50 Shades, the lemming theory in action.

[geronimo_appleby]

click

 

[Kurokami]

50 Shades is a fantasy! It’s of no more real-life value than Snow White, or Sleeping Beauty, or any of the other fairy tales that inhabit this world! It’s a lovely fantasy. Not the most well-written of all fairy tales, but it strikes a cord. I mean, really, who among us wouldn’t like a lovely billionaire with a beefy cock and limitless sex drive to make us the sole center of his universe and spending (both figuratively and euphemistically)? The fact that he’s a wounded bad boy who wants to spank your ass and then kiss it better only adds to the appeal.

And why is there such controversy over the character’s BDSM or D/s choices? So what if it doesn’t subscribe to someone’s perceived idea of the industry “norm”? Why does this piss people off? Where did all these “purist” and “one-wayer’s” come from? Each relationship should embody the elements of the lifestyle that work for that relationship. I like to have my ass spanked, my hair pulled, and happily submit in the bedroom. You try to cane me or tell me what to wear and I’ll come out swinging. It’s an exchange of power. How much, or how little, of that power is exchanged is up for negotiation.

We’ve all likely read better erotica (and some of us have written it), but this author was lucky enough to have the perfect storm of product, attention, and readership. Don’t we all dream of that? Instead of trashing the story (which is a premise that is getting insanely ripped off), why don’t we get off our high horses and celebrate the fact she was lucky enough to score one? And say kudos to the fact that she’s opened doors to main-stream and lifestyle erotica that might have taken much, much longer to open without 50 Shades.

JMHO

Yeah, it's called literary criticism. We're free to criticize the prose because it's terrible, and we do. But we're also free to criticize the themes and characters in the books, and how they're portrayed, especially if those portrayals are damaging. I, and a number of others, clearly think that they are. BDSM is not an industry, it's a subculture, and one that's small enough and misunderstood enough that we do need to be conscious of the way we're coming across in the mainstream. Would you have this reaction if the LGBT community came out in condemnation of a popular book that portrayed them as mentally ill and abusive?

I don't get why we're all supposed to just shut up and cheer for EL James for getting a successful erotica book out the door. I don't by any means begrudge her her success, but the fact is she's getting it via the reinforcement of some not quite kosher stereotypes. Besides, the fact that the series is popular should in no way mitigate or silence our criticism; quite the opposite, in fact. The fact that Fifty Shades has become this popular means we all in the BDSM community have our work cut out for us in just providing a counterpoint to all this; we actually need to be a little loud just to be heard some of the time.

 

[Verdad]

I'm not pondering the literary merits of 50 SOG ‘cause I can quite well imagine them. I'm also not surprised the book hit some people's favorite fantasies, though certainly not mine.

I am surprised there are people who were apparently unable to satisfy them until the book was pushed in their face.

I mean, really? It's the year 2012; any erotic curiosity you might have had (such as can be satisfied by reading) you've probably thoroughly looked up the moment you got online or came of age, whichever happened first. If you've had a hankering for smutty romance, with or without 'BDSM', you've probably found enough out there to choke on it.

Yet suddenly we hear erotic horizons have been broadened, innermost fantasies fulfilled at long last, and women have been liberated yet again. (Apparently many products have this fortunate side effect.) Or, depending on whom you ask, the end of the world is nigh.

I wonder if there's anyone who could say in first person they've been deeply affected by this book or whether it's the imaginary reactions of imaginary others who have supposedly been innocent till now that make it seem important.

 

[PennLady]

I am surprised there are people who were apparently unable to satisfy them until the book was pushed in their face.

I mean, really? It's the year 2012; any erotic curiosity you might have had (such as can be satisfied by reading) you've probably thoroughly looked up the moment you got online or came of age, whichever happened first. If you've had a hankering for smutty romance, with or without 'BDSM', you've probably found enough out there to choke on it.

Yet suddenly we hear erotic horizons have been broadened, innermost fantasies fulfilled at long last, and women have been liberated yet again. (Apparently many products have this fortunate side effect.) Or, depending on whom you ask, the end of the world is nigh.

I wonder if there's anyone who could say in first person they've been deeply affected by this book or whether it's the imaginary reactions of imaginary others who have supposedly been innocent till now that make it seem important.

I think you underestimate a lot of people. Or overestimate, depending. I can tell you from personal experience that I heard women discussing these novels as though they'd never read anything so explicit or exciting in their lives. Perhaps they hadn't. Complete with fanning motions as though it was too hot to handle and talk of keeping it hidden somehow so no one else would see it.

And judging by some of the reviews, at least, it did apparently spark the sex lives of some people.

 

[Verdad]

I think you underestimate a lot of people. Or overestimate, depending. I can tell you from personal experience that I heard women discussing these novels as though they'd never read anything so explicit or exciting in their lives. Perhaps they hadn't. Complete with fanning motions as though it was too hot to handle and talk of keeping it hidden somehow so no one else would see it.

And judging by some of the reviews, at least, it did apparently spark the sex lives of some people.

Hey, I've long been of a mind that porn exerts a terrible influence, but I was told in no uncertain terms there's no effect of fiction on attitudes and behavior, no, no, absolutely none. Apparently it only goes for bad effects, but not at all for beneficial ones.

I don't think I can take up that question again (bores myself, not to mention others) but on the issue of 50 SOG, I completely trust you've seen public displays of elation, yet I still wonder whether to trust them. They seem more like a matter of a welcome excuse to talk about what was being read anyhow, though it's not quite clear to me why even the excuse would be so welcome. I mean, if 50 SOG is a banner for the genre readers to rally around, just where are they marching?

Dunno. Far as I can figure it out, whoever decided to put the big machinery behind this title judged well that a large readership already existed and it was just a matter of making all the small amounts pour in a single pocket. Add a bit of a fabricated controversy and apparently it works. Or maybe I’m sticking to this explanation because yours strikes me as even scarier, so definitely overestimate.

I'm not claiming I'm very good at figuring these things out, though. Mystified, more often.

 

[Stella_Omega]

And why is there such controversy over the character’s BDSM or D/s choices? So what if it doesn’t subscribe to someone’s perceived idea of the industry “norm”? Why does this piss people off? Where did all these “purist” and “one-wayer’s” come from? Each relationship should embody the elements of the lifestyle that work for that relationship. I like to have my ass spanked, my hair pulled, and happily submit in the bedroom. You try to cane me or tell me what to wear and I’ll come out swinging. It’s an exchange of power. How much, or how little, of that power is exchanged is up for negotiation.

"Industry norm?"

There is no BDSM industry.

Matter of fact, the norm that she's catering to is the common notion that BDSM is an aberration.

Trust me, the complaints are coming from a point so far away from any possible "industry" that I can't evn come up with how you got that.

 

[lovecraft68]

And judging by some of the reviews, at least, it did apparently spark the sex lives of some people.

But were they legit reviews?

Shades also inspired the increased sale of rope in New York according to one dipshit.

Soon we'll here that shades has become the cure for ED!

It's made lesbian women go straight!

It's made the new Websters definition of Vagina- Down there!

It's increased women's desire to be treated poorly and to seek out abusive men! Oh, wait that is an affect it may have sorry.

All I'll say is if this book increased someone's sex drive-and I don't care how many people I piss off with this.-then you were pretty fucking pathetic in the bedroom in the first place.

I know because we're all cruising an erotic site and most of us write erotica we're a more "pervy" group than most, but I could've topped this crap when I was a teenager with my first girlfriend.

Phffffft!

 

[PennLady]

But were they legit reviews?

Shades also inspired the increased sale of rope in New York according to one dipshit.

Soon we'll here that shades has become the cure for ED!

It's made lesbian women go straight!

It's made the new Websters definition of Vagina- Down there!

It's increased women's desire to be treated poorly and to seek out abusive men! Oh, wait that is an affect it may have sorry.

All I'll say is if this book increased someone's sex drive-and I don't care how many people I piss off with this.-then you were pretty fucking pathetic in the bedroom in the first place.

I know because we're all cruising an erotic site and most of us write erotica we're a more "pervy" group than most, but I could've topped this crap when I was a teenager with my first girlfriend.

Phffffft!

Do we have to go on this track again? For Christ's sake -- why do you keep talking about this book? You're going to give yourself an ulcer.

Do you realize that not everyone is like you? That not everyone has your experiences, sexual or otherwise? That yes, like it or not, this was the first exposure some people had to any kind of D/s? Can you really not understand that?

And stop with this "I could have done it better." No doubt you could. Hell, I probably could and have about as much BDSM experience as EL James does. As Stella said before, it wasn't written for you. One woman wrote something she wanted and it hit big -- that's all. You don't like it, tough.

 

[Verdad]

But were they legit reviews?

Shades also inspired the increased sale of rope in New York according to one dipshit.

Soon we'll here that shades has become the cure for ED!

It's made lesbian women go straight!

It's made the new Websters definition of Vagina- Down there!

It's increased women's desire to be treated poorly and to seek out abusive men! Oh, wait that is an affect it may have sorry.

All I'll say is if this book increased someone's sex drive-and I don't care how many people I piss off with this.-then you were pretty fucking pathetic in the bedroom in the first place.

I know because we're all cruising an erotic site and most of us write erotica we're a more "pervy" group than most, but I could've topped this crap when I was a teenager with my first girlfriend.

Phffffft!

Fess up, LC, how much are you being paid to shill?

 

[lovecraft68]

Fess up, LC, how much are you being paid to shill?

Shhhh!

I'll give you a cut if you stay quiet!

 

[lovecraft68]

Do we have to go on this track again? For Christ's sake -- why do you keep talking about this book? You're going to give yourself an ulcer.

Do you realize that not everyone is like you? That not everyone has your experiences, sexual or otherwise? That yes, like it or not, this was the first exposure some people had to any kind of D/s? Can you really not understand that?

And stop with this "I could have done it better." No doubt you could. Hell, I probably could and have about as much BDSM experience as EL James does. As Stella said before, it wasn't written for you. One woman wrote something she wanted and it hit big -- that's all. You don't like it, tough.

Well very simple, I just like to tweak you my dear.

and I left one thing out.

50 Shades will certainly benefit the medical industry when all the Gray wannabe's tie up the Ana wannabe' and use zip ties.

Big fucking no-no they can do some real damage, but people who are amateurs may not know that.

That right there is alll anyone needs to refute James claim that she researched the bdsm aspects of the book, and that's not a dig, that's fact.

 

[Brunne]

a 50 Shades protest that's a little closer to home:

Don't read it in front of the kids...

 

[lovecraft68]

For anyone who's interested

There's actually a far better BDSM story on Amazon that started here on lit.

I can't think of the authors name(here or amazon) But the name of the book(and story here before they pulled it) is Dom of my dreams.

It's doing pretty well there, been around awhile and many days is ranked in the top 10k so its selling a bunch of copies a day.

Blows shades away and again it was an author who started here, so if anyone's reading this, go check it out. It's done the right way.

 

[master_chay]

Yeah ... I bought the trilogy and read it.

I was surprised how comparatively hard core it was. It's kinda weird standing at a street corner, watching the women go by and thinking that 27% of them enjoyed FSOG.

The sales alone, that's the tip of the iceberg. I was at this lady's flat the other day, the books were there, the sister was there, the best friend was there. They were passing them around. One sale, at least five readers up to this point.

Makes you think ...

Two things appalled me.

No. 1 = I hope to hell those girls reading this never meet a real Christian Grey.
No. 2 = Product endorsements. [shudders]

First, Harry Potter. Now FSOG.

What's gonna be next ...?

 

[lovecraft68]

.No. 1 = I hope to hell those girls reading this never meet a real Christian Grey.

I've said this several times and take heat for it.

Gray was not a dom in this book, he was not a master.

he is an abusive asshole using the crutch of a bad childhood to continue to be one.

There's a shitload of guys like this out there, in every "class" and there are now thousands of sweet little "Ana's" just lining up to meet them

because they're really good guys at heart, because they can save them.

In reality these relationships end in pain, restraining orders. beatings and sometimes worse

Now go ahead and bash me lemmings because your naivity makes me ill.

 

[Recidiva]

I just felt like pointing out something I got from reading the books that can be inspirational even if the sex and premise are...lacking in many ways.

The banter is good. The idea that people can communicate and compromise and get what they want through charm and engagement and not sit sullenly by waiting for a partner to hand them what they want on a platter...is a good idea and is represented well, even if what they're talking about or doing is basically full of a lot of holes.

I'm not sure its success is due necessarily to the type of sex being had as the relationship being described.

It's not complete crap. It's a lot of crap, yes, but not a total loss. It's not entirely out of the realm of possibility for someone to read it, reassess how they look at their relationship and see if they can't inject some fun and lightness and compromise into the deal to make it better.

Using at least the conversational template, it probably would get good results.

 

[PennLady]

I'm not sure its success is due necessarily to the type of sex being had as the relationship being described.

It's not complete crap. It's a lot of crap, yes, but not a total loss. It's not entirely out of the realm of possibility for someone to read it, reassess how they look at their relationship and see if they can't inject some fun and lightness and compromise into the deal to make it better.

Using at least the conversational template, it probably would get good results.

I think you've definitely hit on something here. I wish I could remember where I read it, on here or in a review, but the writer noted that when you strip it down to the basics, what you have is a relationship in which the man is lavishing his attention on a woman, and that is very appealing to many women, regardless of how well-written the story is or isn't.

This is not to say (hold your horses, lovecraft) that women want an abusive partner, or to be controlled or tied up or be into BDSM or anything like that. And as I understand it, at the end of the series, it all comes around to a more-or-less "normal" love and marriage thing. That is what the audience is responding to.

 

[Recidiva]

I think you've definitely hit on something here. I wish I could remember where I read it, on here or in a review, but the writer noted that when you strip it down to the basics, what you have is a relationship in which the man is lavishing his attention on a woman, and that is very appealing to many women, regardless of how well-written the story is or isn't.

This is not to say (hold your horses, lovecraft) that women want an abusive partner, or to be controlled or tied up or be into BDSM or anything like that. And as I understand it, at the end of the series, it all comes around to a more-or-less "normal" love and marriage thing. That is what the audience is responding to.

I think you have to start from a stereotypical space and this book might help you work backward a bit.

I think it introduces the non-stereotypical idea that men don't just "want one thing" in that horrid way women can be taught by other women or awful experiences with certain men. The idea here is that yes, men want that thing (and so do women) but one man can want one woman more and be willing to take pleasure in her pleasure.

Yes, it might also be really feeding into the stereotypically idiotic idea that if a man really loves you, he'll change...but in this case, I think it does embody the idea of romance in the sense that sex is separate from love, and although someone might have a specific flavor of sex that they enjoy, the introduction of love to lust creates something new.

It isn't executed all that well, but it's there in its bare bones so you can make out the shape of it.

I don't really think it's about the BDSM aspect so much as the transformational idea. I mean, sure it's about the BDSM for some, but if I were to describe what the book did well enough to give people ideas, it'd be that.

 

[Verdad]

I think you have to start from a stereotypical space and this book might help you work backward a bit.

I think it introduces the non-stereotypical idea that men don't just "want one thing" in that horrid way women can be taught by other women or awful experiences with certain men. The idea here is that yes, men want that thing (and so do women) but one man can want one woman more and be willing to take pleasure in her pleasure.

Yes, it might also be really feeding into the stereotypically idiotic idea that if a man really loves you, he'll change...but in this case, I think it does embody the idea of romance in the sense that sex is separate from love, and although someone might have a specific flavor of sex that they enjoy, the introduction of love to lust creates something new.

It isn't executed all that well, but it's there in its bare bones so you can make out the shape of it.

I don't really think it's about the BDSM aspect so much as the transformational idea. I mean, sure it's about the BDSM for some, but if I were to describe what the book did well enough to give people ideas, it'd be that.

What I wonder, and maybe you can help me, is how different 50 SOG can be from tons of similar stuff out there?

I'm not sneering at it because we ought to be reading Thomas Mann all the time, or something like that. That'd be ridiculous. I'm sneering because there's all this talk of a big revelation, where the plot and the excerpt tell me you could be reading something damn near identical every day if you wished.

Maybe I should add I'm not a romance reader at all. Again it's not a superiority thing—I have my lowbrow entertainments and I'm perfectly unabashed about it. Just recently, I spent three months obsessively reading Harry Potter fanfic, so who am I to cast stones. But romance bores me to tears, always has, so I don't read it.

I still have a pretty good idea of what's out there, though, and I also have the idea that romance is massively read and has been growing all through the past decade.

Too, based on how I treat the, let’s say, romance-equivalent materials, doesn’t one go through them like through socks, with nary a look back?

So 50 SOG seems to me like a cue to make raunchy romance a topic du jour, but could the book actually be a novel experience to all that many?

 

[Recidiva]

What I wonder, and maybe you can help me, is how different 50 SOG can be from tons of similar stuff out there?

I'm not sneering at it because we ought to be reading Thomas Mann all the time, or something like that. That'd be ridiculous. I'm sneering because there's all this talk of a big revelation, where the plot and the excerpt tell me you could be reading something damn near identical every day if you wished.

Maybe I should add I'm not a romance reader at all. Again it's not a superiority thing—I have my lowbrow entertainments and I'm perfectly unabashed about it. Just recently, I spent three months obsessively reading Harry Potter fanfic, so who am I to cast stones. But romance bores me to tears, always has, so I don't read it.

I still have a pretty good idea of what's out there, though, and I also have the idea that romance is massively read and has been growing all through the past decade.

Too, based on how I treat the, let’s say, romance-equivalent materials, doesn’t one go through them like through socks, with nary a look back?

So 50 SOG seems to me like a cue to make raunchy romance a topic du jour, but could the book actually be a novel experience to all that many?

Specifically for me it's the banter. I think that the Blackberry sequences are clever and offer something Mann can't. Mann might let you know how to leave a calling card, but to carry on a clever email exchange? That she's got covered. It is genuinely smart, clever, disarming and is the real saving grace of the books. It's a completely modern theme that I've thought would be worth writing myself, the art of instant verbal gratification. Tiny chunks of wit in a few sentences that play with the themes of subject, content and signature in the email form. I think she did it very well.

I've read a ridiculous amount of romance. I read a ridiculous amount of lots of things, true, but I have enough experience in modern romance writing to think that part at least stands out. The charm and banter are up there on the list of things that are fun to read. For that reason alone, I'd read it again and bought all three, even though I thought the story was pretty much crap and the endings of each book a total loss.

I wouldn't read it again for the sex, but I like seein' 'em talk. Sometimes. They do get stupid. But they don't stay that way for too long.

I do go through romances at a truly alarming rate and that can say whatever it says about my character. Maybe one out of fifteen is worth reading every word and maybe one in sixty (I'm not saying fifty here, I'm not) is worth reading again. If it hadn't occurred to you that talking is fun and sexy and charming, this is a good example.

It doesn't come near some of my favorite romances, the main one of which would be "Windflower" by Sharon and Thomas Curtis, who would be the most fun people to talk to, ever...that's my desert island book. Probably have that one entirely memorized.

Since that's not available on Kindle, I don't have much of a choice there.

 

[Verdad]

Specifically for me it's the banter. I think that the Blackberry sequences are clever and offer something Mann can't. Mann might let you know how to leave a calling card, but to carry on a clever email exchange? That she's got covered. It is genuinely smart, clever, disarming and is the real saving grace of the books. It's a completely modern theme that I've thought would be worth writing myself, the art of instant verbal gratification. Tiny chunks of wit in a few sentences that play with the themes of subject, content and signature in the email form. I think she did it very well.

I've read a ridiculous amount of romance. I read a ridiculous amount of lots of things, true, but I have enough experience in modern romance writing to think that part at least stands out. The charm and banter are up there on the list of things that are fun to read. For that reason alone, I'd read it again and bought all three, even though I thought the story was pretty much crap and the endings of each book a total loss.

I wouldn't read it again for the sex, but I like seein' 'em talk. Sometimes. They do get stupid. But they don't stay that way for too long.

I do go through romances at a truly alarming rate and that can say whatever it says about my character. Maybe one out of fifteen is worth reading every word and maybe one in sixty (I'm not saying fifty here, I'm not) is worth reading again. If it hadn't occurred to you that talking is fun and sexy and charming, this is a good example.

It doesn't come near some of my favorite romances, the main one of which would be "Windflower" by Sharon and Thomas Curtis, who would be the most fun people to talk to, ever...that's my desert island book. Probably have that one entirely memorized.

Since that's not available on Kindle, I don't have much of a choice there.

That’s a reasonable answer and pretty much what I’d expect. Lots of people read romance, many read lots and lots of it, and every now and then, a title stands out a bit or thoroughly charms you and captures your imagination, and you’d actually like to keep it and read it again.

It’s all the hoopla about 50 SOG either corrupting or enlightening the supposedly naive readership that seems completely fabricated.

 

[PennLady]

What I wonder, and maybe you can help me, is how different 50 SOG can be from tons of similar stuff out there?

I'm not sneering at it because we ought to be reading Thomas Mann all the time, or something like that. That'd be ridiculous. I'm sneering because there's all this talk of a big revelation, where the plot and the excerpt tell me you could be reading something damn near identical every day if you wished.

---

So 50 SOG seems to me like a cue to make raunchy romance a topic du jour, but could the book actually be a novel experience to all that many?

I'm not sneering either b/c I like plenty of fluffy stuff, in music and books and movies and etc.

As far as the sex goes -- and I have not read 50SOG, I can only go by what I've read about it -- yes, I really do think it is a novel experience. I've read a number of romance novels and most of them seem to have the "fade to black" attitude on sex, or it's rather... flowery (?), like Nora Roberts. Trying to get anything more raunchy and really explicit, like naming body parts other than breasts or using "dirty words," you have to look and these days, you look online.

I'm 42, and this spring, a couple of women whose kids are on my son's baseball team were reading this. They were definitely in the "OMG, can you believe this?!" camp, going by the conversations. It really did appear they hadn't read stuff like this before.

I think sometimes we here on Lit and similar sites forget that not everyone reads these sites, even anonymously. They don't have time, or don't know they're there, or don't want to get "caught," whatever that means for them. So yes, even though the BDSM and sex in 50SOG is mild -- and I gather in some cases, flat-out wrong -- it is the first exposure to such things for many people.

 

[Recidiva]

That’s a reasonable answer and pretty much what I’d expect. Lots of people read romance, many read lots and lots of it, and every now and then, a title stands out a bit or thoroughly charms you and captures your imagination, and you’d actually like to keep it and read it again.

It’s all the hoopla about 50 SOG either corrupting or enlightening the supposedly naive readership that seems completely fabricated.

Well, romances aren't dumb books by dumb authors. They have a few hallmarks that I appreciate, that being they generally have some sort of happy or hopeful ending and some sort of vulnerability in their characters. Most of my stories end up in romance for a reason.

It's not so much the sex for me as the "Awww...you guys..."

I appreciate the vulnerabilities and choices of what brings someone to the point of wanting to be part of something more than just themselves. That's a theme most often found in romance.

I find a lot of fiction to be completely empty of character content and focusing on recycled plots and facts. Yes, some fiction still has good characterization in the way that some romances actually have good plots. Modern fiction wants to make itself distinct from romance by making romance seem childish and naive. I find that ironically to be childish and naive.

I'm not a fan of the hard, sharp, omnicompetent and quirky anti-hero of most fiction. Bores the hell out of me.

 

[Verdad]

I'm not sneering either b/c I like plenty of fluffy stuff, in music and books and movies and etc.

Glad you understood that because I was afraid it looked like I was coming from a place of snobbishness, and I’m if anything suspicious of people who (claim to) read/view/listen only the tried and true.

As far as the sex goes -- and I have not read 50SOG, I can only go by what I've read about it -- yes, I really do think it is a novel experience. I've read a number of romance novels and most of them seem to have the "fade to black" attitude on sex, or it's rather... flowery (?), like Nora Roberts. Trying to get anything more raunchy and really explicit, like naming body parts other than breasts or using "dirty words," you have to look and these days, you look online.

I'm 42, and this spring, a couple of women whose kids are on my son's baseball team were reading this. They were definitely in the "OMG, can you believe this?!" camp, going by the conversations. It really did appear they hadn't read stuff like this before.

I think sometimes we here on Lit and similar sites forget that not everyone reads these sites, even anonymously. They don't have time, or don't know they're there, or don't want to get "caught," whatever that means for them. So yes, even though the BDSM and sex in 50SOG is mild -- and I gather in some cases, flat-out wrong -- it is the first exposure to such things for many people.

You could be right; it’s just pretty hard to imagine. Here at Lit there’s sometimes a sense of being avant-garde-like, but I’m wary of flattering myself that way. If years ago I came here looking for smutty stories, I reckon half the planet did the same, and even if I’d been fairly quick, there’s been more than enough time for others to catch up. The sales of every type of raunchy material suggest the same.

I’m also fresh from a foray into the world of fanfic (my first return to smuttiness after I’d long gotten bored with it and didn’t seek any in years) and it’s a world by and large populated by women. The majority of them seem young (in their 20’s) and sometimes too young to be writing smut, but all age groups are represented. They’re many, well versed in reading and writing sex, and in many cases the plots and clichés they employ suggest smutty romance has been the staple of their reading.

I realize that’s a relatively small corner compared to the widest possible mainstream, but for me it only confirmed what I thought to be the mainstream reality.

 

[Verdad]

Well, romances aren't dumb books by dumb authors. They have a few hallmarks that I appreciate, that being they generally have some sort of happy or hopeful ending and some sort of vulnerability in their characters. Most of my stories end up in romance for a reason.

It's not so much the sex for me as the "Awww...you guys..."

I appreciate the vulnerabilities and choices of what brings someone to the point of wanting to be part of something more than just themselves. That's a theme most often found in romance.

I find a lot of fiction to be completely empty of character content and focusing on recycled plots and facts. Yes, some fiction still has good characterization in the way that some romances actually have good plots. Modern fiction wants to make itself distinct from romance by making romance seem childish and naive. I find that ironically to be childish and naive.

I'm not a fan of the hard, sharp, omnicompetent and quirky anti-hero of most fiction. Bores the hell out of me.

No more than other relatively clichéd stuff we enjoy reading. I totally don’t have an issue with that or a high horse to sit on. I sometimes go without reading any fiction for a time, and sometimes I’ll stuff myself with the most juvenile stuff you can think of. I do try to follow my appetites instead of getting lured into the “everyone’s reading so and so.”

I read the Da Vinci Code because it was on the bookshelf at the in-laws; same, as I recall, with Bridget Jones’ Diary. I saw the Girl With The Dragon Tattoo movie and said no thanks to the book, and I remain blissfully ignorant about the sparkling vampires, among other things.

Harry Potter I resisted through the entire decade of Potter mania (because I’d read the first book early on and was not charmed), but just last year, I saw the movies and then I couldn’t help reading the books, and then they captured me and I had an, uh, episode of reading every fanfic I could find. I haven’t actually revised my early opinion of JKR’s books, and I don’t think I’d have bothered with them at all if the movies hadn’t been charming, but I guess I should hand it to her that I was so annoyed with some of the things she did I had to seek the fanfic cure.

So it’s not like go “ewww, I read a bestseller, I feel so dirty” but if a best-selling book doesn’t look like it’d interest me anyhow and I’m not like, stuck camping, I’m hard to guilt into feeling that I’m missing something.