Meme: Show-not-tell love languages (FK Edition)

[brightknightie]

Back in September, sholio dove into a certain meme about how people (real and fictional) may habitually express and accept love (all kinds) in very different ways. For example: touch, words, deeds, gifts, time, etc. (The meme originator also went over how not all "love languages" are compatible for all people, leading to mistranslations, as it were, and also noting that while many individuals give and accept love in the same language, not all do.)

Sholio wrote that it's "an interesting tool to have in your characterization toolbox, especially for characters who come down really hard in one category or another... or absolutely suck at certain categories."

Ever since, I've wanted to try this paradigm on my favorite fandoms. Yet FK could be the worst fit for this. A fictional character with a single creator, or a solid "story bible," could well be as consistent as — or more than! — a real person. But FK? Different writers, directors, editors, networks? Seasonal reality adjustments? No more of a show "bible" than the opening-credits voice-over? Not to mention the differences in acceptable interactions and their interpretations across eras and around the world? Eeek.

Let's try anyway. :-D

Nick: Touch

I feel that Nick's predilection for touch may be the most obvious for this paradigm in FK. From GWD's acting choices and the concurrence of many directors, editors, and other collaborators, Nick frequently touches other characters (especially the human characters). Even setting aside physical contact related to flirting, romance, or sex, the character is forever patting a hand, an arm, a shoulder, putting arms around shoulders, pecking foreheads and cheeks, and embracing in sympathy, protection, or grief.

What do all these touches mean? I'd suggest that it's complicated, especially through a first-season lens.

Many touches are exactly what they first appear, attempting to give and receive concern or fondness, to make interpersonal connection in the manner most natural to this character. They are a literal as well as emotional reaching out, and also a silent plea to be reached back to across the metaphysical divide.

Then there's another layer. It's quieter, colder, and perhaps inherent in that metaphysical divide. Nick is pretending to be human. Sometimes he overplays the part, getting those touches not quite right — not quite fluent in this "love language" of humanity. Nick is also a predator, and touches can be a weapon, a trap, however natural to him as an emotional expression, perhaps even easier to wield because of that. Ann Foley (of "Dance by the Light of the Moon") leaps to mind here. Truth and lie, invitation and rejection.

(Nick isn't really in the gifting category. The few gifts he gives — the painting in "Partners of the Month," the cards in "Only the Lonely" and "My Boyfriend is a Vampire" — are plot devices, however sincere in addition to furthering or patching a plot. And the gift we see him keep (St. Joan's cross from "For I Have Sinned" and "I Will Repay") is extraordinary beyond any other physical gift). He also seems less than acutely aware of time as a means of showing regard, perhaps because he's lost any acute sense of proportion in time's value. And he's not a talker, by any means, building with words; the handiest example is not speaking Sylvain's loss ("Love You to Death") for a century.)

Natalie: Time

Natalie seems to show she cares by how she distributes her time. Every hour hanging out at Nick's loft measures caring about him. Every hour overworking in her lab measures caring about her work, more vocation than career. She really doesn't have oodles of time — either as a mortal in a universe with immortals, or as a workaholic in a demanding profession, or as a utility character in a procedural — so how she allocates that precious resource could be read as deeply revelatory. This interpretation could tie into her seeming to have few hobbies or connections off screen, at the sides of the story. If she's lavished all her time on who and what she cares about most, then other activities, if only subconsciously, don't rise to the investment price in her eyes...?

(Natalie tries out the gifting category in "Be My Valentine," with the pill box, but gifting isn't a native language to her. She's not much of a talker, either, in putting words to use specifically for indicating attachment and sustaining connection; Nick thinking he'll leave in "Cherry Blossoms" comes to mind. And I feel strongly that touching isn't remotely as natural to her as to Nick; she replies to touches, usually, but rarely initiates them; I feel on stable ground in interpreting that back to the implications of her grandmother in "Dead of Night.")

(If Natalie's native "show-not-tell" love language is time, while Nick has lost any acute sense of proportion in time's value, as I suggest above, that could be a source of miscommunication.)

Schanke: Gifts & Deeds

I don't want to overstate how much Schanke shows connection and affection with gifts. I don't want to overlook it, either. This is the character who crows about his gift-giving prowess from the FK universe's equivalent of the Victoria's Secret catalogue ("Love You to Death"), and has a standard emergency plan for what to do gift-wise if he forgets a birthday or anniversary ("Only the Lonely"). He sends flowers when he feels guilty ("For I Have Sinned"), invests the duck lamp Myra gave him with their entire married life ("Partners of the Month"), and mentions buying Myra rock-climbing equipment (um, a second-season episode I can't name just now). Giving and receiving physical tokens resonates very much with Schanke. I imagine that what he helps Santa put in Jenny's Christmas stocking, even if it's just batteries and chapstick picked up in the supermarket check-out line, is an incarnation of all his love.

If this meme required assigning one character to one "love language," Schanke would be Mr. Gifts! It doesn't...

A deeper aspect of Schanke's place in this paradigm, I think, is showing and building connections through doing things for others. This is perhaps his natural place in the story structure as a sidekick character, but it's also the character's soul as a friend, a father, a husband, a civil servant. The most elaborate illustration is Schanke making breakfast for Nick in "Partners of the Month." Other great examples are Jenny's ditto-sheet survey in "Father's Day," and bringing pizza and playing cards in "Father Figure." ("The Fix" car-washing doesn't count, because it's compelled, but let's toss it at the feet of the evidence.) I can't count all the times that Schanke took the drudgery of looking through files, completing paperwork, processing suspects or evidence, so that Nick wouldn't have to. Yes, Schanke justifiably complains about it from time to time, but he still does it over and over, and it seems to function to convey his regard and build his relationships, on a different level from that on which it simply keeps the plot ticking over. I don't want to be too grim by pulling in "Black Buddha, Part 1," but I can't resist pointing out that to that very end, Schanke is doing things on behalf of others.

(Touch doesn't seem to be one of Schanke's inborn "love languages," but he doesn't seem to have any aversion to or issues with it, either. Words, on the other hand, he certainly does use to try to connect — sometimes to comically bad effect, like misunderstanding the implications of calling Patrice "hon" in... a first-season episode that I can't name just now. Was it "If Looks Could Kill"?)

Janette: Deeds

Janette's most used "love language" is surely actions, doing things for others. What makes her different from the other FK characters for this paradigm, I think, is that her most used "language" of connection may or may not be the one most naturally innate to her. Instead, it's necessarily the one that she can't hide, suppress, wall off exposure of the vulnerability of her caring.

With Janette, a process of elimination yields this result, as well as the instinct that leaps to it. She doesn't use words to build or sustain affections; her casual use of endearments seems just that: casual. She reserves her time to her own needs and obligations, and expresses annoyance when it's trespassed upon (yet many of her obligations, like doing her taxes in "Can't Run, Can't Hide," are also deeds with an aspect of the responsibility that is doing things for others, holding her business together not only for her own sake, but her employees and customers). She doesn't give gifts. (Even in fanfic, where she often receives gifts, writers rarely have her give gifts.) She rarely touches others without immediate practical purpose.

With Janette, the only possible leading love language is doing things for others.

(Aside: When does another character do something for Janette? Aside from dire emergencies, like the flashbacks of "Hunters" and the present of "The Human Factor," and a begrudged gesture in "A Fate Worse Than Death"...? Am I just not remembering? Is it because Janette is a do-er and Nick is a touch-er and she just doesn't get nearly enough screen time?)

As much as Janette rails against doing things for others and would claim she doesn't (flashbacks of "The Human Factor" the exception, moving Lacroix by using his "love language"), she always does. She is forever doing things — favors asked and unasked — for Nick, for the Community, even sometimes for Lacroix. Part of this is her role as a utility character in a show of a certain structure. On another level, this is who could survive best down the centuries between Nick and Lacroix, holding enough ground, refusing to be bent entirely out of her own shape. Most of all, this is someone who has and knows the needs to give and receive love and connection, but also knows how to get by on starvation rations of it if necessary; history has rarely been gentle with women who let their needs be known, and Lacroix is rarely gentle with anyone whose needs don't conform to his. Action is closer to power, closer to security.

But would actions be Janette's default method of expression, if life had been different? What would that tell us about her, if so?

Lacroix: Words

Is this too simple? Allocating "words" as the method of the Nightcrawler, of the literal voice in Nick's head? Yet I don't think I'm overlooking too many examples of other approaches.

Talking is Lacroix's go-to method. Whether lying or truth-telling, speaking plainly or in elliptical code, he by default builds his relationships with words. Choosing his words. How will he address Natalie in "Be My Valentine"? How does he want her to address him? Why does he call Nick "Nicholas" instead of either "Nicolas" (Nick's given name) or "Nick" (Nick's chosen name)? Backward and forward, Lacroix lays words down like layers of bricks. He is forever pushing the buttons of all those he knows, and he likes to think himself the puppet master with strings of words stitched into every wound, every weakness.

One memorable time he seemed briefly at a loss for words: he handed Fleur a rose, instead.

More typically, think of what he chose to quote to Nick in "Baby, Baby," and what he may well have chosen not to quote. Do we really think Lacroix doesn't know the rest of that rhyme?

(As with Nick, the few gifts Lacroix has given, like the watch in "Father's Day," have been very much plot points, not repeated enough to indicate a pattern. He sometimes does things for others, but that's not his first instinct. Words to build and destroy. Words are his preference even over violence, and this is a villain who enjoys his violence (granted, not as much as his daughter does).

The 3rd-Season Characters: Hard to Say

I'm afraid that we don't have quite enough canonical indicators for the third-season characters. What do you think?

Tracy has the most evidence. My hypothesis for Tracy is words. I'm thinking of her chattering as Vachon listens, in so many scenes, from hearing his background in "Blackwing" to telling her case in "Francesca" to still speaking over his dead body in "Ashes to Ashes." And I'm thinking of her yelling at her mother when that dam breaks in "Avenging Angel." The puppy she gives her "nephew" in an early episode is an exception, no pattern. And while she does do things for others, that seems to all fit within her role as sidekick in some plot structures.

Screed has perhaps the least evidence. My call for him, with what we have, is gifting — more to receive than to give, but still. Screed is a tangible sort of guy. "Mi casa is su casa," with rules. It's all about what he has and holds, what's real in the most provable way.

Vachon... well, it's not words. It's not gifts. It's either time or deeds. Trying to find the line between for him, I'm going with time. When we fist meet Vachon, he's planning to withdraw his presence, his time ("not running as a crew anymore"), but then he doesn't. Is it only because Nick threatens him, or is it also Vachon's method of showing caring?

Urs has so little screen time. Perhaps she is our polyglot, able to give out, and reach out for, connection in all the love languages. But does she equally receive it via all? Urs gives Vachon many words (as Tracy also does). She touches Nick and doesn't wrap him in words. She says nothing, not one word, on screen with Lacroix, just a smile and a body safe from his understanding ("an innocent goddess"). We never see her interact with Tracy, Natalie, Janette, or even really Screed or Bourbon.


I've left off the Captains, and many other characters. What are your readings of them? And what do you think of my constructions for the main characters — do you have telling examples I missed that would support or redirect...?

Comments

[ride_4ever]

Excellent, thought-provoking meta! Thank you for sharing this!

[brightknightie]

Thank you very much!

[greerwatson]

Thinking of Nick and gifts, I immediately remembered the final scene in "Dance by the Light of the Moon". He certainly shows his affection and regard for Natalie with the rose and perfume. On the other hand, it's a remarkably trite gift—even worse, really, than Schanke's recommendation of flowers in "Only the Lonely", since perfume (in particular) is something that a man would only give to a woman he openly admits he loves, and Nick expressly denies this, albeit to Schanke.

On the other hand, the fact that he does choose a trite, conventional gift—and one so inappropriate (given that he's her patient!)—suggests that he is really bad at gifts. As you say, that's not his language of love. He just thinks that it's what is expected of him, as man to woman.

Still, I got the impression Natalie did appreciate the thought behind the gift.

[greerwatson]

You mention the sterling silver pill box. As gifts go, that seems to be very well chosen for Nick, since Natalie wants him to use it to hold the pills she prescribes. However, we all know that he's terrible at following Natalie's treatment regimen. He knows it too! As a result, the gift comes across primarily as a way to coax him into taking his pills.

Furthermore, the pill box is sterling—rather than plate—which is probably rather pricey for Natalie's salary; but that fact is unlikely to be appreciated by Nick, whose concept of money is affected by his centuries of living as a nobleman, plus how rich he is even today. So here is a BIG gift, carefully chosen by Natalie, that fails in two regards: he won't appreciate its monetary value and it points out his failings as a patient.

To top it off, Natalie is so very awkward when handing it over.

As you quite rightly say, the time she puts in trying to cure him is the true mark of her love; and the frequency with which he puts his arm around her and touches her hair (not to mention his efforts not to hurt her!) demonstrate his love for her. The joke is that neither Natalie nor Nick is any good at showing their feelings through gifts, but both of them see that as the socially appropriate way to demonstrate affection.

[brightknightie]

>"The joke is that neither Natalie nor Nick is any good at showing their feelings through gifts, but both of them see that as the socially appropriate way to demonstrate affection."

That is an exceedingly good insight. Thank you for sharing it!

[brightknightie]

Yes, just about the best that can be said for the perfume at the end of "Dance by the Light of the Moon" is that at least the storyline clearly confirmed for Nick and the audience that Natalie does wear perfume.

There's a whole class of unobservant but well meant gifts, like foods the recipient can't eat, perfumes she can't wear, pierced earrings for someone whose ears aren't pierced... gifts that show how far the giver is, rather than how close.

[sholio]

This is so cool; I love your analysis! I also really like that they're all so different from each other. Most of the fandoms that I've been applying it to have characters who are fairly compatible, and it raises a lot of interesting story possibilities that these characters have such diverse ways of showing affection, particularly the "time" thing with Natalie and Nick.

[brightknightie]

Thank you! Yes, it's amazing how distinct from each other and consistent to themselves the FK characters are, in the teeth of all their creative roller-coasters.

You're spot on with the possibility of the "time" thing as a trigger between Natalie and Nick -- some third-season situations leap to mind -- and I wonder also at how a potential clash between Nick and Janette could have smoothed over the decades, as Lacroix's promise to her was that no one would ever touch her again without her permission, and even granting that Nick generally has her permission, were his ways of showing love always able to be read by her as such, or did she have to learn to read them that way?

[under_the_silk_tree]

I loved reading all of these. I think you have them pretty much down pat. Once you laid out your reasoning I just kept nodding my head. Especially with Natalie because Time is of course hers look at how much time she spends on Nick's cure and with Nick himself. Also Janette with the love language of deeds I could definitely see because she always seemed so put out or at least reluctant to help but then she inevitably would. Thanks so much for sharing!

[brightknightie]

Thank you very much for reading and replying!

[nicholas_lucien]

Spot on for these characters. Really great detailed analysis!

[brightknightie]

Thank you very much!

[elistaire]

Loved this post. I need to rewatch some episodes to get a better sense of this all. But what you have here makes a lot of sense.