1, 2, 3, 4, My way is better than yours

I was thinking about my last post. It was written after a week-long onslaught of reading many, many sources. One of the things I was thinking in the back of my head, but hadn’t quite percolated to the forefront of my consciousness, finally burst through today.

Not all of these articles are talking about the same genre or desired outcome when they judge what is a good final product.

Some articles are talking about straight fiction literature. Within this genre exists a specific spectrum of opinions:

1. Sex doesn’t belong in fiction
2. Sex only belongs in fiction if it moves along the plot
3. Sex to titillate or arouse cheapens fiction and this is bad
4. Sex when written shouldn’t be perfunctory or mechanical but
5. Sex when written shouldn’t be gloriously described and transcendental
6. Sex when written should be straightforward, described as is, while somehow avoiding number 4

I’m not writing straight literary fiction, I’m writing in part to arouse the reader. I’ve masturbated over most (but not all) of the sex scenes in my head, long before I ever wrote them. When I look at the mash of perspectives, I see a puritan take that doesn’t mesh with what I am trying to achieve with my stories. This is likely not my audience and catering to their ideas of what are good descriptions of sex will probably undo me. I am writing erotica to arouse, but I’m also writing a good story  (I hope) exploring themes and messages that both relate and don’t relate to sex, both through and not through sex. So if I don't belong in narrative fiction, where do I belong?

Some articles talk about erotica. I thought about mixing this with the discussion of pornography because their complaints over lap, but some perspectives on pornographic writing are simply unique to themselves. The same goes for romance writing, which I consider a sub-genre of erotica, but I found was a view rejected by many (but not all) self-labeled erotica writers.

The spectrum of opinions on sex and erotica/romance/pornography that I found, flow as follows:

Erotica

1. The point of erotica is to arouse the reader.
2. The point of erotica is to explore the concepts related to our sexual and emotional beings through erotic settings and relationships.
3. The point of erotica is to explore themes related to sex, through sex but not directly sex, like themes of control, connection trust and release.
4. Erotica can explore violent and taboo topics but shouldn't do so for the sake of doing so, but to connect and explore these themes. If this is in place, its okay to also aim for arousal, but not okay if these aren't in place.
5. Good erotica uses transcendental (this is a word I use because I saw it several time on blogs that discuss a certain type of description of sex)....transcendental...uhm...pick a word: metaphorical, floral, indirect, elaborate, euphemistic language.
6. Good erotica depicts sex with a real, literal description and avoids metaphorical, floral, indirect, elaborate, euphemistic language to describe sex.

Some of this I'm down with, but some of this I'm not. Maybe I'm an explicit romance writer then?

Romance

1. The point of romance is to create an experience for women to feel certain emotions, such as emotional connections, feeling desired, putting themselves in a fantasy land and escaping reality. Different bloggers and commenters don’t necessarily agree with all of these; they may agree with some, but vehemently reject others.
2. The point of romance is to engage and fulfill women sexually and emotionally and connect that sexual desire to the emotional desire and vice versa.
3. The point of romance is to allow women to get aroused, feel desire, and probably masturbate, without feeling like they are slipping into erotica or pornography.
4. Romance novels that have a lot of sex--implicit or explicit--are erotica.
5. Romance novels are almost never erotica.
6. Romance novels are low level pornography.
7. Romance novels are not pornography.
8. The point of romance novels are to allow women to live inside taboo or exaggerated romance, love, lust structures, such as being thrown over the shoulder of a pirate, or mount an emotionally unavailable cowboy.
9. The point of romance novels are to do 8. but with an emotionally satisfying happy ending.
10. Good romance novels use flowery intense, euphemistic, elaborate language.

The romance community has too many conflicting restrictions for me to plop my curvacious bottom there.

Pornography

1. Pornography is about getting aroused and often contributing to an orgasm.
2. Pornography should be explicit.
3. Pornography should use metaphorical words and taboos if it heightens arousal
4. Pornography is about sex, sex, sex and has no other literary, erotic, or romance purpose.

I absolutely plan on getting aroused and making beautiful orgasms all over the world. I'd like to be explicit. But sadly, I have many other maniacal purposes, so I can't simply follow the rules of porn.

As you can see, there is a lot of spillover and a lot of dissent. If I listen to the cacophony of voices, I’ll become dizzy and fall down before I finish a paragraph.

Maybe I'll be porna: my own mixture of erotic, pornographic, romantic, literary fiction.

Yes, I still have to crack the secret code of the carnivore that is meat eating pornography and how it mixes with literature to create good erotica, but understanding where I want to take the reader will help me understand how I fit in to this collage of sexual culture, and what voices I feel best guide me.