to ease readers' minds about the main premise of my book (single mom offers to rent room to stranger) and she had some great points about keeping my chapters in the POV of only the two romantic leads.

But then, she had like this vendetta against my portrayal of the teen character. To start off, let me say a few things about this character.

• She's heavily based on my own daughter (who knows this).
• She's a "new" teen, as in she recently became 13.
• She's not a sociopath

On that last note, let's begin. I had received feedback from one of my professors that the teen character seemed ageless in a way. She seemed mature in certain instances, younger in other, and I'm working on the consistency. Both the editor and MFA professor thought teens would be more indifferent to their parents' relationships, and I think I can lessen the involvement of this character by removing her POV. All of this is fine.

Where the developmental editor (DE) completely lost me is when she made comments about how the child "wouldn't care" if their parent was alone or not and that children are "not that perceptive or empathic." She went further to say "I actually think so often they forget their moms are human beings with wants and needs."

Look, I don't know what sociopathic children this person knows, but that's not my child, that's not my child's friends, that's not my friends' kids...literally that is almost no child/teen I have ever met. Are there exceptions? Sure! Does my kid sometimes get overly self-absorbed? Sure! Honestly, who doesn't (adult, teen, or child)??? 

I'm hoping that this is stemming from the fact that, because a few chapters are from the teen's POV, she seems a little too involved, and not because the DE actually thinks children are unfeeling robots so self-absorbed that they don't notice the world around them. But her comments just really rubbed me the wrong way. She said she felt like the teen would hate the male love interest from the get go, which I thought was a little weird since, even in the version of the book the DE received, the mom states in the beginning that she rents the room out to people all the time. So, the teen would be used to having someone staying there? I could see, as my MFA professor suggested, the teen being indifferent to the guest, but hate them? Why?

Of course, I did an immediate perception check on all of this with my own daughter and she was not only shocked by the stereotyping going on in the edits I received, but also seemed a little hurt. Interestingly, one of my goals with this book was to break the stereotype of the veteran with PTSD who is healed by the love of a good woman. Apparently, I am also breaking a stereotype that teens are, basically, sociopathic assholes. Who knew.

Some of the DE's problems with the teen that I took issue with included that  she was:

• Excited for Christmas
• Excited for chocolate chip pancakes
• Looking forward to a shopping trip with her mom
• Enjoyed playing in the snow

Again, I think some of these things will seem less over-the-top when I remove the experiences from the teen's POV, but I just vehemently disagree with her characterizations of teens/kids in general. And as far as the view in pop culture, as a friend of mine asked "have these people never seen/heard of the Gilmore Girls?" There's an entire mother/daughter relationship where the daughter 1) has empathy, 2) cares about her mother a great deal, and 3) enjoys town events. 

Additionally, my book is heavily influenced by Hallmark movies. Some of the criticisms I received were that the male romantic lead shouldn't take an interest at all in the teen. He should be polite to her, but his focus is on the female lead. First of all, even in real life, that's not necessarily the case. Using the Gilmore Girls, Lorelei dated Max, who was Rory's teacher at the time. There are arguments that can be made about this pairing, but it was done, so let's put those aside. Rory liked Max, both as a teacher and as a potential father figure. She actually suggested some things they could all do together, which scared Lorelei and she ran for the hills, but I digress. When dating someone with a kid, if the relationship is going to make it, at some point said kid is going to need to be included. Switching to my original point, this is a Hallmark story. Hallmark is VERY MUCH focused on "families." I watched a movie last night with one of the more self absorbed portrayals of a teen, and not only did that teen care about her mother's interest in the male lead, she also bonded with the male lead over cooking. In every Hallmark movie involving children, the romantic love interest BONDS WITH THE CHILD. Because in Hallmark movies, as in real life, a parent with a child is a packaged deal.

I will agree that perhaps the child is indifferent to the person in the beginning, but there needs to be some sort of bonding between the child and the romantic interest or there's no point in making one of the leads a single parent in a romance novel. I've seen it in countless movies. To list a few Hallmark ones: Summer Villa (which I watched last night), Christmas in Montana, Crashing Through the Snow, Delivered by Christmas, Love You Like Christmas, etc. Each of these movies had a kid/teen, and there is some sort of bonding that occurs between the romantic interest and the kid/teen. Again, if you don't allow them to bond, there's no point in having the kid/teen in the story. Period. Sure, they can serve as an obstacle to the relationship, too. Kid doesn't want a new parent in the mix. Kid wants parents to get back together. Caring for kid takes up all parent's time, leaving little availability for dating. Etc. etc. etc.

There were a few other comments that I disagreed with, and I'm still considering which suggestions I will incorporate and which I won't, but the way she wrote about kids/teens just really rubbed me the wrong way. While overall, I felt her advice was helpful, I don't know that I'd work with this person again, regardless of whether my future books include kids or not.

The Double Standard of Professional Reputation

 As discussed in my last post, I'm leaving my current job. I have surprised myself with how motivated I've been despite all of the aggravation I expressed previously, but I have accomplished a lot in this last week and think that I have maintained my good reputation with my team. 

In an effort to maintain that motivation, I read a few articles on the importance of not checking out in your last few weeks in a job. One of the driving factors for me was definitely my reputation. I like to leave things better than I found them, and have accomplished that in many of my past jobs. My problem with the articles is that this expectation of maintaining a professional reputation does not go both ways. The leaving employee is expected to continue to be as reliable, hard-working, and dedicated as they were when they first got the job, which is fine. However, nowhere in any article that I read did the writer encourage the same for the soon-to-be former boss. 

I can understand that, in some ways, the decision to leave may feel like a reflection on the boss. Truthfully, up until about six months ago, I really loved my boss. He asked me at one point to let him know if I was starting to look elsewhere so he would have a heads up when I was leaving, and I honored that when the interviews started rolling in. While there had been certain changes in his behavior before then, what my husband has referred to as "microaggressions," they were covert and not something I paid much attention to. I might have waved it off as he had a bad day or something. After I first gave him a heads up that I was interviewing, he seemed to distance himself from me. 

When I first started, my mentor told me that in the group I had joined, they really encouraged people to find their passions and to pursue other avenues if the work they were doing wasn't what they wanted. I suppose for her, and our group director, that is true. But my boss has been a real jerk since I told him I was leaving, as I mentioned in my last post.

One article I read mentioned how your boss might be dragged before his boss to find out why you're leaving and may disparage your character to save their own skin. I don't believe this happened in my situation; however, I do wonder if my boss' failure to maintain communication with me over projects and such that the group director wanted me to do contributed to his getting hauled into the director's office. I told my boss, and my mentor, that I wanted to do more policy related work. My boss did mention a few projects during one of our touchbases, but after that, it was crickets. We were supposed to meet biweekly but I think most of our meetings were cancelled in my last few months because of time constraints or him being out of the office.

The article also mentions the recruiting process being difficult, and that actually makes more sense for my situation. Honestly, I don't know many people who would want to do the work we do. We basically take the information and data found on audit and analyze it for an enforcement action. There's a bit of auditing necessary, some legal aspects, but it's not really audit work and it's not really legal either. The closest thing I can compare it to is, well, law enforcement, except that instead of taking someone to jail, we might impose a sanction where we monitor an entity for a period of time. The goal is to help the entity improve their processes and correct whatever failures were found on audit. Our money penalties are like a fine or a speeding ticket, a really expensive speeding ticket. However, since it's all paperwork based, it's not exactly the same as an actual police officer. 

Before I told my boss I was interviewing, he was trying to hire another PMF to join our team. The two he was interviewing both didn't work out. One cancelled the interview because she was offered another job and the other one, to whom he actually made an offer, turned it down. I later learned that the one who turned down the offer was somewhat naïve about what it means to work in government. She apparently waxed poetic about how she was going to change the world. My pseudo boss told me that I seemed more grounded, and I guess after 10 years of working in state government, I felt lucky if I could make small changes in my unit, let alone the world. 

Most of the PMFs from my class wanted to work at State or USAID, and even if they didn't want to work at those big agencies, they wanted to work in policy. I recall many of my fellow PMFs discussing their spreadsheet hierarchy of the positions they were looking to obtain. Some had "A" and "B" list agencies or positions. I had a very simple goal: to find a position, any position, in the federal government. I actually was offered 3 positions: a budget analyst at DOL, a position at SBA that I don't recall the title, and the job I accepted. I also almost was offered a job at OMB, but I received my onboard date shortly after that interview and after I let them know, they advertised the position for which I was being considered. 

My point is, there are a limited number of people who would actually enjoy doing this work. I took this job because it was a foot in the door with the feds. I recall telling my old state coworker that I could do any job for three years (I didn't realize you could apply for other jobs as career conditional, but I ended up being here for three years anyway). For someone who enjoys analyzing data and really getting into the nitty gritty, an auditing or financial position may better suit them. A lawyer or paralegal would likely prefer more litigation or appellate work, even if the appeal is to an administrative law judge. Since I've been there, someone has left at least once a year. In my first six months, two people left. Another person only lasted a year and left at the end of 2020, and then the last person before me left in April of this year (though she'd been on detail since October). The other problem is that they don't always replace the people who leave. When the second person left within six months of my start date, they didn't replace him. Then after the 2020 person left, they didn't replace her either (though I think they were planning to replace her with a PMF). Now, they have three positions to fill, but they'll probably only fill one or two of them. 

While I can understand that my boss is probably frustrated with having to find more people to hire and train, I still don't think it's fair that I am expected to maintain my integrity while he can do a complete 180 in his treatment of me. I had this happen with a previous attorney I worked with, and our relationship was never the same. Unfortunately, it is a bridge burned, and while I did not light that match, I didn't try to put out the flames either. I'd hate to see that happen here. The article I linked above leaves the questioner with this piece of advice: "Just make sure that you handle your resignation as professionally as possibly. Make a plan to transition your work to your co-workers and stay positive. Your boss will get over your resignation. You'll need that boss for a recommendation later, so play nice right up until the end, regardless of the reaction you got."

This is my problem. Of course, I'm going to "play nice" and do my job, but at the same time, I can't help but see the double standard. I know it's not necessarily common practice, with privacy issues and what not, but what if a future PMF finds out that I used to work in this division and looks me up? We do network, as I spoke with one who was considering my agency. And as this article points out, the former employee also has the ability to blast the company on various social media sites where people research the culture and experience of former employees. I also liked that this article states: "If you make people feel like they’re dispensable, the damage runs far and deep." I know in the articles warning departing employees not to check out, they point out that you never know when you might have to work with your boss and/or coworkers again, but doesn't that go both ways? I don't plan to return to this division or even this area of my agency, but that doesn't mean that one day I won't need to work with these people again. It's going to be awkward and uncomfortable for everyone if it happens.

Bottom line, while it sucks to lose an employee, everyone should try to remain professional. To steal a line from Bridesmaids: "Why can't you be happy for me, and then go home and talk about me behind my back like a normal person?" I don't encourage bad mouthing or gossip, but go vent to your family/friends if you need to, lament the loss, but don't take it out on the employee. Clearly, it wouldn't be such a huge blow or loss if that employee sucked, so don't make them regret the time they spent working for you. And as the last article I shared said, remember that your other employees are watching.

Take this job and. . .

 So, it finally happened. A few weeks ago, I was offered a new position. Surprisingly, it was exactly the position I wanted, but didn't think I could have. I literally had a five year plan to get this role and I cannot express my glee when it was offered to me five years before I expected it! 

It's a policy position and I am stoked! The entire reason why I went back to school to get my masters was to work in policy. It's why I chose to get the degree I did instead of going to law school. After working for years as a paralegal, I realized that I was tired of defending bad laws and I wanted to do more to create good ones. That said, I didn't want to be a politician, so policy work seemed the best option.

For the last three years, I've worked in compliance enforcement, which means that I was still at the end of the line. Insurance plans came to my division when they'd done something wrong, and our focus was on punishing them for not fixing it timely, or in some cases, helping them to come into compliance. The analysis part was interesting, but the work was really demoralizing for me. I think I realized that I needed a new job after I had to take an action against a plan with which I heavily sympathized. It was in a region that had been devastated by natural disasters, but nobody in my division or group was willing to consider these events as mitigating factors. I realized then that I was still doing what I had wanted to move away from: enforcing bad laws or regulations.

I had multiple interviews for various positions in my agency, but none of them panned out and, truthfully, none of them were really interesting to me. I mean, a part of me would have jumped at the chance to just get out of compliance, but I knew, deep down, that accepting a job just to get out of the job I had started to hate wasn't a wise choice. Talk about the possibility of jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire! So, when I received an interview request for the position I've accepted, it felt like my stars were aligning. The interview went well and within two weeks, I had the offer and I was making plans for my departure with my boss.

Since then, I've really started to have issues with my current position, and my initial feelings of regret for leaving my team are quickly morphing into indifference. For starters, my boss insisted I needed to stay on for four weeks, which unfortunately put me starting my new position while on vacation that was already approved. I thought about altering the vacation as I'm not actually going anywhere, but I am attending an online residency, and I didn't want to have a hectic schedule my first week in trying to work around attending the seminars. 

Then, my boss asked me to create a summary of my current projects so he could reassign them, which I did. We were supposed to discuss them at a meeting, but then he was out the day of the meeting. Since he had scheduled the meeting, I assumed he would schedule another one. This was my mistake, I should have been more proactive, but then he announced he was taking vacation during my last week and, as far as I can tell, only one of my current projects was reassigned. 

It's also felt like he's been in denial the last few weeks. I gave a briefing to our group director and received high praise from multiple people for how I handled it. He started to say how well that would serve me in my future, but then seemed to realize that my future wasn't here, and finished his sentence with something like "wherever you end up." This was after he condescendingly said in a meeting before I told him I was leaving that my projects were really just "juggling balls" and that none of them required a lot of attention. After the latter comment, I started to feel unvalued, which just further supported my decision to leave. 

I'm disheartened as I really liked my boss and my team. It would be nice to leave a job simply for a better opportunity and not because I desperately want to get out, but that's really only happened once or twice before. Similar to how I am with relationships, I'm usually well over a job by the time I leave it. It's just that I've been strategizing how to get out of something for so long.

There are some downsides to the new job, so don't go thinking I am expecting everything to be perfect there just because I'm disappointed with my current situation. I'm an early bird in my current role and my agency has flexible hours, but when discussing my schedule with my future bosses, they made it clear that those early hours wouldn't work for them, at least not on a daily basis. On the flip side of this, if I continue to get up as early as I do now, I can utilize that time for writing, and maybe finish TWO novels this year instead of just the one.

Another downside is teleworking. While we're still full time telework in my office because of the pandemic, there are signs that will be changing soon. When discussing my telework schedule, my future bosses said that most people in the office telework on Mondays and Fridays, with a few people doing 3 days of telework. That may change due to the pandemic and continuing to social distance (especially with the variants starting to be more concerning), but I had hoped to bump my telework days from 2 to 3. This isn't written in stone, but I get the feeling the new position is more in-person collaborative than virtually collaborative like my old position, so that may impact things. I had considered applying for the full time telework program as most people in my current team do that, but it doesn't sound like that's an option for the new job. I am hoping I can at least keep my telework days (Thursday and Friday) because I prefer working in the office on Mondays when traffic is light and no one is there!

The last downside is one I chose with the full knowledge of what I was giving up. Before I had this offer, my boss had told me of an opportunity for a promotion that would be coming right around the time I got this offer; however, I had already been interviewing when he told me about it. After thinking long and hard about it, I ultimately decided that if the right job was offered to me, I would be willing to forego the promotion because, at this point in my career, I'm more interested in enjoying what I do than making more money doing something I don't enjoy. If I was still making the salary I did at the state, I might have felt differently, but at the end of the day, if I'm going to spend 40+ hours a week doing a job, it'd be nice if I didn't dread it. Besides, while it may take longer to bump up to that higher salary in the new position, it's not like I'll never qualify for it again. 

Next week is my final week in this position and I'm definitely looking forward to moving on, but I'm trying not to check out before I'm gone. I worked hard to prove myself in this position and built my reputation on my willingness to learn and pitch in, so I'm not about to ruin it by screwing around now. But I will say, after some of the things that have happened with my boss in my last few weeks, it's difficult to motivate myself not to check out. I'm optimistic though that my respect for my colleagues will win out over my irritation at his behavior.

The Road to Becoming Published

When I joined my MFA program and subsequently finished my novel, I thought the hard part was mostly behind me. Sure, there'd be editing and revising to be done, but the book was written, right? Things should be smoother sailing now.

Boy was I wrong, but man have I learned a lot in the last couple of months. Let me start at the beginning. Around the end of May, I learned of a Twitter event called Pitch Madness, or #PitMad that was occuring on June 3rd. Apparently it happens every quarter, and while I could have waited until September's, I wanted to give it a shot. Essentially, writers can tweet three times with pitches for their books, including the hashtag #PitMad and other hashtags to help agents find your book (e.g. #R for romance, #A for adult, etc.). If an agent hearts your tweet, you then follow their instructions for submitting your query (usually you send a letter and however many pages they request).

I joined a challenge on Facebook to help me prepare called the Pitch Perfect challenge. I learned how to write a each aspect of the pitch and how to reduce my book to 280 characters. It was a lot to learn in a short amount of time, but I did it. I knew that I still had a lot of editing to do on my book before it would really be ready to start pitching agents, but I wanted to try this event. So, on June 3rd, I tweeted three different tweets. I got a heart from an indie/hybrid publisher, which was questionable. But then, lo and behold, I got a heart from an agent! I was so excited! 

The challenge I had joined also gave us tips on writing our query letters, which were really helpful as I drafted the letter, a synopsis, and put together my pages. I took a little over a week to put everything together and then I sent it out. A few days later, the agent sent me a nice rejection letter, which I was expecting. It was actually a relief to pull the bandaid off, even if I'm not ready to really start querying anywhere else. 

I plan to participant in #CarinaPitch on July 14th, which is directly with a publisher, and then do #PitMad again in September and December. I will have submitted my entire book through my MFA program in early September, and I think just having all of my chapters reviewed by tutorial instructors will give me more confidence in pitching agents in the future. 

I've also been working on my second manuscript as I'll need more chapters to submit for fall and spring semester. My current program plan has me graduating next summer, so I'll probably get about half of my second manuscript submitted through the program before I'm done. I actually feel a lot more confident about the second book just because I think it's a better concept and really just a better story. I'm hoping to finish writing it during National Novel Writing Month in November. I've been participating in the "camps" that NanoWriMo has put on in April and July. I'm planning to be at 25,000 words by the end of this month, which will put me just about done with the book if I write 50,000 words in November. 

But writing and publishing are clearly two different animals, and I'm really glad I took a chance on #PitMad last month. I've learned so much about what to expect with the publishing world, and am coming to terms with the idea that I might not get my first, second, or even my third book published. I mean, technically, I'm on my fourth book now. I wrote a really awful YA novel in middle school and then a really bad mystery in high school. The first I wrote and printed out, but have no idea where the printed copy ended up. The second I hand wrote and, again, have no idea where it ended up. So, maybe my second/fourth manuscript will be the winning ticket to being a published author. Time will tell!

I'm really glad I've taken this journey though. It's been really good for me to get back to my creative roots and I've enjoyed writing again. Even if I have to throw in the towel at some point and self publish, at least I'll fulfill my promise to my mother in some way. But I figure I'll work on my pitching game for at least a few years before I even think about throwing in that towel.

The road to getting published will not be easy, but I'm really excited to see where it takes me!

The past revisited

 It's Friday afternoon and my motivation to do work has evaporated, so I checked out my old journal for a "This Day in History" moment. There were two entries that really made me pause. I'll start with the entry from 2008, which was about my ex husband trying, once again, to guilt me into helping him get his license. Please note, he hadn't had a valid license for the 3 years we were together, but every time I left/tried to leave, suddenly it would become THE most important thing he needed to do, all in an effort to guilt trip me into staying.

Anyway, the entry itself was not remarkable. It was a comment I made to a friend who was trying to convince me that it wasn't my job to help my ex become an adult. She had posted multiple comments lamenting her own husband's relationship with his father and how trying to help my daughter have a relationship with her father (at 1 year old, mind) may do more harm than good.

In response, I said the following:

"I don't plan to lie to kiddo about her father, I just plan to do my part so that if one day she wants a relationship with her father, she has the opportunity. If all she learns from my efforts is that she's better off without him, then I'll be there to help her through it. And if a day comes where she tells me that she no longer wants to see her father, then I'll stop making the efforts. I just do not want to feel like any relationship issues between her and her father are because of me. I want to feel like *I* did my part, and if that means going the extra mile for now, then so be it. I know her father is going to try to say that I didn't do something, and I want to have proof that I did."

Twelve years later, kiddo did tell me she didn't want to see her father anymore. Her therapist and I tried to work out a way she could maintain the relationship without forcing her to keep the same visitation schedule she had had since she was almost two, but he refused. He made a counteroffer, and when I asked one too many questions about how it would work, he stopped responding for two months. Then, when he finally did respond, it was to basically blast me and say that it was no longer worth the privilege of being in our daughter's life to deal with me. That was right around the time the pandemic hit. I haven't heard from him since.

My daughter has heard from him. He texts her sporadically, but she refuses to respond. I've felt guilt about it for the past year, but this entry makes me feel a little better. I gave him the opportunity to draft a new visitation arrangement, one that she would be willing to adhere to. Prior to this, she had refused to get out of the car at the last visitation attempt and began texting him every other week that she wasn't coming. Our court order is really vague on visitation and just says that it's to be "reasonable and liberal as agreed to by the parties." So, essentially we're supposed to work it out between us. In the past, I had initiated most discussions and tried to compromise if there were disagreements, but on the suggestion of my husband, this time I tried to let my ex lead. As I said, after trying to clarify his plan through a series of questions, he stopped engaging.

This leads me to the second entry I saw, from 2011. Here I was lamenting the fact that my 10 year high school reunion was around the corner and I felt ambivalent about it. I wrote: "It hasn't felt like it's only been 10 years. It hasn't felt like it because I feel like I've lived a lifetime in those 10 years." Indeed, it definitely seems like I had. I lost my mother just over a year after I graduated from high school, I dropped out of school, scored a job at a prestigious law firm, went back to school part time, bought a house, left the job at the prestigious law firm, was fired from my next two jobs, dropped out of school again, sold the house, got pregnant, got married, gave birth, got divorced, moved back in with my father, found a part time job with the government, and finally finished my associate's degree. All in that order. 

At the time I wrote the entry, I was feeling really despondent about my life. I wasn't where I wanted or expected to be and, while I had a plan to improve my circumstances, it wasn't going to be a quick fix. So, I was debating on going to the reunion at all. I didn't go, and honestly with the uptick in social media, I don't really know if reunions are going to be necessary anymore. Not many people went, from my understanding.

Now that it's coming up on my 20th reunion, I'm somewhat disheartened that it doesn't appear we are having one. I'm sure a lot of that has to do with COVID, but now I'm in a much better place. I'm remarried, my daughter has grown up to be an incredibly kind and empathetic person, and I have a really awesome job with a master's degree under my belt (with another one partway completed). I was so ashamed of where I was 10 years ago that it's important to me to take the time to realize how much better the last decade has been. I wrote an entry in 2018, which was a decade after I left my first marriage, to discuss what a difference a decade had made. I don't want to repeat a lot of the same themes, but I think it's important sometimes to take a look back at where we were then versus where we are now.

There's still a lot I'd like to do in my life before I reach my 30 year high school reunion (assuming we have one), but I'm really proud of the progress I've made since 2011. Who knows, maybe by 2031, I'll have a few books published and be living a writer's life! A girl can dream!

When Calls the Heart - An Addendum

After publishing the last analysis, I have seen additional arguments against the show. I have also seen a really wonderful Twitter thread where a fan explained in significant detail how the showrunners did not mislead fans. Finally, I saw the fandom of another show I enjoy that also had a love triangle come together in full support of a renewal for Season 3. I'm going to address each of these in turn. Once again, spoilers are below, but this time there are spoilers for Zoey's Extraordinary Playlist as well.

Before I delve into this, let me just say that I am really angry at the amount of hate being thrown at the actors. I understand that people got invested, and that the show promoted the triangle, but I don't think it was ever meant to be taken this seriously. These people are real, their characters are not, and attacking real people over something a fictional character did is so ridiculous and uncalled for. Chris McNally, Erin Krakow, and Kevin McGarry are all amazing actors, which is why I think this story has impacted so many people. If they weren't good at their jobs, there wouldn't be so many fans distraught by this ending. That said, it's been over a week. It might be time for all of us, including me, to let it go. I'm hoping this will be my last post addressing the negativity. If I write about a tv show again, I hope it's for a positive reason.

1. Lucas is Charles 2.0

About the only thing Lucas and Charles have in common is that they both have, and come from, money. Charles is an old family friend of Elizabeth's. When we left him in Season 2, he worked with her father and had come to HV twice: once to set up a business relationship with Lee's lumber mill and the second time to propose to Elizabeth. He is not described in Season 2 as well traveled and it's clear that he had an "in" with Elizabeth's father in business, thus allowing him to continue the success of his parents' generation and add to his wealth.

In contrast, Lucas IS well traveled AND there is every indication that he has made his own wealth through a series of shrewd business decisions. He bought the saloon and increased its popularity well beyond what we saw with the previous owner. He also took a gamble on Henry's oil business and has worked hard to aid in its success. In Season 8, we see him get blasted after the explosion at the oil well, and we see him, with Nathan, Bill, Fiona, Ned, and Hickam, push the explosives towards the fire in an effort to save their operations as well as the town. So, the other argument, that he's not willing to get his "hands dirty" is clearly not accurate either. 

Honestly, I would describe Lucas' family as upper middle class. Both of his parents worked, which was not necessarily "normal" at that time. Their positions allowed the family to travel extensively. We don't know a lot about his father's career, but his mother is a book editor and her connections led to Elizabeth's book deal. I don't understand why people hate Lucas so much. The man not only encouraged Elizabeth's dream and passion, he essentially orchestrated that dream becoming a reality. Through his encouragement, and questionable decision to share her chapters without her permission, Elizabeth really grew as a writer. As a writer myself, I loved to see it. My own husband has been very encouraging of my return to grad school to pursue the MFA degree and we both hope that someday I will be published.

2. Lucas won Elizabeth's heart with money

Elizabeth teaches and, presumably, now gets her salary from the town budget (as I recall an episode from before Lori Loughlin left the show where she asked for supplies for the school and Abigail wasn't sure there was room in the town budget). Initially, she received a salary from the mothers, but I think now she receives a salary from the town itself. She also has Jack's pension from his time as a Mountie. And, in S8, she received a book deal with a $200 advance payment (which at that time was a significant amount of money).

My point is: Elizabeth herself is not hurting for money. She has her row house, she can afford to pay Laura as a full time nanny, and she could likely go back to high society life any time if she chooses. The fact that she doesn't choose to leave HV, and tells Lucas in S7 on their "not-a-date" in Union City that she can't imagine raising LJ anywhere else, speaks volumes. This sort of goes back to the first argument about Lucas being the new Charles. Again, Charles never chose to join Elizabeth in HV. In fact, if memory serves, her sister, Viola, hoped that Charles would be able to convince Elizabeth to give up her HV teaching by proposing. 

Really, if anybody is the new Charles (and I don't think they are) it's Nathan. Charles assumed Elizabeth's feelings, even after she told him she only saw him as a friend (parallel to Nathan declaring his love after Elizabeth told him she couldn't give him what he wanted). Charles proposed to her, even after she told him how she felt, and seemed surprised and unhappy with her refusal (again, much like Nathan, and more specifically, TN in this last season). Nathan may not have wealth, but his refusal to take Elizabeth at her words reminded me way more of Charles than anything Lucas did. That said, I can acknowledge the similarities in their relation to Elizabeth without seriously equating the two characters. They are clearly very different men, just like Charles and Lucas.

And honestly, can you call all of the dates Lucas planned for her a demonstration of his money? They went on picnics, a morning ride, and the backyard dinner wasn't really a demonstration of his wealth either. The only date that I could see as being a demonstration of his wealth was the Union City date, but I interpreted that less of a show of wealth and more as evidence that he wants to support her interests. 

3. The story wouldn't have been repetitive

I can't say whether it would or wouldn't have, but I personally was not looking forward to watching another teacher/Mountie pairing. I likely would have begrudgingly watched the show, but I certainly wouldn't have blasted the actors on social media had Nathan been Elizabeth's choice. There were certainly stories that could have been examined with the differences. Blended families often have a lot of friction (though, let's be fair. Just because Lucas doesn't have a child of his own doesn't make his potentially joining Elizabeth and LJ any less of a blended family. My husband is my daughter's step-father, and we had a lot of growing pains in the early years). But at the same time, there's always a sense of danger for the Mountie position and many of those storylines have already been portrayed when Jack was alive.

I saw someone on Twitter compare WCTH to Outlander and sarcastically comment that no one likes repetitive storylines when discussing Claire's return through the stones. The fact that this person cannot see the vast differences in the shows amazes me. Yes, Claire went back to 18th century Scotland, 20 years after she left. So, right off the bat you have two people who haven't seen each other in 20 years and there's a new dynamic there to explore. She also CHOSE to go back through the stones the second time, which was already a new storyline from the first time she accidentally stepped back through time. Finally, she and Jamie didn't stay in Scotland, did they? Ian gets kidnapped and they chase him down to the Caribbean and eventually end up in North Carolina where their daughter finds them, adding new characters and new storylines to the mix. 

Contrasting that with HV, unless Nathan and Elizabeth travel to the Northern Territories together, as Elizabeth and Wynn did in the books, it's a lot easier to repeat storylines when a writer is confined to the same town. I've been reading the Outlander books as well (slowly because those things are ridiculously long) and even I have gotten a bit tired of some of the storylines, but because there are so many storylines in books that are hundreds of pages long, the television show has more options of what to present on screen. Personally, I am so glad that Stephen Bonnet's character is now dead both in the series and after the last book I read (A Breath of Snow and Ashes) because it was starting to be a bit unbelievable that they kept running into him in a state as vast and populated as NC was, even back then. And I'm also tired of the storyline of Claire being kidnapped and Jamie having to rescue her. So, while I maintain that comparing Outlander to WCTH is unfair, even I can admit that some of the storylines in Outlander are repetitive and, therefore, a bit tired.

4. The polls - revisited

I keep seeing the "teams" fighting over the polls. I talked about polls in my last post, but since it seems a point of contention, let me address these again. For the TL fans who are citing how the polls only represent a tiny portion of the population...that's how polls work. A small percentage of people are chosen, at random, to participate in a poll and then the data is extrapolated to the population at large. For the TN fans who insist that this proves 70% of the population of WCTH fans are TN, I have yet to see a clear scientific poll anywhere. I've seen Twitter polls, which are often heavily retweeted by one team or the other, thus skewing the data. I've seen websites, like Good Housekeeping, where by refreshing the webpage, one person can vote multiple times, again skewing the data. 

If someone wants to do a real scientific poll, you're going to have to select a random sample of WCTH viewers, send them a poll to their email addresses in a way where they can only submit ONE response, and then once you have results, you can then extrapolate the data to the population as a whole. But again, the 2016 polls mostly projected Hilary Clinton as the winner of the presidential election and we had Trump for 4 years. So, even the most scientific polls are still capable of getting it wrong. I have a masters degree in public policy and administration and as part of that degree program, I not only took Statistics, I also took a class called program evaluation where we had to plan out the methodology of how we would conduct a study (which is essentially what polls are: studies). If you ever read a report on a study that was conducted, this is likely the section mostly skipped over because people want to read the results, not the method of obtaining those results. These polls that are being cited don't have a methodology section, and that's just one of the many reasons I wouldn't trust them.

Truly, the best way of knowing how many people were on each team, or at least, how many people are so insanely dedicated to a team that they would abandon the rest of the show, is to watch S9 ratings. If the show tanks next season, as many are apparently hoping it will, then sure, TN had more fans. But if it doesn't? Either TN got over their anger and decided to watch, or they weren't really the majority they think they are. If it does tank, all the bitter TN fans can dance around the fire the show just died in.

5. The storyline didn't follow/they flipped the script in the last episode.

Let me walk you through romance writing 101, which I actually took at my local community college last year and which I have engaged in with both of my novels. Romance writing is one of the most strictly formulaic types of writing there is. All writing requires certain elements of plot, but romance readers have certain expectations of what a romance novel should have.

A) Opening Scene and Inciting Incident

Now, a show is significantly different from a novel or even a movie. But I feel like the inciting incident for Elizabeth and Lucas was Lucas buying the saloon and coming to town. He was an outsider and not much was known about him. His purchase of the saloon shook up the town since Henry and Bill finally agreed to go in on the purchase together, only to find out they were too late. 

I think it's safe to say that the writers were not sure where the triangle was going to go when they first introduced it. So, I think it's only fair to include Nathan in this analysis as well. For his inciting incident, I think just his presence as the new Mountie is enough to shake both the town and Elizabeth. It's clearly jarring her to see that red serge again, the wound of Jack's death being still fresh in season 6 (for both her and us). But her choice to approach him on her own and welcome him to HV could also be the inciting incident because she could have tried to avoid him. By making that choice, she set off the trajectory of their relationship.

B) Meeting

The meeting isn't the only aspect of this element, the characters' attraction to each other is also established, even if they aren't thinking about love. I felt that Lucas and Elizabeth had the better "meet cute" than Nathan and Elizabeth. Lucas is clearly fumbling. He says he can usually read people, but he gets her totally wrong. With Nathan, it's a much more painful meeting, for both. We don't know it at the time, but Nathan is feeling guilty about his part in Jack's death. Elizabeth is struggling with this man who was sent to replace her husband. With Lucas, we see a bit of banter, and Lucas putting his foot in his mouth. It felt like there was a stronger attraction implied with Lucas, but then, since Nathan and Elizabeth are both in so much pain in relation to Jack, it's not really fair to judge this meeting. That said, this is another reason why I always saw Lucas as endgame. I don't know that Elizabeth would ever be able to truly separate Nathan from Jack despite the vast differences between the characters.

C) Development (Intimacy Grows)

Here the relationship is developed and the attraction becomes more prominent. In Season 6, we see more of the characters getting to know each other. Lucas helps Elizabeth with the library. Nathan and Elizabeth start to bond over their mutual affection for Allie. Lucas and Nathan are portrayed more as rivals as we get to later episodes. Nathan even calls out Lucas' interest in Elizabeth when discussing the library, which causes Elizabeth to confront Lucas. He quotes a book, but tells her that his interest in the library is only about the benefit to the town. Perhaps this is not entirely true, but I think his heart was in the right place. At the end of Season 6, Elizabeth chooses to dance with Lucas, but we see her looking at Nathan. This is actually where I think the storyline of her associating Jack with Nathan began, whether intentionally or not. The look in her eyes, to me, implies that she feels like Jack is watching her dance with another man. When Nathan leaves, the ghost of Jack leaves with him, and she turns back to Lucas with a smile.

D) Conflict

Lucas messes up big time with his secret and puts Elizabeth in danger. Nathan's jealousy over Lucas rubs Elizabeth the wrong way and she calls him out on his bias. Again, back then, we didn't know Nathan's motivation was his guilt over Jack's death and his decision to protect Elizabeth and LJ. 

D) and E) Periods of Happiness

We see the fluctuations between periods of happiness and conflict throughout Season 7. It's clear that the writers were working to build up both men as potential love interests. Elizabeth admits to Rosemary that her heart is open and is being pulled in two different directions. Lucas encourages Elizabeth's writing, but at a cost. She feels discouraged initially based on his review of her short stories, but ultimately is inspired to write a novel. Nathan is surprised and touched that Elizabeth is not asking him to talk Robert out of becoming a Mountie, and I think it's here that Nathan starts to understand the true depth of his feelings as well as hopes for reciprocation. (After all, if Elizabeth is okay with one of her students becoming a Mountie, she clearly hasn't sworn off the occupation, right?). 

Lucas declares his feelings for Elizabeth first. He asks her to a book reading and, after some deliberation, she agrees to go. He tells her that he is willing to wait for the woman of his dreams as long as he has to. This is a crucial scene in the Lucas/Elizabeth love story. He's declared his interest, and while Elizabeth doesn't reciprocate, she doesn't reject him outright either. When she returns home, she tells Rosemary the outing was "perfect."

In contrast, Nathan and Elizabeth get in a fight, supposedly over Elizabeth's actions on the mountain during the windstorm, but it's clearly about more than that. She tells him that she and Lucas were in Union City because Lucas asked. Nathan doesn't rise to that challenge immediately (again, we don't know his motivation at this point, though now in hindsight, his hesitation makes sense with his conflicting feelings about Jack's death). He does eventually ask her out, but here is where I feel like things were really turning towards Lucas: she hesitates. She doesn't talk to Rosemary about her hesitation like she did with Lucas. She just....hesitates. Then he is almost shot and we see her run into his arms at the end of Season 7 with Lucas looking on, and looking hurt.

In Season 8, we see more back and forth. Lucas left town shortly after the hug and Nathan doesn't seem to do anything to further pursue Elizabeth during Lucas' absence. They never do have that dinner. Lucas comes back and apologizes for his actions, explaining that he let jealousy get the better of him. It is notable that every time Lucas comes to her home, Elizabeth invites him in, and he refuses to do so. I asked my fellow Team Lucas hearties and every one of them said it was a sign of respect. I think that is an ongoing theme throughout Season 8. Lucas respects Elizabeth to make up her own mind and choose, but Nathan doesn't. He declares his love for her multiple times and fails to see how much these declarations hurt. Lucas doesn't say he loves her, but he shows his feelings through actions (planning dates, adjusting dates as needed for her comfort, respecting her space, allowing her to come to him, not pressuring her, etc.).

Elizabeth agrees to a dinner with Nathan and Allie and there is an adorable moment when the four of them are walking hand and hand down the street. But Lucas' mother arrives and Elizabeth changes her mind. Nathan never gets a date with Elizabeth. I think that was a smart move on the writers' part. In that time period, it wasn't normal to "date around." So, her hesitation in Season 7 likely stems from her already agreeing to go out with Lucas (even if it wasn't technically a date) and possibly also from her confusion over Nathan and Jack. 

She and Lucas fall out over Helen's insistence that Elizabeth not tell Lucas about his parents' separation. He says some harsh, but true, things to her and then walks away. Their interactions are distant and awkward for a while.

The conflict with Nathan and Elizabeth ups the ante when she tells him she can't be with him. We see happier times with Lucas and Elizabeth when they both apologize for their behavior (and I love his shy smile when she tells him about Nathan and he asks what that means for "us"). Allie causes conflict by inviting only Elizabeth to the adoption ceremony. Nathan says the famous "save it" to Lucas and then we later see Lucas throw that back at Nathan. 

And here we also see Nathan make the decision to continue to pursue Elizabeth. TN fans have praised this as "fighting for love" but as I said in my last post, it would have been better for him if he had listened to Elizabeth when she said her soft no. Could she have been more forceful in her refusal? Perhaps, but women have been raised to protect men's feelings for centuries and, especially at that time, I felt her refusal was pretty forceful enough. Lucas even tells him that his actions had better have Elizabeth's AND Allie's best interests in mind.

F) Conflict Crescendos

Nathan drops the bomb about Jack on Elizabeth. This causes a rift between Elizabeth and Rosemary. Lucas is so understanding of how she felt about it and offers to speak to Nathan on her behalf, with her permission (he learned his lesson from sending the chapters previously). Elizabeth confronts Nathan and he tells her he felt guilty because he was falling in love with her and it felt like dishonoring Jack. Again, his declaration makes Elizabeth uncomfortable enough to leave. 

Elizabeth experiences what I can only describe as a crisis of faith. This revelation from Nathan has reopened an old wound and it is bleeding and festering. She shies away from Lucas because she is confused over her feelings. A lot of TN fans said that the love triangle was really between Jack and Lucas and I think at this point, that is very true. Nathan's revelation has caused her to mourn Jack all over again, and in the process, her feelings have become all mixed up. This is where I think the triangle really becomes Jack, Elizabeth, and Lucas. Nathan, unfortunately, gets caught in the crossfire. I understand why TN is angry, I do, but this happens in real life. Elizabeth is not being callous, she is confused. She is pulling away from Lucas to sort out her feelings. When she forgives Nathan, he holders her hands and she doesn't cringe away from him because it would be very upsetting for him if, in the middle of telling him she doesn't blame him for Jack's death, she pulls away. So, she lets him hold her hands, and later she welcomes him into her house and warms his serge. But we see, at the end of the scene, the moment of familiarity and deja vu, where she shakes her head as if trying to clear it. And then she leans against the door after Nathan is gone, looking completely lost.

Lucas sees Nathan and Elizabeth outside of the wedding, and then he sees Nathan's horse outside of Elizabeth's house. He notices that Elizabeth is pulling away from him. He confronts Nathan about pressuring Elizabeth. 

G) Misery (The Big Black Moment)

All seems lost for Team Lucas. He comes to Elizabeth and tells her he is letting her go. He tells her that he wants her to find her true love. He tells her that love is worth fighting for, but it is also worth defending. She tries to talk to him, but he turns and walks away. It looks like everything is over for them and I'm sure after this episode, TN fans were cheering. In episode 12, Elizabeth approaches Lucas first, which implies that he is not the choice, but then they are interrupted, giving renewed hope to TL fans.

For Team Nathan, if he was the real romantic hero in this story, the big black moment may have been when Elizabeth tells Nathan she can't be with him way back in an earlier episode. Another moment that COULD have been the BBM was when Nathan tells her of his part in Jack's death, but even that doesn't lead to the next element of a romance novel. Nathan does get a redemption story in that Elizabeth forgives him, and he forgives himself and moves on from his guilt, but at the end of the day, it's not meant to be.

H) Resolution

This is the Happily Ever After or Happily For Now ending. Elizabeth tells Nathan that she does love him, but she's not in love with him. The writing has been on the wall since the episode she said she couldn't be with him. What I think TN didn't grasp was that it was never about Nathan fighting for Elizabeth's love, it was about Elizabeth fighting for her own love story. When Lucas tells her "what would you know about it" after confronting her about his mother's secret, it dawns on Elizabeth (eventually) that it's a valid criticism. She isn't fighting for anyone. Lucas has done all of the wooing, (which is why it's so amazing when Elizabeth returns the favor in the library at the end of the season finale). As my husband put it, Nathan's love is unrequited, so what is he really fighting for?

But of course, before we get there, we have to go through a bit more angst. After telling Nathan she isn't in love with him, Elizabeth doesn't immediately go to Lucas. Instead, Nathan tells Lucas what transpired between him and Elizabeth, and then encourages Lucas not to give up. Lucas is lost as to what the heck is going on in Elizabeth's mind because he hasn't heard from her. So, he makes plans to sell the saloon and leave. We see Elizabeth passing a note to him through Robert to invite him to the library, but she doesn't seek him out again. By the time she finally does, it appears to be too late and we see her distraught. She goes to the one place she feels closest to him, the bridge, and there he finds her. Hallmark gave us two beautiful scenes to solidify this love story: the passion on the bridge and then the real beginning of their courtship in the library, where Elizabeth makes it clear that THIS love is worth fighting for.

And there you have it. This is the love story that TN fans don't see. Some of TN feel that the hug at the end of Season 7 was the resolution of the triangle, but I disagree. Elizabeth lost her husband suddenly and then, at the end of the season, it appeared that she lost Nathan just as suddenly. If she was projecting her feelings towards Jack on Nathan, it was like Jack had survived the mudslide and come home to her. She was able to give Nathan the embrace she could never give Jack. For those who hate the way S8 ended and felt the Jack line Elizabeth gave was cheap, then consider that the hug was relief. I tweeted at the time that it felt more of a "I'm so glad you're not dead" hug. 

I also think it's interesting that people expected Nathan to be endgame or that he was "fighting" for love when 1) he didn't do anything to further his relationship in the offseason when Lucas was literally out of town, and 2) he forgot to bring her Florence's bouquet for a week after the wedding, which also sort of implies that he didn't really see her after the wedding until he came to her house. If he was really "fighting" for her, then wouldn't the little things matter? Big declarations of love are not what make a truly healthy and successful relationship work. It's the little things, the day-to-day interactions that help build a relationship. Meanwhile, Lucas invited her out to picnics, morning rides, and came to see her to help decorate her classroom (even though in that scene she didn't seem to want him there). But it mattered to him to spend time with her whenever he could. And not to harp on Nathan's decision to not tell Elizabeth about his role in Jack's death, but when Allie came to see Lucas, he immediately went to Elizabeth to tell her about it. Likewise, Elizabeth told him about her conversations with Nathan because honesty and communication is clearly important to both of them.

I read a meme recently on Facebook that talked about preferring fictional characters who truly enjoyed each other's company over the overdramatic fictional romances where they would literally die for each other. That's how I wrote the romance in my own novel and that's how I see Elizabeth and Lucas. They truly enjoy spending time together. I feel like Nathan's declarations of love and promise to quit the Mounties is more the overdramatic variety and I wonder how their relationship would progress without such theatrical moments.

Alright, enough about WCTH. Let's talk about Zoey's Extraordinary Playlist. So, this show is only in its second season, but it has packed quite a few emotional punches in its short time. Last season, we watched the heart-wrenching journey of Zoey saying goodbye to her dad. There was a lot of back and forth about the love triangle between Zoey, Max, and Simon, but I think the main story was about going through grief. In season 2, we see the aftermath of Zoey's loss. She tries to have a relationship with Max, but things are always unequal because of her special powers to hear heart songs. So, they put things on pause and she pursues things with Simon. For the last few episodes, it really felt like she and Max were slowly finding their way back to each other despite being in relationships with other people. Zoey, and the audience, are treated to a similar bombshell as in WCTH when it's revealed that Max gave up his chance at SPRQ Point so that Zoey could work there instead. In the season finale, Zoey finds out this information as well and we see a really poignant scene between her and Max where he explains why he did it. 

I appreciate that they had the breakup between her and Simon early on and I really love that it was Simon who initiated it. Zoey hasn't been treating him all that well and her refusal to share her special abilities was always going to hamper the relationship. I also loved that they showed Simon moving on, not only professionally, but just in general. His "I'm Still Standing" rendition was perfect and I think if Hallmark had maybe given TN fans a final scene between Nathan and Allie where it's clear that Nathan is bruised, but not broken, the finale may have gone over better. There's still time for that next season, but it may be too late. 

Back to Zoey. For a moment, it looked like she wasn't going to end up with either guy, but then Max shows up in the park and tells her that he and Rose broke up. Then, shocker of shockers! Zoey sings Max a heart song, and unlike in Season 1 where it's a power glitch, it's clear that Max now has the ability too! I really think they did a beautiful job with this episode and ending, but that's not really why I wanted to talk about it.

What really struck me is how, even though the fanbase was divided and there were teams for Max and Simon, all I saw on Twitter was love for the show and requests for a Season 3. There were no calls for boycotting. I didn't really see much in the way of argument from Team Simon (there was disappointment and annoyance, but not to the extent that WCTH had). There is certainly an argument that Zoey's handling of the triangle was better than WCTH, but I actually think it was worse in some ways. Zoey started out with Max, then they paused things and she pursued a relationship with Simon. On the one hand, maybe she needed to get Simon out of her system so she could truly commit to Max, but on the other, it was a bit disconcerting. Still, I think they handled her wavering, and more specifically her grief, very well. I think that's one thing that WCTH fans forget. Sure, it's been a few years since Jack died, but Elizabeth is still grieving. A part of her will always be grieving. My mother died almost 20 years ago and there are moments where it feels like it was yesterday. Grief is a journey, and it's rarely a straight line.

I appreciate that Zoey fans handled the end of the triangle with maturity. I wish I could say the same for WCTH, especially since it's been a week and I'm STILL seeing rude posts from fans. It's a television show. Let it go and move on. The show creator has been attempting to address the backlash, but I think at this point, he should stop poking the bear. Clearly, it's not helping and every time he posts, it just brings the negativity out of the woodwork. I understand he's trying to unite the fan base, but I think they can try to do that when they start filming or when the show actually airs. Give TN fans the time and grace to process what happened and hope that they give the show another chance. 

I'm trying to take my own advice and avoid social media, or at least, only communicate with the people who aren't mud-slinging. I'm looking forward to season 9 and what new stories it will bring.

When Calls the Heart - An Analysis

 I've taken a few days, watched more of the drama over the Season 8 finale play out over social media than I should have, and revisited some aspects of previous seasons. I don't typically use this blog for the purpose of analyzing television shows, but I feel like I need to say this, and since this site rarely gets any traffic, it feels a safe enough place to do so.

SPOILER ALERT - If you haven't seen the Season 8 finale of When Calls the Heart, stop here.

So, Elizabeth chose Lucas. I will state up front that I was Team Lucas, but not so much for the character himself (though I do love Chris McNally). I was team "tell a better story" and it seems that I was on the same page as the writers and the showrunner based on the interviews I've read/listened to. I liked Nathan, and I think he's got a bright future in Hope Valley, but I did not want to watch Elizabeth fall for another Mountie. I've seen a lot of arguments about the original story being about a teacher and a Mountie, but let's be real here. The original story was about a teacher named Elizabeth and a Mountie named Wynn. Not Jack. Not Nathan. Janette Oke eventually wrote a companion series for the show featuring the original Elizabeth's niece and a Mountie named Jarrick (Jack for short), but if you're going to complain about Hallmark going off book, you probably shouldn't have watched at all because the entire series is off book. The original Elizabeth spends much of her life with Wynn in the northern territories, not in a small town like Hope Valley, and the last couple of books in the series are focused on their children.

Now that we've got that out of the way, let's delve into the show. In season 5, hearties everywhere were devastated when Daniel Lissing chose to leave the show to pursue other opportunities and the decision was made to kill off Jack. We all loved Jack. We waited five seasons for Jack and Elizabeth to really begin their lives together. Because Hallmark had dragged out their courtship for so long, we had a limited experience with that life and I think a lot of us felt cheated. They gave us a beautiful wedding and Elizabeth was revealed to be pregnant with Jack's son at the end, but let's be real again. That wasn't what we wanted. I think most fans that stuck with the show made their peace with that situation as Daniel Lissing's decision left Hallmark with limited options. I don't think we would have liked him recast, but it was hard to see Elizabeth's (and our) hopes and dreams dashed so brutally.

Then in season 6, we were dealt another blow. I'll be 100% honest here, I feel like the situation with Lori Loughlin was handled appropriately and I'm in no hurry to see her return to the show. If they chose to recast Abigail, that would be one thing, but I also will not pledge to leave the show if they do bring her back. I question how difficult that would be since she is a convicted felon and Canada has laws against allowing felons into the country within a certain timeframe of their sentencing, but that's Canada's and Hallmark's decision to make, not mine. 

We were warned early on that Elizabeth would not be paired with someone immediately and I think it was wise that the showrunners gave both her and the viewers a chance to truly grieve. We were also warned of the love triangle. This is not the first love triangle of the show, though it was truly the most played up. We had Elizabeth, Rosemary, and Jack. We had Elizabeth, Jack, and Billy Hamilton. We also had Elizabeth, Jack, and Charles. I know nobody really thought any of those other triangles stood a chance, which is why I think Hallmark thought to up the stakes a bit. Elizabeth has already had one great love of her life, and it would make sense for her to take her time in finding her second great love. 

Now, I've watched multiple interviews, and I've read various articles. I know what all of the polls said about who the fans thought Elizabeth should choose. I have two things to say about the polls. First, most of the polls were taken after filming ended. Unless Hallmark had made the decision to film Elizabeth choosing both men separately and then aired the ending of the one most favored by fans, those polls were unlikely to have any impact on the outcome. Second, ask Hilary Clinton how accurate polling is. For every American who has tweeted or posted about the polls, I can't help shaking my head. Clearly, we have learned absolutely nothing from the 2016 election... I will also add that if my daughter's local school system followed their own polls or social media commentary, they would have reopened at full capacity back in September and my daughter probably would have gotten COVID. There's something to be said about a vocal minority, no matter what unscientific polling says (and they are unscientific because on many of the ones I've seen, people can vote multiple times just by refreshing the page).

I want to break this down by the arguments I've seen and my counter points to those arguments. So, let's get to it, shall we?

1. The original story was between a teacher and Mountie.

I've addressed this above, but I will make one final point: the original story is about a teacher. The original books are all written from Elizabeth's point of view (at least until the ones focused on her children). It was her story. I've seen people talking about how they want to move on from Elizabeth's story and focus on other characters in Hope Valley. I think, since Jack's death, Hallmark has done a much better job of incorporating other characters' storylines into the episodes. But if people are going to make the argument for the original premise, then the showrunners can't really delegate Elizabeth to the background. That's why all of the promo pictures show Elizabeth front and center. It's her story.

2. Elizabeth is unrecognizable from the earlier seasons.

I think that was part of the point of season 8. Previously, we saw Elizabeth mourning Jack and trying to come into her own as a single mother. In season 8, she had to confront her growing feelings for two different, honorable men. Nathan dropped multiple bombshells on her. First, that he loves her, and second, that he was supposed to be on that training mission, but Jack went in his place. I think we saw a lot of Elizabeth in the anger stage of grief. She was angry at Nathan for what she initially saw as his part in Jack's death. She lashed out at Rosemary for telling her, truthfully, that it wasn't Nathan's fault. She's already confused about her feelings for Nathan, and now she probably can't help wondering if she would have kept her distance from him if he had revealed this devastating news to her sooner. Hurt people hurt people. She's also depressed, she states she feels so lost. With Jack, she had a clear choice, her heart was 100% his, even when they faltered in season 2, we all knew they belonged together. If Elizabeth's own words and actions don't demonstrate that she had a tough choice, the divided fanbase certainly should. We watched her go from that anger and depression to acceptance. Jack is gone. He was, as one fan eloquently put it, "called home" and that was why he was her season. I saw someone complain about how this was portrayed, that they would be really upset if someone called their late spouse a season. I don't think the writers meant disrespect with this wording. She wanted Jack to be her lifetime. Hell, we ALL wanted Jack to be her lifetime, but it wasn't meant to be. Elizabeth finally came to terms with this and we see that when she removes her rings. Her heart is ready, she is ready, to let go of Jack and all of the hopes and dreams she held for their future.

3. The writers dragged Team Nathan on for ratings.

First of all, everything the show does is for ratings. The cliffhangers in earlier seasons? For ratings. Ratings are how the show survives. If they don't boost their ratings, they get cancelled. Welcome to television economics 101.

Secondly, they really didn't. Elizabeth told Nathan in episode 2 that she couldn't give him what he wanted. Now, clearly, many fans have analyzed this as Elizabeth running away from the pain of losing Nathan like she lost Jack. But hear me out. Nathan promises he won't let anything happen to himself and swears he'll quit the Mounties. Elizabeth would never want that for him. She wouldn't want him to sacrifice his career, his livelihood, or any dreams for her. She's not that type of person, and for all the people who say she's "unrecognizable," she clearly learned this lesson from Jack in season 2. Her father offered Jack a position, she encourages him to consider it, but he tells her that that is not him. She accepts this for Jack, why would she now do a 180 for Nathan? Not to mention, if Nathan gives up the Mounties, then the argument from #1 is null and void because either way she chooses, she ends up with not-a-Mountie. 

Going back to my original point. Elizabeth told Nathan she could not give him what he wanted. Nathan (and apparently Team Nathan) took this as a challenge to "fight for love." In the words of the amazing Captain Awkward, if someone tells you they can't or don't want to be with you, believe them. Take them at their word. If Elizabeth were to change her mind in the future and come back to Nathan, then that's fine because then it's HER choice. And she would have to deal with any consequences of Nathan moving on from her at that point. Lucas understood this. In episode 11, we see him let Elizabeth go so she can find her own way. That wonderful saying people quote all the time "if you love something, set it free," that is what Lucas did. Nathan got there in episode 12, but I feel like he might have had a better chance if he had let her go in episode 2. He didn't. He also insisted to Rosemary that he wasn't ready to do that yet. I get it, he loves her, it's hard to walk away from someone you love. But this isn't a fairytale. It's fictional, but that's different from a fairytale, and I think there's something to be said about giving someone the space to determine their own feelings about you and not trying to "fight" your way into their heart.

Now, I'm going to take moment to get personal. I have been in a few love triangles in my time. Some of them were true triangles where I was torn between two men, but most of them have been forced triangles in that, I had already made a choice, and the potential suitor who wasn't that choice wouldn't let go. So for me, this situation after episode 2 started to feel like the second scenario, but then later proved to be the first. Elizabeth told Nathan she couldn't give him what he wanted, she went to Lucas and told him what she had told Nathan, and then she and Lucas started clearly courting. I once switched public transportation stations and took a completely different train to avoid one of the men who wouldn't let go. Elizabeth doesn't have much option in avoiding Nathan and I think, since she wants to be his friend (in my situation, by the time I switched stations, I was done), she wouldn't want to avoid him anyway.

My point here is: the signs were there. Yes, in later episodes it seemed like Elizabeth was faltering or wavering in her choice, which is what led Lucas to let her go in episode 11. And I think that's completely natural in a true love triangle because she truly does love both men. But I think there were even signs in those episodes that Elizabeth was coming to terms with her projection of Jack onto Nathan. The scene with the serge by the fire? The look in her eyes told me she was thinking of Jack, and I feel like at that moment, it started to dawn on her what she was doing. 

The other thing that drives me crazy about this argument is that many fans seem to want to have their cake and eat it too. I've seen the same people saying that "Nathan never had a shot" while cursing the show for not choosing him. If you feel that Nathan never had a shot (which I honestly agree with), then why on earth would you expect him to be the winner at the end? He and Elizabeth never even had one date. The one time they were supposed to go to dinner, she cancelled to see Lucas' mother. And when Allie invited her to go to dinner at their house, she turned her down flat. Besides, a lot of the scenes that led Lucas to let her go were a misinterpretation on his part in my opinion. Elizabeth told him that Nathan told her he loves her, but didn't really have an answer when Lucas asked her what she said in response. Then he saw Nathan's horse in front of Elizabeth's house, but didn't know the purpose of the visit, which leads me to... 

4. Lucas wasn't fighting for love, he just left.

I don't disagree with this argument, but I have a different interpretation. Lucas has never had a reason to stay in one place for a long period. In season 7, he tells Elizabeth that he came to Hope Valley in the hopes of one day settling down and having a family. But he acknowledges that he's traveled a lot and moved around in his youth. So, here he thinks he's found the woman of his dreams, and it looks like he's about to lose her to another guy. He's heartbroken, and he's trying to protect himself. We saw a lot of Lucas protecting himself in his first season: answering Bill's questions very vaguely. Team Nathan fans have said he has something to hide (despite evidence that his deep dark secret was revealed in Season 6 and, ironically, it was NATHAN who had the big dark secret this season, but I digress), but I think that's just how he's learned to be. I compare him to Allie in this way. The constant movement, the lack of roots, it's similar. Allie protected her heart when she first got to Hope Valley, too. Lucas has never been as fully embraced and welcomed to Hope Valley as Allie has (nor by the fan base based on comments I've seen on social media). I expect that next season we will start to peel back more layers of Lucas' background and character. But as long as it was clear that Elizabeth was unsure of her feelings for him, I don't blame him for not putting it all out there. He was not only vulnerable, he was respectful of Elizabeth's feelings and wanted her to come to him on her own. Again, from my own personal experience, Elizabeth's comment of Nathan making the situation harder is spot on. She's confused, and having someone declare their love for you is overwhelming, especially if you just told them you can't be with them.

This is also one of the many reasons I support the writers in choosing Lucas. I'm not sure what else would have kept him in Hope Valley beyond Elizabeth. He was ready to sell the saloon at the end of season 8, so I don't know that he'd have any qualms about moving on if she had chosen Nathan instead. But Nathan has Allie and he already gave up a promotion to stay, for her. That said, I do have some annoyance at the storyline that Nathan came to HV to protect Elizabeth because in season 6, he was offered a promotion and almost left. So, it seems odd that he would even consider the promotion if he came to HV to protect Elizabeth. 

5. Elizabeth is reverting back to her "spoiled" Hamilton self.

I had a really hard time with this argument because in season 2, Elizabeth, very clearly, tells Jack that Hamilton and HV are both huge parts of her. She states that she likes living in a big house in Hamilton when she's there, but she also loved being on the homestead. I think we're seeing a revisit to her former life in Hamilton with Lucas and I think it's a good thing to remember that she still appreciates both aspects of herself. Before season 7, we hadn't really seen her Hamilton life so much since season 2 as Julie came to see her in HV and we haven't seen much of her family otherwise. So, it was nice to see her revisit her roots. I think this is another positive thing for the Lucas choice. They have a common background, but they both seem to prefer the small town life offered in HV. I will never understand what is wrong with Elizabeth loving both the life she left in Hamilton and the life she has built in HV. Does everyone making this argument also hate their home town if they left it? 

6. Lucas is not a family man/cannot cut firewood

I cannot even believe I have to dignify this argument with a response. Is Nathan the ONLY man in HV who can cut wood? Besides, Jack cut wood first, so doesn't that mean Nathan is just a copycat? See how ridiculous that sounds? And Lucas told her in season 7 that he was looking at HV as a place to settle down and start a family. If Nathan is the only "Family Man TM" allowed in HV, then what does that make Lee and Jesse?

7. Lucas is a saloon owner and that is the worst profession for that time period.

What about HV reminds people of Old West movies? Seriously, what about it? Sure, there's been some criminals who have come to town a few times, but the saloon doesn't also have a brothel or cancan girls dancing in the background. I saw one comment say that a teacher would be fired if they stepped foot in a saloon back then and it took a large degree of willpower not to respond sarcastically with "then I guess Elizabeth should have been fired in season 1 since she literally taught school there." Some of these arguments...I just can't even.

Besides, Lucas is not only a saloon owner, is he? While I would argue that the "saloon" is really more of a restaurant/bar/hotel, he also has stake in the oil business. So, he could, at some point, sell the saloon and take more of an interest there. 

8. The storylines are already similar between Lucas and Elizabeth to Elizabeth and Jack.

I think we need to have a conversation about what is an actual "storyline" and what is a similar background or action in a scene. A storyline has a plot, it's not just a gesture or a similar background. For example, the storyline of Jesse being lost on a mountain in the woods, THAT is a repeated storyline. But I've seen some really ridiculous comparisons as "storylines." For instance, I saw someone comparing Elizabeth and Jack watching fireworks to Lucas and Elizabeth watching the lanterns just because they were both looking up at the sky. Completely different holidays (E&J were at New Year's, E&L were at Christmas) and circumstances, but because they were standing together watching something in the sky, it was the same. Just...what?

The candles in the final scene were also compared to past scenes with Elizabeth and Jack. I think that's more a question of Hallmark's choice of background than a storyline. 

That's it for arguments, so let me take a minute to talk about the storyline itself.

A fellow Team Lucas fan stated that they felt like we watched a different show from Team Nathan. I know a few TN fans who said they fast-forwarded through the TL scenes, but I don't think the vast majority did this. I think some of it was misinterpretation. I've seen others say that the story wasn't told right and I can agree that's a valid criticism. There were parts of the finale that even I felt were rushed. But I think the reason the season worked for me was because I understand how easy it is to falter when you are in a true love triangle. There's even a musical that addresses the different paths our lives could lead based on the choices we make: If/Then. I've never seen the full musical, but I've read the premise and listened to the soundtrack enough to know that we follow the protagonist down two different paths she could take.

I think the story could have been told better, and I agree with fans who have said it would have been a better story if they had known the character arcs going into it. But I think that's the difference between a movie or a novel in that a writer can plan for a character arc. With television, you're limited to your season and, for whatever reason, Hallmark chose not to really pursue either guy in season 7, they focused more on building up the triangle itself. I think if they had gone into this with a clear choice in mind, it would have been a better story. As I said, this is a valid criticism I have seen from TN fans, that it didn't seem like the writers had a clear end goal. I do think some of the wavering Elizabeth had later in the season was to up the ante and boost ratings, but I also think there were some things TN is in denial about. I'm currently rewatching seasons 6-8, so I may do a follow-up post on this. I am currently working on a novel that will include a love triangle and I have a clear winner in mind, so I'm hoping my story will receive a better reception (should I ever get published) than this story did, but I have the benefit of writing a full length novel and not just a seasonal show.

Erin said in interviews that they couldn't go wrong with either guy and I think, if the majority of TN fans I've seen being vocal on social media (note this is not inclusive of all TN. Let me rephrase in a way that makes sense in this day and age: #NotAllTeamNathan) had given Lucas even a hint of a chance, they wouldn't have been so blindsided. Based on the comments I've seen, a lot of people see him as a "sleazy" "saloon-owner" who is "clearly hiding something." This has amused me to no end because at the same time people are tearing down Lucas, they are raising up Henry in his ongoing redemption story. I guess HV only has room for one redemption at a time? 

Personally, I expected that she would pick Nathan because of the predictable storyline. I stopped watching the show live and would watch it later in the week for two reasons: 1) the 9 p.m. time went too late for me and 2) the fanbase had become a rabid cesspool of its former self. For everyone saying Elizabeth was unrecognizable, look at the tweets of the so-called "hearties" even before Lucas was revealed as the choice. Now, somehow, it has denigrated even further.

I think I've beat the love triangle to death, but I do want to talk about one other aspect of the finale and a storyline as a whole: Elizabeth's journey as a writer. We saw her write her short stories and try and fail to publish them. Jack created a book of them for her with his illustrations, which was beautiful. We see her share her dream with Lucas and his encouragement. She falters, it impacts their developing relationship, but ultimately she decides to embrace a bigger challenge: writing a novel. She meets his mother, they argue over changes, but it culminates beautifully in a finished manuscript in the finale. 

This has been my favorite storyline. I'm a writer (if this blog post doesn't prove it) and I was so inspired by Elizabeth's journey that last summer I enrolled in a MFA program in fiction writing. I've finished a novel and am working on a second while editing that novel. If things work out, I might be a published author at Hallmark itself. That would be a dream come true! So, if any of the WCTH writers are reading this, know that this storyline was truly inspiring! As happy as I am that Lucas was the choice in the end, the love triangle does not compare in my heart to seeing Elizabeth come into her own as a writer. It was just what this writer needed to relight a fire of my own.

I am looking forward to season 9. I hope the fallout from the love triangle heals with time and cooler heads prevail above the more vocal fans, but even if this does become the last season for this show, I'm amazed at how much it has grown in the last 8 years. Kudos to the cast and crew! #heartieforlife