Real and Make believe

[Guest]

Charlus, I love all Pasolini (recently watched Mama Roma again), including Salo. But then I don't watch really good films as entertainment (like pop novels, pulp fiction, etc.) So for me it's nothing to do with my psyche, only art.

On the other hand, I never saw that film with Jodie Foster as the woman who gets raped on a pool table. I'd read about how graphic a scene the rape was and I just can't bear to watch stuff like that. I've heard it was a very good film all in all but I can't imagine if I ever saw it that I'd put it on a level with anything Pasolini did.

Sorry, I get your question but can't respond on the level of the general discourse here.

Perdita

 

[BlackShanglan]

On the other hand, I never saw that film with Jodie Foster as the woman who gets raped on a pool table. I'd read about how graphic a scene the rape was and I just can't bear to watch stuff like that.

Saw it. Terrible images. Part of me wishes I'd never seen it; the rest thinks that it's well that people have that image of rape, and not some fetished "oh she really wanted it" version that has nothing to do with reality. This was brutal, savage, and ugly. The only one I can think of that was worse and more hideously real was the Sopranos episode where Dr. Melfi is raped. That was harrowing and terrible work that left me sick and gasping. I can't imagine what it most have been to film it.

Shanglan

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Hold up a sec, here.
Isn't it possible to write about something even if you have no interest in it? I'm not saying necessarily that you write an incest story with the intent of getting turned on by it. But it's the reality of the thing...you might not be turned on by rape, but it's something that happens. Do you, therefor, not write about it at all? Even if you don't like something, it can be a valuable tool in writing.
I know that wasn't exactly the point, but I wanted you to consider what you said. I find it hard to believe that you simply ignore any elements you don't like, but that is a little what it sounded like.

Damn, that's almost the exact opposite of what I said.

I said that in the context of writing smut, yes. If you write smuts stories in which the focal point is incest, the focal point is getting sexual satisfaction out of incestuous, sexually explicit relationships, you're either writing to find out if you can write - or to respond to a challenge - or you have a real sexual interest in it - even if merely at a fantasy level.

I also said that it is dangerous to make that generalisation. I offered the example: Would it be legitimate to assume that Ellis has sociopathic tendencies because he wrote "American Psycho", for example? Or is it more legitimate to assume that the theme of sociopathy was chosen because he felt it was the best-fitting metaphor to tell a tale? In case you don't know, the book "American Psycho" makes extensive use of highly descriptive hyperviolence from one individual (the title character) throughout, as a metaphor for the behaviour of American society in the 80's.

 

[oggbashan]

I find that writing for specific genres and for people who like particular fantasies is a way of exploring the possibilities of my skills (if I have any).

Many of my stories have similar themes. I started them because I had an audience, not on Lit, but on Yahoo. I have written several stories for particular Yahoo Adult Groups some of which have now been deleted.

I have written Incest although I cannot see the attraction. It seemed to work even though I hadn't convinced myself that it was erotic.

I do not believe that you can, or necessarily should, determine an author's personal beliefs by what is written. Anthony Trollope was mercilessly criticised because he admitted that his major incentive was money. Were his stories any less good because he needed to make money from them? Charles Dickens enjoyed the money but the fame and his need of an audience was probably more important to him.

Others had different motivators. Jonathan Swift and Milton wanted to change the world they saw, one through satire, the other through exhortation. C.S.Lewis wrote Christian parables and his Narnia stories have the message writ large. Were their stories flawed because of their motives?

I am willing to attempt to write on almost any erotic subject and in any genre if I can do it in a way that convinces the audience. I still have to complete my story about Kerala Women's hairy and sweaty armpits. That is still my unattained goal. Once that is reached maybe the next one will be even more unlikely.

I write to amuse myself. If I succeed in entertaining someone then that is a bonus. Once I have written the story it is done, finished. The next one, whatever genre, is the new object of desire and if it is difficult because the attraction is not one I share then my satisfaction is greater when I finish.

Perhaps that is why I have the record low ratings for those prepared to admit to their disasters.

Og

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Saw it. Terrible images. Part of me wishes I'd never seen it; the rest thinks that it's well that people have that image of rape, and not some fetished "oh she really wanted it" version that has nothing to do with reality. This was brutal, savage, and ugly. The only one I can think of that was worse and more hideously real was the Sopranos episode where Dr. Melfi is raped. That was harrowing and terrible work that left me sick and gasping. I can't imagine what it most have been to film it.

Shanglan

Have you ever seen the Gaspar Noé movie, "Irréversible"? It's relatively recent. It has a 15 minute-long rape scene of Monica Bellucci that was the most sickening thing I ever saw. There were hordes of people abandoning the theatre all throughout the movie, but especially then. It made Jodie Foster's scene look like a soft caress.

It was a brilliant movie, once you understood it was not ABOUT the rape. But I think most people had a lot of trouble dissociating the two.

 

[msboy8]

Personally. I'm a fan of Happily Ever After but that rarely happens in movies nowadays. I always was a fan of Edgar Rice Burroughs, because everything is neatly tied together by the end. The ones to be punished are punished and the heros always win out in the end.

 

[Boota]

I am not a murderer, rapist, or misogynist. I have, however, written a snuff porn piece, Killfuck. It is coming out in an anthology of erotic horror called Dark Sins and Desires Unveiled. (Light on the erotic, heavy on the horror.)

In writing Killfuck, I was never at any point turned on by the heinous acts my characters were performing. The sexual aspect of the story, layered with some of the most graphic violence I have ever read, gave me the effect I was going for. I wanted to write something disturbing, something to make people cringe. This did it. Some of my friends couldn't even finish reading the piece. I normally write comedy and I really just wanted to stretch my legs.

Do I have an interest in that sort of thing? Yes, from a psychological view. The mental workings of human monsters is fascinating to me. The normal psychological response to sex is fascinating to me as well. Combining the mental workings of a human monster and his (it's) psychological response to sex piqued my interest. But just because I wrote that story doesn't mean I want to do it or to see it done.

Considering the supernatural aspect to my story, I don't see anyone doing the things that happen in Killfuck. But rapes and murders happen all the time. Even if a rapist or murderer read my story I wouldn't feel responsible for what he did. A story can't make anyone do anything. I think it's the same sentiment as this Frank Zappa quote: "There are more love songs than anything else. If songs could make you do something we'd all love one another."

 

[brightlyiburn]

Damn, that's almost the exact opposite of what I said.

I said that in the context of writing smut, yes. If you write smuts stories in which the focal point is incest, the focal point is getting sexual satisfaction out of incestuous, sexually explicit relationships, you're either writing to find out if you can write - or to respond to a challenge - or you have a real sexual interest in it - even if merely at a fantasy level.

I also said that it is dangerous to make that generalisation. I offered the example: Would it be legitimate to assume that Ellis has sociopathic tendencies because he wrote "American Psycho", for example? Or is it more legitimate to assume that the theme of sociopathy was chosen because he felt it was the best-fitting metaphor to tell a tale? In case you don't know, the book "American Psycho" makes extensive use of highly descriptive hyperviolence from one individual (the title character) throughout, as a metaphor for the behaviour of American society in the 80's.

I figured you were referring to smut, but I wasn't sure. I know quite a few people here like to do other writing, though.
I've not read American Psycho, but I wouldn't assume the author was a psycho. It can be difficult to imagine that position fully if you're not in it yourself, that's true. But it can be done.
I can't speak for Shanglan, but still, I wouldn't assume she (she? he?) is into incest simply cause of her story "Mordred" either. I guess it depends on how you do it. I think something can be erotic without being a turn on, if you catch my meaning. You're bound to find a range here...because so few places allow stories with more mature themes, you're likely to find some stuff that feels like it doesn't belong amid the smut.

 

[Kassiana]

I don't think fantasizing about something means that the "obvious" aspects of it is what a person wants.

For example, I have underage sex fantasies. Is it because I'm an evil pedophile? No, but you might assume I was by the fact that I fantasize about it.

Want to know the real reason, or just want to speculate about what an immoral bitch I am? (SubJoe: don't say it.)

The real reason? It's because I wish I'd started sexual experimentation earlier in my life. I didn't even masturbate until I was 22 years old and didn't have actual intercourse until I was 25.

I have no sexual attraction to children. I would not let/encourage someone to have sex with a child, even one who reminds me of me. It's a fantasy, not a desire to have the action happen...it's not even enactable. I can't go back to my teen years and have sex. I'm 32. My body shows it.

I also have no sexual attraction to any members of my family, but because it's part of the "wish I'd done it earlier" package, I do regularly have incest fantasies.

Fantasies have personal meanings. The plain fact is that the theme of a fantasy doesn't tell you what it means to the author/experiencer of the fantasy.

 

[sweetnpetite]

In my opinion, all erotica is a fantasy of some type.

As the people who hang out here know, I've been kinda outside the world for a long time. So my fantasies tend to be about the very simple pleasures of falling into or being in a relationship. That's why almost all my stuff is Romance or Erotic Couplings.

Dr_m's point about snuff porn is making me re-think writing a story bouncing around in my head. I've been putting off writing it as it requires me to use a dark part of my imagination that I would rather not access. One of the two main characters dies during this story, and in a quite hideous manner. I hadn't considered it snuff porn until now. It was intended as a political allegory dressed up as a BDSM piece.

So, yet another reason to not write it.

I've written things that make the hair on the back of my own neck stand up as I'm writing it. Sometimes you do have to push you're own boundaries. I don't think it's always bad. Then again, you never really know were a story will take you till your'e in it. Sometimes it feeds the darknee, sometimes it shines a light on it and get's it out of your system.

 

[CharleyH]

Charlus, I love all Pasolini (recently watched Mama Roma again), including Salo. But then I don't watch really good films as entertainment (like pop novels, pulp fiction, etc.) So for me it's nothing to do with my psyche, only art.

On the other hand, I never saw that film with Jodie Foster as the woman who gets raped on a pool table. I'd read about how graphic a scene the rape was and I just can't bear to watch stuff like that. I've heard it was a very good film all in all but I can't imagine if I ever saw it that I'd put it on a level with anything Pasolini did.

Perdita

Well, no, I would not refer to The Accussed as a work of art. I had just been revisiting some films, 'Not A Love Story' by Klein, 'Les Filles Du Roy', by Poirier, rethinking of having a Godard or Bergman fest night. I had just submitted an essay on a Canadian film, A Winter Tan, when it is posted, I will direct you to it. If you can find this little known film, it is fascinating

 

[NoJo]

I tend to write about the humiliation and degradation of female characters. However, I have absolutely no desire to see these things happen to real people.

I think that at best, you're using the wrong words, here.

You may have meant to say that you have absolutely no intention of enacting any of the scenes. And not knowing who you are, I would believe you, and flag you as someone who's "working through their darker side"; because it's pretty common for people to explore less ethically or morally acceptable aspects of their sexuality.

But you really shouldn't claim not to have any desire. Unless you're writing some critique of that behavour.

 

[sincerely_helene]

I have only skimmed the many replies, so I hope I'm not sounding redundant in my response.

I think, (in fact, I know,) that it is very possible to read and even write an extreme/taboo scenario without necessarily having the slightest inkling to make it a reality. I have been (for lack of better term,) "enjoying" Dolcett comics and snuff/rape/degredation stories for years now, but never once have I wished any of it on myself, much less any one else.

The thrill for me comes not from a sexually aroused state of mind; rather the fascination of the unthinkable-- the curiousity of the many "what ifs." It is much the same reason some of us might watch a biography of a serial killer, for instance (I had a feeling the better example I was originally going to use would be found offensive and steer us away from the topic at hand .)

I guess it is just more accepted by society, though, if it is reality based, and we claim it in the name of research. Never then, does anyone assume we are getting off on it if we watch, read or write about it.

As for accepting responsibilty, if someone is that unstable that they actually go out and commit such horrid acts as presented in a story, odds are they were messed up enough in the first place that it was just a matter of time before they did it anyway. I refuse to believe that something I said or wrote had such a profound impact that it was what "pushed 'em over the edge."

P.S. Some day I might attempt a story involving two men engaging in sex. That doesn't turn me on either.

 

[Lord DragonsWing]

For me, I write as the story grows. If it leads to murder and mystery then I let the characters take over. I don't think someone who writes erotic horror has a realistic fantasy for that subject. I think we all, as writers should try out talents in various areas of the art. That leads to a broadening of the mind and an openness to others who are more skilled than we are in a certain genre.

Stephen King as we all know writes horror, but has he committed any murders due to his writing? I've written one erotic horror story, and it took a dark nature as the story developed. I didn't kill anyone, nor did I imagine it. Actually, I'm a southern gentleman who enjoys writing.

All writers should explore the genres. Where we feel comfortable is where we should concentrate our skills. But to not experiment in other genres will also affect our writing in our primary. We learn and we grow. That's part of being a writer.

I don't judge anyone by what they write. To take up the challenge of writing is awesome. Where ever they feel comfortable at is their choice. I may not read it, but I don't see a writer writing a story and then commiting the act.

 

[mcfbridge]

I want to point out again that an interest in writing, does not imply an interest in reality. I write in non-consensual because that is indeed the category that most interests me.

But it is stories that interest me and excite me, not an actual woman being degraded or raped. I would be absolutely horrified if any of what I write actually happened to someone I know. And I would have no interest in actually doing any of this. Frankly, anyone who knows me will tell you that I am an absolute sucker for tears, and I would find it impossible to be anything but comforting to a woman that was crying.

Our erotic fantasies usually have absolutely no bearing on reality. I don't believe that most people who write violent or degrading porn would actually want to engage or even witness that behavior. Certainly there are some sick people who lose the lines between fantasy and reality, but they are just that, sick. I don't believe that whether they read stories or not will change whether or not they act out their sicknesses.

Of course, but you're doing it because you have a declared interest in writing stories in all categories here, for the sake of writing or because you're a Survivor contestant. But if all thing are equal and you opt for writing constantly on a given category, it can only be because you have an interest in that specific category or because you have a specific interest in writing in that category.