There has long been discussion in the romance world about soulmates: Those who are fated/destined to be together but really have no choice in it. One example of this is Christine Feehan‘s Carpathians, which are featured in her Dark series. For those of you unfamiliar with the series, each Carpathian male loses all of his emotions at a certain age. He is unable to feel or even see color until he meets his Lifemate. The only other way to for them to feel emotion is by killing, thus redendering them vampires – evil personified. Once they meet their Lifemate, color is retored to their lives and they must bond with her, or they may still fall to the dark side.
Some readers love the idea of a Lifemate, the one person who can save them from the darkness, the only person that can give them color back in their lives. Others hate that the choice has been taken from the women.
Because that’s the rub. The woman, the Lifemate, has no say in the matter. The Carpathians possess a mating bond, words they must say that bind the two together. Once said, the words cannot be taken back, and the bond is permanent. From that moment forward they cannot be apart from one another for more than a short period of time, or else they’ll literally go mad.
In the HeartMates series by Robin D. Owen (see my review of book 7, Heart Fate) there is one HeartMate for each person – their one true soul mate. In this series, there is a HeartMate for each person, though they can choose not to accept the bond if they wish. In Heart Fate, the H/H chose not to accept their bond right away because they were both suffering serious heartbreak and needed time to heal first. Though they did acknowledge that they would probably accept one another some day, there was a possibility that they wouldn’t. They had a choice on whether or not to accept, but the bond was still there.
In many shifter paranormals the h/h are mated as well. A good example is Night Play by Sherrilyn Kenyon, part of her Dark Hunters Series. After one time together Bride and Vane were mated, neither of them having been given a choice. Had they not accepted each other, Vane would have been left impotent for the rest of his life – unable to be with anyone ever again.
Personally, I’m not sure how I feel about it. On the one hand, it’s kind of romantic to know you’re literally saving the life of your one true love. On the other, to not be given a choice is ridiculously archaic. I think I prefer it when the choice is theirs to make, as with the HeartMates (as an aside: I haven’t read any of the other books in Owens’ HeartMates series, so I don’t know if others were forced into accepting. I’ve been collecting the books but don’t plan to start until I have all of them in the series. That way I can binge if I want 😀 ). Though the bond is there, they have the choice on whether or not to accept it. And unlike with the Carpathians, both parties have to accept, not just one. On the other hand, if done well, seeing two people make a choice to live with their bond can be beautiful.
Of course, the Lifemate bonding ritual is kind of romantic anyway, the words poetic and beautiful:
“I claim you as my lifemate. I belong to you. I offer my life for you. I give you my protection, my allegiance, my heart, my soul, and my body. I take into my keeping the same that is yours. Your life, happiness and welfare will be cherished and placed above my own for all time. You are my lifemate, bound to me for eternity and always in my care.”
Although, in my (not so) humble opinion, much of the beauty behind them is lost, since only the hero says the pledge, often without giving the heroine a choice. Hearing both of them say the words, willingly, would make it so much sweeter. Don’t you think?
How do you feel about soulmates? Not those in contemporary or historical romances who seem to complete each other, but those that have no choice. The ones destined to be together, who will face dire consequences if they refuse.
I like the idea of soul mates…. but there are many types as you mentioned. A choice is important. Even today, I believe in soul mates, but if not nurtured, it doesn’t mean that it works out the way you want. So yes, choice is imperative.
That being said, I still read all those you mentioned that don’t have a choice. LOL.
Teresa,
I like the idea of soul mates, too, but sometimes the idea of “forced” soul mates bothers me.
Of course, like you, that doesn’t stop me from reading – and liking – them.
😛
In all the books I have read with soul mates, even if one of the people involved does not agree to the union at the beginning, there has always been a happy ending….they realize they actually are in love forever and they can’t imagine living any other way. And, I can’t think of a time where I didn’t agree…the authors have to build up the angst to reward the readers at the end.
However, it might be a nice change of pace to hear the heroine say it first, and have to convince the hero to follow through with the relationship throughout the book 🙂
Well, I have to admit I never really thought about the whole “being forced” part, but you have a point there.
I think what literally blinded me was the whole way the authors made up the bonding – it is usually so romantic that I don’t think much about the fact that one part (mostly the woman) has no real choice.
There are those cases, though, when it really bothers me because the woman already found someone she’s in love with. Some authors see to make a habit of destroying this first relationship then, only to pair up the otherwise commited partner to the one the author wants her (or him) to be with. That makes me cringe and sometimes even stop reading the book (unless the current partner is a jackass…).
Wendy,
I totally had you in mind when I started this post. Heh.
I agree, the idea of being stuck with my Rat Bastard ex doesn’t appeal in the least. OTOH, if done well reading about two people learning to love one another after being forced together can be spectacular. It’s not terribly different from arranged marriages in historical romances, is it?
*innocent look*
Kathrin,
That isn’t something I’ve read before (breaking up one b/c of a mating) but it would definitely make me stop reading, too.
Spark,
You’re right, it does work out in the end, but still..having them be FORCED to accept, rather than make the choice consciously..well, that doesn’t always sit right with me.
I like the idea of that one person that’s out there for me and is perfect for me in every way – and most of the stories I read about it are pretty darned romantic in the end.
That being said there are those stories that drive me nutty because the woman is forced – Feehan’s Carpathians. It didn’t bug me at first…probably because that was the first story I’d read of “soul mates” but after a couple of books I wanted to whack the men over the head because they were so domineering and not giving the women the choice. I don’t want any man doing shit like that behind my back…or in any book I read. 🙂
Holly, I had this storyline once, where a seemingly happy couple was broken up just so that the two “meant for each other” could come together . yuck!
I think it is a lovely idea/ideal, and to me it sorta goes with the idea of “only one” or “perfect for each other” kind of thing, but in real life that doesn’t really work. Just like no choice or no free will doesn’t really work in real life. It’s great to read about once in a while in a romance though, as in the back of mind I am still thinking “well, they’re obviously meant to be, right!?”
LOL I saw the title and thought look a post for wendy *g*
I like the idea of soulmates. It is a wonderful ‘idea’ makes for great fiction.
Do I believe it in truth? Prolly not but it makes for a great romance.
I like the idea of soulmates but not the lack of choice. If there isn’t a choice, then how can the bond be accepted by both parties? In CL Wilson’s books the female has to consciously and subconsciouly accept the bond…saying the words means nothing – she has to believe them.
…I had this storyline once, where a seemingly happy couple was broken up just so that the two ‘meant for each other’ could come together.
Really? See, that for me doesn’t work. If the couple in question were drifting apart because of their decisions fine, but not forceably separating them…. *gobsmacked*
The reason I love CL Wilson’s Tairen Soul series so much is because of its nuanced treatment of the concept of soulmates. Yes, it brings extraordinary joy and pleasure, but it can also be used to manipulate and cause great suffering.
I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE soulmates, forced or unforced, doesn’t matter to me. While I don’t really believe in it in RL, it’s a wonderful concept *still waiting for mine* LOL.
One of my favorite of SK’s Were-Hunters was Wren & Maggie, because they fell in love without the mating mark. Wren’s feelings that it was unfair they weren’t marked was awesome. Same thing with Lora Leigh’s Mercury & Ria, he said she was his soulmate even without the mating heat…nice.
I’ve tried Feehan’s books and personally found the whole Lifemate thing kind of creepy.
However, I DO like bonds between characters, both in and out of the romance genre. I find them fascinating, especially metaphysical bonds, which allow the characters to use the others’ powers, to speak mind to mind, to know how the other is feeling, etc. But, when it comes to the romance genre, where I’m supposed to be convinced of the characters’ happiness by the end of the novel, I like to see that they both had a choice; that they’re together because they want to be, because of who they are and what they mean to each other, not simply because the universe told them so. The most romantic bonds to me are the ones the characters formed through mutual understanding of one another, through respect, and through love. One example of what I find acceptable is Nalini Singh’s Psy/Changeling series (I swear I am such a Singh fangirl, lol). I love how her changelings form deep mating bonds but that it has to be accepted by other party in order for the bond to be complete.
Hate, hate, hate, hate – hate with a seething passion hate. Forced soul mates is the reason I no longer read werewolf books. Seriously. Haaaaattttttteeeeeeee.
I like the characters to have free will. Free will is really sexy. Also, as a female I resent the idea that there’s “Only one guy out there for you. Just the one. No one else. And if you think he’s a douchebag – well too bad chica – cuz that guy was your one.”
I also think that human beings have an amazing capacity for love. We evolve. We move forward. Certainly we love our current mates – but that doesn’t mean we’re incapable of loving someone else. It’s just different. Love is not one size fits all.
Or it could just be that I shudder to think that one of my asshole exes was really my soul mate…..
Well sort of. But in most marriage of convenience stories the characters still have a “choice.” Granted, it’s not always an attractive choice (Heroine: OK, marry this guy or become totally destitute and resort to prostitution. Hmmm, decisions decisions).
Still, it is a choice and there’s no high power/deity telling the heroine “If you don’t marry this guy you’ll never have twu wuv ever, ever, ever. It’s either learn to love this guy or nothing at all.”
I think it’s the idea that the characters will never know happiness if they don’t succumb to the forced soul mate garbage. I think that’s what bothers me the most. Sort of feeds into the clap-trap that a woman needs a man. Hey, I like men – but do I need one?
And now I’ll stop hijacking this thread. Seriously, I get rabid on this subject.
I love the whole predestined mate concept. I guess part if it is because of my personal experience. I know I blogged about this on Alisha Paige’s blog so you may already have read about how I met my husband. The weekend before I met him, my best friend and I were drunk in the desert at a party. She asked me to describe my dream man. There was a meteor shower with hundreds of falling stars so we wished on them. A couple of days later she told me she had met my future husband. He had just moved from England to the US. So within a week I made a wish that perfectly described him, he moved from another continent and we became a couple.
Who’s to say that there isn’t one perfect person for each of us? By that I mean in one of Feehan’s books the heroine had been fairly happily married but he died. She met her lifemate and realized how much more there could be. Same thing with Jory Strong’s Fallon Mates. Zeraac had a fiance that he had loved. She dumped him thinking he was infertile. After discovering that Ariel was his match (each woman has two), he discovered that what he previously thought of as love was tame in comparison.
I can’t think if any were the first happy couple was split up against their will because of a predestined second couple. Titles?
Dance Chica has it right. Thru the post and comments, I was totally thinking of the way Nalini Singh does “mated” pairs. There’s the whole knowing they are mated to each other, and then accepting the bond, either consciously or unconsciously. I like that, since it gives the opportunity for choice.
I really do like the mated pairs theme in paranormals. It’s easy to get caught up in the romance of it.
The only part that makes me a little uncomfortable is the idea that if one of the couple dies, the other will either follow them (into death) or they will never find another person to love. The last book really bothered me about that, because the couple had children they were going to raise together, and regardless, the male told the female (who was possibly terminally ill) that he’d still follow her to death when she died. I kept wanting to yell at him, “What about the kids?!” She even mentions that to him and he doesn’t seem to care. And then she drops it. That totally brought me out of the book.
Now, are there any books about mated pairs where it’s entirely the woman’s need to mate? The only one I can think of is Caressed by Ice (Psy-Changeling, book 3.) Does this change the dynamic of mated pairs?
Oh, I do so love soul mates when done right.
I have not read Feehan *gasp* so I didn’t know the heroes forced the bond onto the female. I have to admit I don’t like that idea at all.
I’ve been reading Kresley Cole and she has ‘mated’ pairs but the author makes it clear it’s not love. It’s a biological need and for some reason the males can’t fight it. (Again, I’m not loving that part) In one of her stories the heroine asks the hero ‘do you love me?’ and he was stumped. He hadn’t thought of love only that he knew she was his mate. I liked that twist to ‘mates’.
I guess the idea that you get colour or life or sex from your one true mate and only that person, then wouldn’t this person be like a drug? And the idea you can’t be apart for any length of time? Yetch.
I’m waiting to read Singh’s story about the were-wolf that lost his soul mate as a young boy. They knew they would be a mated pair but she died during an attack.
I’d also like to see a story where the H/H first love was a great love. Someone they were truly happy with. That the H/H could bring the lessons of a great love to their new mate. If I had a ‘writer’s bone’ in my body I would write it 😉
CindyS
LOL – I wondered if Wendy would see this one. I remember a conversation we had about them most fondly *chuckle*
If done well, I love ’em. Like you I don’t like the forced aspect of them. But when both hero and heroine recognize that they are just ‘it’ for each other and nothing can keep them apart – I love me those type.
I like the idea of soulmates and all 🙂 I think that they really exist, but the difficulty is to meet them. However, when the hint becomes a bit too apparent – example: tattoo on the hand or seeing colors, it takes away a bit of the fun. and seriously, I don’t see the attraction in discovering a soulmate that you have to “save.”
The rest of the Robyn Owen’s books are like that too – it’s actually illegal (and this is enforced) in that ‘verse to inform your ‘heartmate’ that they are – they have to realise it and accept it on their own.
Mostly this trope make me spit tacks – the only time I like it is when it’s a biochemical thing, and not mystical and the author uses that as one of the conflicts to be resolved in the book. Mystical soulmates generally make me retch.
the only time I like it is when it’s a biochemical thing, and not mystical… Mystical soulmates generally make me retch.
FD, I’m curious to know if you’ve read Christine Feehan’s GhostWalker series (biochemical soulmates) and CL Wilson’s Tairen Soul series (mystical soulmates). I personally find Wilson’s truemate concept much more compelling and complex than Feehan’s. (Though I agree, the concept of mystical soulmates can be badly executed under the wrong pen.)
I have indeed Kat. And I agree, C.L.Wilson’s series is better thought out and better written than Feehans. In fact, I’ve heard it cited as ‘I don’t like soulmates, but she does it well’ a whole bunch of times; so many times that now I consider it the exception that proves the rule. *cheeky grin*
Feehan kinda proves my point actually – she doesn’t really use the understandable conflicts that would arise from being tied for life to a comparative stranger by your biochemistry. The heroines might kick up a bit – but they are feeble protests and die off quickly in response to the onslaught of love/lust-at-first-sight (literally, what with the colours thing – that made me lmao when I first connected that) from the always ridiculously alpha hero.
Lora Leigh has the exact same problem – she has a fantastic set up for exploring issues of choice and consent and compromise and she backs off it every time. Coyote’s Mate was my ‘wall’ with her because of the way she handled certain issues in it.
In the right hands, the soulmate theme is a fantastic tool for exploring conflicts and creating an emotional journey, but all too often the author cops out and uses it as a short cut to HEA – and I just don’t believe it works like that.
Thinking about it some more, probably the reason the biological soulmates idea works better for me is because I’m naturally heavily science based, not faith based, so I just grok it better. 😉
FD, got any recs for good science-based soulmate stories? 😀