Arousal vs emotion

[StillStunned]

It's harder than you think, I reckon, to write something completely dispassionate, emotionless. Your example doesn't do it. If it did, you'd be describing a plank of wood, which wouldn't be arousing at all.

I think you're confusing sensation with emotion. The fact that some of the words I used have possibly emotional connotations doesn't make the description emotional. Evocative, perhaps, which is the whole point of writing if you're trying to engage the reader, but not emotional.

Take the narrator's lack of interest in Marigold, for instance. You ask:

Why not? Disdain, disinterest, dislike? Something is implied. They're emotions.

Or maybe, as is implied, he works in a large office and sometimes you just don't think of someone beyond as a face in the workplace. I could have added emotion. Shame, perhaps, for only being interested in his colleague because he's noticed her arse. Regret about not having paid more attention to her before. And maybe he does feel those emotions. But they're not there in the text, even implied.

Also: is this discussion about describing arousal, or about arousing the reader? Because I've been working on the assumption that it's the former.

 

[StillStunned]

You see, for me that still includes emotion...
A visual sense, in this case visual. Created a feeling within the viewer... His eyes saw, his brain connected the dots.
He felt an emotion... Arousal. endorphins, Dopamine were released by the brain causing his reaction to the visual stimuli. Excitement... Arousal... They are both an emotional response...
His heart rate increased. His blood pressure increased. The physical reaction caused by the brain doing what it does. Controlling our body.

I said earlier. I'm no expert.. Just an opinion. In my mind, every physical action is linked to an emotion. In the above case. Excitement.

Cagivagurl

If we're going to classify arousal as an emotion, then obviously it becomes impossible to describe arousal without emotion.

As it is, I think it's a decent attempt at describing a physical and intellectual response without bringing emotion into it *from the character's perspective*.

 

[ElectricBlue]

And maybe he does feel those emotions. But they're not there in the text, even implied.

Why did I read the passage the way I did then?

Just goes to show a writer can't predict or determine a reader's response. Clearly, from my response, I read your example in a way you didn't expect, reading something into it that you thought wasn't there. But that's the way I read it, bringing my own self to the party.

Neither of us is right or wrong here - but it illustrates you can't control what a reader brings to your text.

In a way, I read what you didn't write. That's intriguing.

 

[StillStunned]

Why did I read the passage the way I did then?

I'd like to say, "Because it's evocative."

In a way, I read what you didn't write. That's intriguing.

I think this is a very good point. I set out to write a psychopath, or at least someone who doesn't feel empathy for or connected to the world around them. I left out the emotional element. And as a human being, you filled in the blanks because that's what a normal person would feel.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I think this is a very good point. I set out to write a psychopath, or at least someone who doesn't feel empathy for or connected to the world around them. I left out the emotional element. And as a human being, you filled in the blanks because that's what a normal person would feel.

That too is an interesting observation. Humanity is as humanity does .

 

[Cagivagurl]

If we're going to classify arousal as an emotion, then obviously it becomes impossible to describe arousal without emotion.

As it is, I think it's a decent attempt at describing a physical and intellectual response without bringing emotion into it *from the character's perspective*.

I am not saying we have to do anything.
Merely explaining my opinion. Doesn't make me right.
The old adage about the brain being the biggest sex organ is relevant, because without it. There can be no physical response.
The brain decides based upon a bunch of stored memories (Data) What the response will be to any given circumstance.
IE, arousal... We see, feel, smell, hear something. That generates an emotional response...
Joy, sadness, anger, jealousy, hatred, fear, excitement, pride, embarrassment, disinterest.
In my mind I cannot separate the physical from the emotive.
We react based on an emotional input to a circumstance.
You cannot separate emotions from actions...

Cagivagurl

 

[XerXesXu]

Why did I read the passage the way I did then?

In a way, I read what you didn't write. That's intriguing.

That's hermeneutics. Old hat.

 

[AG31]

Alright, challenge accepted. Arousal that engages the reader without emotion. What do you think?

*
He’d never paid much attention to Marigold before. But today she was wearing soft woollen trousers that revealed her firm, round arse cheeks and then hung loosely down her legs.

Even then he probably wouldn’t have noticed, except she was walking right in front of him and he saw the slightest jiggle of flesh inside that soft wool.

And just like that an image appeared in his mind. Marigold’s arse without the trousers. He picture it: two round globes, the crack dividing them, a glimpse of her pussy below with a hint of hair.

The image went straight to his cock. The first surge of blood – not enough to swell more than a little, but so full of pleasure, and full of the promise of more pleasure.

The rest of the day dragged on. Everywhere he looked, he saw naked flesh. An inch of cleavage down Brandi’s blouse, Claudine’s soft red lips wettened by her softer, redder tongue. The intimate moment when Ellie ran her hands through her hair and for an instant exposed the back of her neck.

And all that time he maintained the same state. That single surge of arousal along his shaft, not so much that he betrayed himself, just enough so he felt himself. Felt that warmth that was ready to become heat, and then fire, and then the all-consuming lightning of relief.

Loved it!

 

[AG31]

If we define all description as arousing "emotion," then there's no point to the thread. By tomorrow I may be able to articulate the difference between "emotion" and "reaction to description."

Soft is a tactile word: soft cloth, soft fur, soft voice. Again, there's an implied feeling (to me, at least, because I often use "soft" to conjure feeling - okay, so that's a personal bias).

Yeah, we'll eliminate this from your list of "emotion."

Glimpse, hint. They're conjuring something teasing, flirtatious.

I wouldn't go that far.

"So full of pleasure, and full of the promise of more pleasure". If that's not an emotionally charged sentence, I don't know what is. You've even used the literary ploy of repetition to reinforce the response.

Well, maybe.

This whole section is full of emotional conjuring.

I think it's full of that other thing I'm trying to name.

Betrayed is an emotional reaction, as is all-consuming.

Baloney. Here it just means "reveals without owner's intention."

 

[AG31]

You see, for me that still includes emotion...
A visual sense, in this case visual. Created a feeling within the viewer... His eyes saw, his brain connected the dots.
He felt an emotion... Arousal. endorphins, Dopamine were released by the brain causing his reaction to the visual stimuli. Excitement... Arousal... They are both an emotional response...
His heart rate increased. His blood pressure increased. The physical reaction caused by the brain doing what it does. Controlling our body.

I said earlier. I'm no expert.. Just an opinion. In my mind, every physical action is linked to an emotion. In the above case. Excitement.

Cagivagurl

As I said in my reply to EB, there's got to be a way to distinguish between "emotion" and "reaction to physical descriptions."

 

[AG31]

I think you're confusing sensation with emotion.

We're zeroing in on something here.

 

[AG31]

I set out to write a psychopath, or at least someone who doesn't feel empathy for or connected to the world around them.

That's an odd thought. I took it simply as a man experiencing sexual attraction. Nothing implied as far as I was concerned about his ability to relate to Marigold in other circumstances.

 

[AG31]

@TarnishedPenny published a 750 word story today that I liked a lot and which could be an illustration of erotica without emotion. But can a snippet of erotica be arousing without a setting? Her story is vivid with setting. @pink_silk_glove's post, while captivating in the way EB describes here, has no setting, and I've yet to see anyone say it is arousing.

And, if so, can one write a snippet of erotica just about arousal?

We're talking about writing, but we also segued into whether arousal is an emotion. Back to focusing on writing erotica; while it may be possible to write erotica (stories intended to arouse) without writing about emotion, can you write erotica without a setting?

 

[StillStunned]

That's an odd thought. I took it simply as a man experiencing sexual attraction. Nothing implied as far as I was concerned about his ability to relate to Marigold in other circumstances.

It was what I held in mind while writing. Otherwise I might have slipped into emotional responses. When I conceived of the snippet, I continued it through his commute home until he can finally give in to his arousal. That would have taken it beyond an acceptable word count for a forum post, but it would have highlighted his detachment from the world around him.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I wouldn't go that far.

Well, maybe.

I think it's full of that other thing I'm trying to name.

Baloney. Here it just means "reveals without owner's intention."

You missed my later post to @StillStunned and his reply.

You might not go that far with a reading, but I did, which illustrates that different readers bring their own readings to material, and react differently to different words. The author can't control the reader's reading, not completely.

The words I designated as emotive to me might not be emotive to you, and that's my point. If I was writing a psychopathic character, as Stillstunned says he was (I missed that, incidentally), I'd have used none of those words, because for me, I read and use those words to conjure emotion. I'd have culled his text even tighter.

There's dictionary meanings and there's dictionary meanings. I'd never use "betrayed" with the plainer meaning you give it, because for me it's inherently linked to "betrayal", with all the emotional baggage the other usage contains. Betrayed" is a much stronger word than "reveals". Reveals is like turning a rock and finding dirt, betrayed is finding the blood and the pain and the agony of a betrayal.

 

[ElectricBlue]

@TarnishedPenny published a 750 word story today that I liked a lot and which could be an illustration of erotica without emotion. But can a snippet of erotica be arousing without a setting? Her story is vivid with setting.

That was the story I meant to flag to you, but I cocked up the link and the story name. It reminded me immediately of your Maxbridge Street story, and of course, The Story of O.

Back to focusing on writing erotica; while it may be possible to write erotica (stories intended to arouse) without writing about emotion, can you write erotica without a setting?

Tough to do, I think.

I might have some private erotica without setting, but not here, not in an EB story. My settings almost become a character - the place as evocative as a person, in a typical EB story.

 

[AG31]

That was the story I meant to flag to you, but I cocked up the link and the story name. It reminded me immediately of your Maxbridge Street story, and of course, The Story of O.

Good eye! I read it earlier today when I got alerted on the Story side. I left a comment and gave her 5 stars. Thanks!

 

[Cagivagurl]

As I said in my reply to EB, there's got to be a way to distinguish between "emotion" and "reaction to physical descriptions."

Maybe there is, I'm not sure. My question is... "Why?"
If our physical responses are driven by an emotion. Why is that a bad thing? And why do we have to separate them?

Perhaps I missed something... LOL... Not unusual BTW...
I see all our physical reactions, responses controlled by our brains. Whether we see something that excites us, disgusts us, makes us hungry as in a smell. Our brain descides on a suitable reaction. Become aroused. Run away. Or eat... Job done...
I'm trying to figure out why that is a bad thing???
Maybe it's me...
I'm not suggesting there can be no arousal driven by any of our senses. Which is true, I think. Reading or watching something that titillates causes a reaction, but it's still driven by our neuro system.

Dunno, maybe I'm over thinking it...

Cagivagurl

 

[AG31]

Maybe there is, I'm not sure. My question is... "Why?"
If our physical responses are driven by an emotion. Why is that a bad thing? And why do we have to separate them?

Perhaps I missed something... LOL... Not unusual BTW...
I see all our physical reactions, responses controlled by our brains. Whether we see something that excites us, disgusts us, makes us hungry as in a smell. Our brain descides on a suitable reaction. Become aroused. Run away. Or eat... Job done...
I'm trying to figure out why that is a bad thing???
Maybe it's me...
I'm not suggesting there can be no arousal driven by any of our senses. Which is true, I think. Reading or watching something that titillates causes a reaction, but it's still driven by our neuro system.

Dunno, maybe I'm over thinking it...

Cagivagurl

I don't think it's a bad thing to not want to distinguish between emotion and arousal. I just think comparing them is an interesting way to try to better understand different aspects of our experience. I don't think it advances the discussion to point out that both emotion and arousal originate in the brain. Everything we experience in our minds and bodies originates in the brain.

 

[Cagivagurl]

I don't think it's a bad thing to not want to distinguish between emotion and arousal. I just think comparing them is an interesting way to try to better understand different aspects of our experience. I don't think it advances the discussion to point out that both emotion and arousal originate in the brain. Everything we experience in our minds and bodies originates in the brain.

Yes, perhaps...
I'm still confused why it's important to separate them??? Is it, or am I misreading the context???

If we accept that the giant computer that sits in our head drives everything. Why do we need to separate emotion from action???
If we think that the brain drives it all, and the neuro signals sent out maybe emotional, or sort of important messages like (Run for your life).
What does it matter.
OK... We sense... We react... The senses being engaged first, to set the whole thing in motion... Sensory input... See, feel, smell, hear... Brain engaged, reaction required...
I call the first bit as building an emotive response to the signal...

If I was to write something based on a visual signal as Stillstunned did... It would be in a similar vain...

Seeing something that visually stimulated me. I would react based on that feeling...

My eyes settled on the gorgeous woman leaning on the bar talking to obviously a group of friends. Something about her appealed to me. Her hair glistened, and the way she curled the long locks around her finger intrigued me. My eyes roamed a little further as I people watched. It was always like that for me, I enjoyed assessing people... strangers in a room. Try as I might, I couldn't escape the woman. There was something about her, an aura, and when our eyes met.
I was trapped... She smiled sensing my interest. From then, it appeared every time my eyes drifted back to her, there was a connection. She was now openly staring at me, and the little glow I felt slowly increased.
Yes, there could be no hiding from it, I was interested... aroused, excited by her. I wanted to know more... My mind already spun building a little world around her...
I needed more.
Finishing my drink in one long gulp, I sucked up my courage and walked over.
"Hi, I'm Julianne."
She accepted my hand, and the moment our hands touched. I felt it, like little electric currents enlivening my circuitry.
"Hello, Julianne, I'm Susan. Do we know each other?"
Her scent filled my twitching nose, heaven would smell like that.
My fate was sealed, already trapped in her web.

Senses, all intermingled. visual, touching... smelling...
Not sure if that helped... It's how I see things I guess...

Cagivagurl

 

[AG31]

I'm still confused why it's important to separate them??? Is it, or am I misreading the context???

If you're interested in the differences between arousal and emotion, then it's helpful. Same thing if we wanted to talk about, say, pain, as contrasted with the thought about pain. Or a host of other intriguing questions about the human experience.

As I said before, everything, humans experience involves the brain. Saying something originates in the brain isn't helpful when it comes to talking about varieties of human experience.

 

[Cagivagurl]

If you're interested in the differences between arousal and emotion, then it's helpful. Same thing if we wanted to talk about, say, pain, as contrasted with the thought about pain. Or a host of other intriguing questions about the human experience.

As I said before, everything, humans experience involves the brain. Saying something originates in the brain isn't helpful when it comes to talking about varieties of human experience.

From a purely personal perspective, I love to see emotions in stories. It's what makes a story valuable in my mind.
Yes, we're all different, and everybody's looking for something different in a story...
For me, I want to be moved. I want to experience what the characters in the story are feeling... Pain... Grief, unbearable sorrow... And then a small ray of light... Lifting, elevating... Re-emerging from the darkess back into the light. I want to feel the joy, the euphoria of a new relationship. Arousal yes... I want to feel how the sensuous feelings twist and help drag my characters together...
I don't read for a sexual high. I want to enjoy the emotions behind how characters met and joined. The dialogue, the questioning glances, the chase and seduction...

Because that's what I look for, I think that every human action is driven by an emotive response to something...

I don't believe there can be an action that wasn't firstly driven by an emotion... Hunger, thirst... Whatever it is comes from a thought... zthe thought grows into an action of some sort... Tah Dah... action...
Dunno, LOL... Think I'm getting the whole thing tangled up.

Not looking for argument... I love the conversation and where it leads... Can we separate actions and emotions? Dunno, but looking forward to hearing what people think..

Cagivagurl

 

[M_K_Babalon]

Is it possible to have a sexual connection without emotion????
I can only speak for myself, but....
I don't believe you can have a sexual connection without an emotional one. It has to be something that triggers an attraction. Physical desire driving the rest of the body to make it happen.
The body cannot do anything without the brain. That's where the emotional response comes from...
Lust, desire, hatred... They are emotions... Feelings... Sensations.

It doesn't have to be love, or even romantic, but surely it cannot happen without an emotional trigger... Guilt, anger, a physical chemical attraction...

The body doesn't function without the brains involvement...
Arousal is an emotion.... It is surely a culmination of excitement, which activates the brain to release the concoction of chemicals which produce the feelings of elation. dopamine, Serotonin, Oxytocin, Endorphins...

Physical sensations equates to emotions... Positive or negative.
As I say, just my thoughts...

Cagivagurl

I'd say you were right, on a technical sense. If you didn't count the often shallow emotion of lust, as one, AlinaX is kinda right, too. Given not too deep a thought on it, I think it's more of a "difference", than a difference, if that makes sense.

I'm the same as you, if there's nothing worth triggering arrousal, it ain't happening. Sure things can trigger them, like motorcycles, but that's not really the point here.

 

[StillStunned]

We're talking about writing, but we also segued into whether arousal is an emotion. Back to focusing on writing erotica; while it may be possible to write erotica (stories intended to arouse) without writing about emotion, can you write erotica without a setting?

It should be possible, but I think it would have to lean the other way from the snippet I posted above, for example. To blank out the setting, you have to have your characters hyper-focused on what they're doing and feeling. There's got to be something there for the reader to engage with. I also think that people might be tempted to try it with 2P POV, just to limit the story to the words and the reader, with no narrator involved.

I have a WIP about my sword & sorcery characters Avilia and Sligh being dropped into a pitch-black tunnel. Of course there's the story of them having to find a way out, but they'll be having sex there as well. Without them being able to see, it will be all about the sensations and emotions. (No, it's not 2P.)

 

[AG31]

To blank out the setting, you have to have your characters hyper-focused on what they're doing and feeling.

@pink_silk_glove's post about female orgasm is about as hyper-focused as is possible, but no one that I've seen has identified it as arousing (impressive, yes, but not arousing). I think it's the absence of setting that keeps it from being erotica. (I posted a link to it somewhere up thread.) Here's the link again.