Barrelhouse TV Workshop: Love is Blind Part 3
In the Barrelhouse Television Workshop, writers look at the way we tell stories across media, the way those "writer moves" work, and why they may or may not work in certain situations. Next week, we’ll be discussing “Love is Blind,” the Netflix dating show.
PRODUCTION MOVES
Jackson Blss (JB): Did you ever feel like the writers/editors/producers of LiB put their thumb on the scale too much &/or intentionally manipulated you into feeling something about a couple or a character you resisted? How much of this was the reality tv genre & how much this show in particular?
Leonora Desar (LD): Yes! Excellent question. One thing that really stood out was the heartlessness of the I-Don’ts. This wasn’t just you-know-who (JESSICA), but other characters I wouldn’t have imagined doing this: Kelly, Damian. None of these characters (ahem, people) were exactly Mother Theresa, but you’d think they’d have made up their minds the night before, or have had a pretty good idea of what they were going to do. And would have, in an ordinary, camera-free world, have told their partners.
One thing I wondered watching this: were the couples contractually obliged? Did they have to walk it to the altar, even if it was to say: I cannot. And I think the answer is probably yes. And this sucks. It may make for good TV, but it also takes the viewer out of narrative. We’re aware that we’re being manipulated, and more so, we stop suspending disbelief, to use a fancy literary term. We stop being swept along for the ride, ignoring that it’s a manipulated environment. The strings and puppet master come into view.
This struck me as harsher than other shows. Though maybe not. Maybe the bachelor, for instance, knows exactly who he wants a few weeks in, but is under contract to keep us guessing, all the way through the fantasy suite (and beyond).
JB: Yeah, I wondered the same thing. It felt like couples weren’t allowed to call off the marriage until the altar since marriage was not only the most dramatic public performance of romantic intention here but also the one measurable goal as well. Even though the show is predicated on love, love is obviously ambiguous, volatile, subjective, and ill-defined. And different characters on the show used the same word to mean different things at different times with different intentions, which is probably why LiB pushed public vows as the ultimate outcome because at least marriage was quantifiable.
But this is where LiB sometimes thumbed the scales a bit for me. I got the impression that most of the cast wouldn’t have rushed to the chapel of love if that hadn’t been one of the rules of the show to begin with, so the dramatic rejections seemed predictable and even engineered in a way. This is why the beginning & middle game of Love is Blind for me did the best work, namely, encouraging people to form meaningful & intense emotional connections without the white noise of reality before they could classify or label each other or privilege their physical attraction over everything else. The end game here, OTOH, really wasn’t about love, & maybe that’s part of the reason it was such a compelling catastrophe.
Kate Mead-Brewer (KMB): I definitely agree about the (failed) weddings being a particularly intense moment of the showrunners putting their thumb on the scale. Another instance of this that stood out to me were the group date nights during the honeymoon period. The peculiar stress of these group dates is something the participants (contestants? lovers? characters?) almost definitely wouldn’t have to contend with in the “real world,” and so it seemed uniquely unfair to the couples who were still trying to find their feet with each other. Ex’s are certainly a “real world” issue for couples, but this seemed next-level.
LD: Yes, that’s such a great point. One of my favorite moments of the show was Lauren’s face when they all found out about the compound/living together situation.
Melissa Ragsley (MR): It’s such a good point about the weddings on one hand being a quantifiable endpoint and easily the least enjoyable part of the series. It bothers me so much this is where we have to steer the car towards (insert Thelma and Louise driving off a cliff GIF here) but where else are they going to steer it towards.
The scale was off with the show itself. It seemed like a genuine thoughtful intention behind those pods with their open bars and glowing blue wall, but to sell the show and guarantee viewers, there must be wedding gowns! And maybe that weaving of absolute trash TV of brides running away and the genuine thrill of people who meet each other face-to-face after catching feelings, the lowbrow and the high(ish) thrown together, makes LiB compelling. It did try to cover all the bases. I just hate weddings, but that being said, JESSICA and Mark looked fantastic together, he was the only one with a decent suit and her earrings were divine so in a sense they really won.
LD: JESSICA looked pretty awesome walking down the aisle, like she was chewing gum on the sly and listening to a secret recording of “Even Cowgirls Get the Blues.”
Tyrese Coleman (TLC): The entire premise is manufactured, so yes, of course it will feel like there was a thumb to the show. The set up itself is so outrageous that I doubt the producers had to do much other than let everyone be themselves after the initial “pod” phase. I think this is important to note though. We as fiction writers can learn from the concept of “put your characters in a predicament and then let the characters behave in line with their personalities to get in and out of the predicament.” I think this is what you see when YA is done right. It is why, in most books that are a series, you find the first book to be the best: the writer has created the set up and then just let everything else ride. I think the editing in the wedding scenes were manipulated to allow for maximum tension, but other than that, I cannot see where they led a character to act outside of themselves. Writers have to think of themselves like TV editors/producers. How do we get maximum tension out of the natural behavior of our characters in this unnatural predicament we put them in? How do we keep the momentum of that first book in the series and not fail because we want to manufacture the ending?
MATCHMAKING
LD: What couples would you have foreseen getting together on the show, that didn’t necessarily get together? Of the two couples still together, who do you think will make it?
MBT: I wanted LC to match up. Possibly just because I thought she was cute. Which isn’t, like, a good reason.
LD: I think it’s a fine reason, especially for this show!
KMB: I agree! I really wanted something to work out for LC. At first it was mainly because I thought she was cute, but then after Barnett dumped her, and she had her moment with the camera, I mostly wanted someone to give her a hug. I hated seeing her all alone like that. Same with Diamond -- why couldn’t anyone be there to comfort her in the end?
MR: I wished Diamond Jack matched up with someone else that was more honest up front and unlike Carlton, didn't blame her for the way he acted. She deserved better. And how many people on reality shows are there “for the right reasons” but when I heard that Carlton was also on The Real Housewives of Atlanta, that feels like too much tipping the scales of finding instigators and people used to cameras, for the post-podlife drama. How can you have earnest convos seeking deep connections when you are there for airtime? MAybe I’m cynical but the guy that wants to be Hugh Hefner is not there to find “love”.
I think Cameron and Lauren can make it longer term, but I really did worry it was too quick to get married. I was surprised they did because I thought they had more sense actually. I envisioned a mutual deduction, especially from our Maine-iac scientist, that the odds were in their favor if they just continued to date after production ended and see where it goes. They might have been contractually obligated to have a wedding, but you can’t sign a contract never to see someone again after the cameras stop. I hope they make it but I also hope she gets to keep her little apartment.
And I will put this out there….after a while of getting tired of paying off Amber’s debt and eventually feeling tied down, Barnett will appear in JESSICA’s DMs because he is attracted to excitement, hence Amber, but what’s more exciting than rekindling what he had (says he didn't have, but he did) in secret. Love is not Blind, but the Love that we are talking about here is short. My twisted sense of romance means I’m still rooting for JESSICA to get her man.
TLC: Agreed. I wanted to see Diamond find love. Her opinions about Barnett cracked me up. She knew what kind of dude Barnett is!
LD: I loved Lauren’s apartment. Lauren, if you’re reading this, keep that apartment till you’re 90. Don’t listen to anybody else.
JB: Hold up, Carlton is a reality television fixture in Atlanta? Holy shit. That explains so much! I couldn’t stand that dude. In answer to your question, yes, I just wanted Diamond to find love & be with ANYONE except Carlton. She deserved better than him & his hat-tossing drama, fear-based-deception, constant dick moves, & neon self loathing. Related to this convo, one of my biggest critiques about LiB’s characterization/casting is that there were no Asian Americans at all & only one black dude, which isn’t representative of Georgia’s racial or class diversity at all. Like, there are a lot of other love stories that should have been told here as well whose conspicuous absence bothered me. The casting producer needs to get woke. Still, my love of this show burns bright & much of that has to do with how this experiment connected people together, even momentarily, & that’s a damn good thing.
Sian Griffiths (SG): I think I saw in the extra-curricular reading that someone from the show was now dating someone else from the show that they weren’t engaged to, but I don’t know who. Has anyone found out? (I also saw that Gigi is dating Damian again and girl, RUN.)
JB: Run, girl, you’re too much woman for that sexist leprechaun!
KMB: WHAT??? Gigi!! Get outta there, hon!
TLC: As I’ve said on Twitter, Damien is a tall troll and his facial hair grosses me out. Gigi, you need to find some rich socialite daddy who owns the Maltese Islands and will take you to Montecarlo for monthly vacations.
STAR-CROSSED LOVERS OR: WHAT’S YOUR LOVE IS BLIND SIGN?
What’s your sign? (dominant, moon/private emotional self, rising/how you’re perceived)
SG: Kenny with a Gigi moon and the un-fianced forgotten rising.
KMB: Mark with a Barnett moon and a Cameron rising.
MBT: This is a harder question than it first appears.
KMB: Right? I had to pull up a list of the characters and really debate them for myself.
MBT: I briefly thought about Diamond, but I don’t deserve her. And to answer this fully, besides thinking hard about all the people, it also required looking at my entire continuum of dating and love and all that. And my fully-formed soul-self is from back in the day, which makes me Kelly with JESSICA moon and Mark rising.
TLC: Sun sign would be Diamond/Gigi, Moon Lauren (with JESSICA tendencies depending on my stress levels) with a rising Amber/Gigi
LD: In my 20s my stars aligned under the sign of Giannina, and on a particularly bright day, Lauren. In my 30s they shifted under the House of Messica when I found that wine bar across the street, but then I moved to the UWS where I became more of a Kelly, her star system that is. I keep waiting for Lauren’s stars to renter my orbit. If you’re out there, can you hear me?
(Also, Cameron, I wouldn’t mind if you stepped into my moon sign. I need to temper my rising sign of G, which still admittedly feeds on drama.)
JB: Gigi with a Cameron Moon & Messica rising, but since I have no idea what the fuck I’m talking about, astrologically speaking, I don’t even know if that makes sense.