Lets talk bookish: Romance as a subplot

It's very VERY common to open up a book- any book- and be drawn into romance, be it happy or sad or bittersweet. (Aside from nonfiction, I can't even recall a fiction title that didn't have romance!) For better or worse romance is in all of the fiction titles that I had that chance of reading. 

Why is romance a common subplot of the story? I think mainly it's because it's universal and it's something all people can identify with. It also makes the story a lot more interesting or it helps add elements that both male and female heroes will dare to fight for. 

Whether or not romances add or take away from the stories depends on a story being told and it also depends on an authors writing skill. Most of time romances add more depth to the characters and stories. After all, Gone with the wind wouldn't be the same without romantic elements. Yet there are books that feel, well, fake when it comes to romance. ( I want to say Mansfield Park by Jane Austen or Comet Seekers by Helen Sedgwick...) 

I have read stories that didn't contain elements of romances ( namely mysteries, I realized,) and there are stories that do well without romances as well as plenty that need it to make things more interesting. One tale that I read and that suffers from lack of romance is a Chinese classical novel titled Romance of the Three Kingdoms. ( and romance is being used as adventure rather than love.) Again, authors skill and the tale itself. 

Is romance better as a subplot or main story? Depends on an author honestly and the story and genre. For example, if one is to read a romance novel, one would expect love and preoccupation from characters. If one is to read a different type of story, then romance will have to be optional.