"depth of storytelling"

[AG31]

I suggest that smut (or literary porn, or erotica, or whatever you may like to call it) is, at least potentially, an art form, and so we should be confident of being able to discuss it in those terms

I, too, think that it should be discussable as an art form, but, as one possibility, on its own terms, not forced into the critical standards of fiction. See my post It's Obvious where I try to articulate how "simple erotica" should be viewed. BTW, in an earlier post I make the case that terms like "smut" and "stroker" pre-judge simple erotica.

I write what I myself would want to read. Consequently, my stories have depth and breadth and I make no apologies for that.

I do too. Consequently my stories describe the experience of surrender without the distraction of depth and breadth.

 

[AG31]

What happened to this thread? Not only did my own insightful and beautifully crafted reply to the OP disappear, but the long, interesting post suggesting Explorer, Writer and Teacher disappeared. WTF??????

Did this happen to anyone else?

 

[ElectricBlue]

What happened to this thread? Not only did my own insightful and beautifully crafted reply to the OP disappear, but the long, interesting post suggesting Explorer, Writer and Teacher disappeared. WTF??????

Did this happen to anyone else?

Are you remembering the right thread? I don't recall a long reply from you, nor anything about Explorer, Writer, Teacher.

There's nothing contentious in this thread, so I can't see why the mod would redact anything.

 

[AG31]

Are you remembering the right thread? I don't recall a long reply from you, nor anything about Explorer, Writer, Teacher.

There's nothing contentious in this thread, so I can't see why the mod would redact anything.

I searched "everywhere" for "explorer" and didn't find the lengthy, carefully formatted reply that I had responded to. I just found your and my posts here. (Not only was I responding to a post that used "explorer", I mentioned it in my own post.

I was spending time in this thread and two of my other responses are here.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I write what I myself would want to read.

This is a very profound statement. It is something that many writers lose sight of since there are many writers out there who write to please an audience (and get a score) and they even admit so on this forum.

Think back to the very first time that you wrote something. I'm not talking about the first day that your 2nd grade teacher made you write a paragraph or two about a butterfly or a snowman. I'm talking about the first time that you were inspired to sit down on your own and write something. You probably read a book or saw a movie that sparked something in your imagination and you thought, "If I wrote a story, I'd want it to go like this!" and probably there was at least some element of "I haven't seen a story where x happens, so I'll make one!"

I've always made it a point to never forget this.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I searched "everywhere" for "explorer" and didn't find the lengthy, carefully formatted reply that I had responded to. I just found your and my posts here. (Not only was I responding to a post that used "explorer", I mentioned it in my own post.

I was spending time in this thread and two of my other responses are here.

It's not in this thread.

Here you go https://forum.literotica.com/threads/perversions-perversions-perversions.1604422/#post-98338137

 

[AG31]

Thanks very much. Any idea why my search for "explorer" everywhere got no hits??? I'm pretty sure I didn't check "only in titles."

 

[intim8]

I write what I myself would want to read.

This is a very profound statement.

It is, and I do too. So much so that hope that every so often when I need a good story, I will have forgotten enough about the ones I've written that I can come back to them and read them as if they were new. Though maybe not till I'm old and senile.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Things that provide depth (you do not necessarily have to use them all - especially if your story is short):

Motive ~ The events of your story should happen because of the motives of the characters, not just as stand alone spectacles. Characters have feelings and desires which form motives that the characters act upon to cause the events to happen. Characters should have motives that drive the plot, and those motives should be interesting, not just "he was just very horny". This will give your story depth. She's a total slut but why is she a total slut? Perhaps she is a rape victim and being slutty is a way of taking back control of her sex life, to do things on her own terms, to sleep with who she wants rather than who she doesn't want. This is far more interesting than, she's just a horny slut. Yes, it is perfectly valid to have a motive of pure horniness, but every character on lit gets horny at some point so this will not make your character interesting nor will it add depth to your plot.

3D Characters ~ Your characters should be more than cardboard cutouts. You should make at least one of your main characters three dimensional. Instead of your protagonist being a perfectly saintly damsel (a cutout), try giving her flaws, vices or bad habits that sway her judgment to the wrong. Don't worry, her heart is still in the right place and she can always redeem herself later (which will also deepen her motive and improve your plot). Or instead of an irredeemably evil antag, make an 'honorable villain' a bad guy but with a line of respect that even he won't cross, or a guy with reasons for his badness that the reader can sympathize with ... 'Yes, he's mercilessly hostile but I mean I'd be pretty upset if my home world had been destroyed too, I get it'. You don't necessarily need a full backstory to do this neither, especially if your story is short. You don't necessarily need a protag and antag (or protags and antags), but if two happy people just get kinky and fuck, there's no depth in that. It's not wrong, but it's also done to death and paper thin.

Conflict ~ There literally is no plot if there is no conflict and if there is no plot then the chances of achieving any depth become very slim. Something needs to stand in the way of the desires of our characters. The conflict can be external: our two young lovers want each other but the guy's family will cut him out of his inheritance if he gets involved with that trailer park skank. Or it could be internal: she really wants him but she has concerns that he will disappear in the morning after using her body, but he's just so charming and sexy - should she or shouldn't she?

Show Don't Tell ~ Just in an overall sense, the more that you show your characters doing and saying things that reinforce their traits rather than just tell them, the reader's brain becomes engaged and they become an active reader. Instead of saying "Susie was a kind and generous soul," say "Susie dropped a dollar in the homeless man's cup as she passed." This makes the reader put two and two together and realize on his own that Susie cares. If your character is mean, don't just say that he's mean. Make him kick a random dog or something. The reader will get it. And for God's sake do not info-dump. If you just list a bunch of stuff to get it out of the way, the reader stays passive (and usually bored) as they sit there and listen to your class lecture.

There are a few other things that can add depth but those would be the biggest and most effective. Anyone else please add anything that I may have missed.

I'll also add that if any of my examples sound trite, I was writing quickly and they're all ass-pulls, so don't shoot.

 

[M_K_Babalon]

It's certainly beating this place in the contest for Most Dated Smut Site UI

I will check it out in more detail. I like that smuttiness rating part.

It's almost as old as this site.

 

[M_K_Babalon]

I'd like to think some things I write are profound in some way. That not everything is just that simple, even if on the surface, it appears to be. Like that halloween contest story I wrote; that sex wasn't just sex, it didn't even start as sex, even if it just looked like a guy was just wanting to fuck a ghost. That sex was a bridge of connections, the climax wasn't just an orgasm, but a release. Of all three parties involved.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Not everyone is here for the same reason. Some just want to express what they have to say, to write the stories they have in their heads. Some are doing this as a hobby, to pass the time. Some want to build up their readership and go on Patreon or such.

In the latter case, for example, the quality of stories isn't paramount. I mean, if the stories are good then that is an added value, but giving the audience the content it wants and giving it constantly and abundantly is the key for such an approach. It can be argued that it's almost impossible to write a lot (some authors here claim they can average about 10-15k words per day) and to make such flash content anything but superficial. Good ideas, good sentences, nuanced characters, interesting plot... it all takes time and careful consideration. Maybe some can achieve that even at such an incredible writing pace although I find it hard to believe.

The key point is that there is a place here for all the stories. This isn't a critically oriented website, it also isn't a competing website, and the scores our stories get are not really a measure of their quality.

 

[countdowntolov3]

I didn't interpret this thread as telling anyone that they should write erotica in one way or another. I thought it was some folks discussing the merits of a particular way of writing.

But it's been derailed by constant instances that it's equally valid to write erotica in any way you want. Which is 1000% true. But, as far as I can tell, nobody is arguing against it. So it's frustrating that the original discussion got drowned out by it.

 

[KeithD]

I didn't interpret this thread as telling anyone that they should write erotica in one way or another. I thought it was some folks discussing the merits of a particular way of writing.

But it's been derailed by constant instances that it's equally valid to write erotica in any way you want. Which is 1000% true. But, as far as I can tell, nobody is arguing against it. So it's frustrating that the original discussion got drowned out by it.

Yes, the statement, "Is it something smut writers can and/or should aim for?" hit me as a one-way proposition.

I like to think that a lot of what I write has depth because it leans heavily on plot and often has a strong theme to it. Other times I'm just going for a strong arousal emotion. Beyond that, I don't know what you'd like to see in this discussion--because I DID see it as promoting a single aim.

 

[countdowntolov3]

Yes, the statement, "Is it something smut writers can and/or should aim for?" hit me as a one-way proposition.

I like to think that a lot of what I write has depth because it leans heavily on plot and often has a strong theme to it. Other times I'm just going for a strong arousal emotion. Beyond that, I don't know what you'd like to see in this discussion--because I DID see it as promoting a single aim.

I suppose you're right that the original post's wording does leave open the interpretation that they are outlining the correct way to write erotica. That's too bad.

As for what I hoped to get from the thread: I liked the original posts example links. I liked hearing how some writers set out out with themes or plots in mind or something to say, but how other writers discovered them -- and not all the time. I liked the examples from their own work people were giving.

 

[Britva415]

constant instances that it's equally valid to write erotica in any way you want. Which is 1000% true. But, as far as I can tell, nobody is arguing against it

The original question, assuming a "yes" or "no" answer, completely fails to consider that there isn't a yes or no answer.

Nobody's arguing against writing one way, or the other way, or anything in between. We're arguing against the entire notion of picking one answer. Or, arguing against the question itself, if you want.

 

[GrushaVashnadze]

I didn't interpret this thread as telling anyone that they should write erotica in one way or another. I thought it was some folks discussing the merits of a particular way of writing. But it's been derailed by constant instances that it's equally valid to write erotica in any way you want. Which is 1000% true. But, as far as I can tell, nobody is arguing against it. So it's frustrating that the original discussion got drowned out by it.

Yes, the statement, "Is it something smut writers can and/or should aim for?" hit me as a one-way proposition.

The original question, assuming a "yes" or "no" answer, completely fails to consider that there isn't a yes or no answer.

Er... Goodness. What I actually said was:

Is "depth of storytelling" something you aim for? How do you incorporate it into your smut? Or, perhaps more appropriately, how do you incorporate smut into a profoundly felt, thought provoking story? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

None of these questions demands a yes or no answer, nor are any of them one-way propositions! Thank you to @countdowntolov3 for noticing this. And thank you to those of you who addressed the complex multi-directional questions I was asking: your responses have been fascinating in all their variety.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Not everyone is here for the same reason. Some just want to express what they have to say, to write the stories they have in their heads. Some are doing this as a hobby, to pass the time. Some want to build up their readership and go on Patreon or such.

In the latter case, for example, the quality of stories isn't paramount. I mean, if the stories are good then that is an added value, but giving the audience the content it wants and giving it constantly and abundantly is the key for such an approach. It can be argued that it's almost impossible to write a lot (some authors here claim they can average about 10-15k words per day) and to make such flash content anything but superficial. Good ideas, good sentences, nuanced characters, interesting plot... it all takes time and careful consideration. Maybe some can achieve that even at such an incredible writing pace although I find it hard to believe.

The key point is that there is a place here for all the stories. This isn't a critically oriented website, it also isn't a competing website, and the scores our stories get are not really a measure of their quality.

Yes, but we are specifically talking about how to add depth. Presumably that means, IF one is so inclined to start adding more nuance to his strokers what tips might help him do so? In that sense, this thread is not condemning 'lighter' material at all.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I like to think that a lot of what I write has depth because it leans heavily on plot and often has a strong theme to it.

Theme. Good one that I missed.

Exploring a theme certainly adds another layer to your story. (In)fidelity, trust, maturity, devotion, arrogance/vanity, depression/self-esteem, justice, fate, religion, racism, crime, war, corruption, nature, magic ... we could go for ever here ... if your story can discuss, revolve around or even embody a theme or multiple themes (particularly if your story is longer) it will add depth.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

In that sense, this thread is not condemning 'lighter' material at all.

I would say that this thread was started mostly as an outlet for an oversized ego, and with such an approach it failed to engage many people properly. I agree that the subject of lighthearted, fun smut, vs deeper smut could be an interesting discussion, but not in this thread, in my opinion.

 

[MrHereWriting]

What is "depth of storytelling"?

It's what people who like your story/stories see.

Is it something smut writers can and/or should aim for?

Write what you want.

 

[Britva415]

What I actually said was:

Is it something smut writers can and/or should aim for?

Is "depth of storytelling" something you aim for?

I grant you that I did cherry-pick those yes-or-no questions out of your much larger post. But I did it to illustrate to @countdowntolov3 that others, too, in the thread have been doing exactly that. Well, maybe not cherry-picking, but, those questions are what people are reacting to.

And, yeah, they're easily taken as yes-or-no questions, even though one doesn't have to read them that way. People DID.

Especially considering this entire paragraph:

I suggest that smut (or literary porn, or erotica, or whatever you may like to call it) is, at least potentially, an art form, and so we should be confident of being able to discuss it in those terms. I would like to suggest an axiom to start us off: Art is about something. It has to be, or else it could not “make us think”. Specifically, I suggest, art is about us, and it is about our relationships, to ourselves, to each other, and to the world around us and beyond us. It expresses what it is trying to say not through analytical text – for that would make it merely an academic essay – but through metaphor and gesture: physical, visual, auditory and verbal.

In which you present a point of view which specifically provides a "yes" answer to your own question. So you framed it as yes-or-no and as taking one side versus the other, yourself, even while spelling out elsewhere that you just want a conversation.

No wonder people formed this impression.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I would say that this thread was started mostly as an outlet for an oversized ego, and with such an approach it failed to engage many people properly. I agree that the subject of lighthearted, fun smut, vs deeper smut could be an interesting discussion, but not in this thread, in my opinion.

Oh, it has not been lost on me that the OP's threads, yes more than one lately, have been ads for their own work as much as or even more than discussion starters, but that does not mean that we can't end up with a productive discussion out of the deal.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Oh, it has not been lost on me that the OP's threads, yes more than one lately, have been ads for their own work

There is plenty of that going on with some AH regulars too, and to be completely honest, it goes on my nerves to a degree. From the flaunting of their work everywhere, in every thread, and responding to every discussion with a link to their own story in which supposedly something related to the topic goes on, to the blowing of smoke up each other's asses in a circle. As I said, it irks me somewhat but I never commented on it before as it has long become normal behavior here. It goes against my own mindset and culture, but once again, I am probably the "awkward" one here and I never said a word about it.
Yet this guy takes it to a whole new level with both of his initial posts in the two threads he created. Not to mention his bio and forum signature.
I resent this posturing and self-aggrandizement. It's okay to be proud of your work. I am proud of my own work too. But there is a limit where it all becomes tasteless and we are long past that limit. Just my opinion, which will undoubtedly draw some ire but hey, wouldn't be the first time for me.

 

[Djmac1031]

So, back to my opening questions: Is "depth of storytelling" something you aim for? How do you incorporate it into your smut? Or, perhaps more appropriately, how do you incorporate smut into a profoundly felt, thought provoking story? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Honest answer?

I make things up as I go.

Any story I start has one initial goal: to tell an entertaining story.

For most of my stories, that "entertainment" involves at least one sexual scenario.

The how's and why's of that scenario are then built. Who are the characters about to participate in this scenario? What's motivating them to do so? What problems if any need to be overcome first? Etc. Etc.

I don't set out to intentionally incorporate some "deeper meaning" to any of my stories. If there is any depth to them, it comes about naturally. Usually through finding something to say through my characters.

I don't set out to make people feel. Or think. I set out to entertain them, to tell them a story I think is worth telling.

If my story actually makes them think, and / or feel something after? Brilliant. I'm glad. Guess I did an okay job.