On Writing Erotica
Apr. 11th, 2004 10:28 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
icarusSo I was sent a professor's erotica by my creative writing teacher. (Isn't it cool when you have a professor with whom you can discuss slash?) I greatly fear I may have been too hard on the man. But here is what I said:
Right off the bat I could give him some things to watch out for in writing erotica.
First, in good erotica you use the sexual tension as characterisation. There's a kind of alchemy when people meet, they act differently with one person than they do with another.
You get to see a different side of a character when they're in "pick up" mode, and see what the two bring out in each other. A good practice exercise is to create - separately - two radically different characters with nothing in common, and then... find something that connects them. And that's what will be brought out in that relationship, and that describes their flirting, the sex, and may even tell you the plot.
By "in common" I mean not just they like to ski, but, oh, say perhaps they both are rather sarcastic and blunt. The one may be very educated and toss around elegantly sculpted stinging phrases, while the other may be sort to say, "hey, I just tell it like it is." But this tells you these two together would be aggressive and possibly even love/hate.
Both main characters have to be well-rounded. You can't go through a great deal of effort of developing one character and then have a cardboard cut-out walk in the door. You can do that with porn (where the impact is in the physical description), but you can't do it with erotica because so much of it's in the reader's head.
The other thing is to very carefully avoid "Mary Sue" or "Gary Stu" characters. This is an online fanfiction term for self-inserts. The self insert is obviously the writer. Generally if a "Mary Sue" has flaws, they are charming ones... and the character is just sickening. The world revolves around them and roses spring up at their feet. They never have bad breath. Women have flowing hair. The men are befuddled professors with darling coeds falling at their feet.
Somehow, where the writer manages to avoid a Mary Sue, the opposite character is often better realised. Funny how that works.
Though another way they can avoid flat characters is to avoid limp, vague words like "young" or "pretty." They're meaningless. Too vague, subjective, and really doesn't tell the audience anything. Let them decide if they find your characters attractive. I find people are more interested in believable people, and characters with physical flaws. I don't know if this is a male-female thing (90% of erotica is read and written by women) or if it's because we like to look at pretty people on the silver screen, but on paper we want to be able to identify with them.
Dialogue should be the cue of those things like "she's young" unless you're really deep into the protagonist's thoughts.
"'Oh, hi Professor. Sorry, I just -- had to get my things. I'm Amber bytheway. I'm new here and," she interrupted herself with a giggle, "oh I mean, that's obvious I'm new or I wouldn't have to introduce myself, right? Anyway, nice to meet you!" She hurried out the door, but glanced back with a bright smile, her blond curls bouncing. Along with the rest of her. Professor Thackaway shook his head, convincing himself that he hadn't noticed that and wouldn't the next time -- which classes was she in again? This one, and nine am tomorrow morning."
Last... never, ever focus first on the physical features, brown hair, freckles etc. (unless they're Erin Brockowich impressive and two forces she uses for good in the plot). Really, if that's all that's interesting about your opposite character, you better hope she doesn't turn sideways or she might just disappear. You gotta deliver the whole package, what really makes everyone's head turn. Is it really the color of the hair? Or the force of personality?
The professional Domintrix shouldn't have "flowing black hair and red lipstick."
No.
She has "a wry smile, and looked him up and down frankly as if taking his measurements. Then her smile broadened. What was that supposed to mean? He fought the sudden desire to move his menu to his lap. She flipped a dark strand off her shoulder with one fingernail and asked without prelude, 'Does your wife know?' Her tone was mildly curious, as if asking what model car he drove.
How did she know he was married? He instantly began to think of identity theft and credit card scams. He knew this was a mistake, and now it was going to cost him."
Okay, so I worked in the flowing black hair.
It's the sensory detail, things like body language that you want to describe, to convey the unspoken communication, the electricity between people. Here the dynamic is one of nervousness and intimidation. It acts like intimate close-up shots in film-making. Only you have a broader palette. You can bring in the smell of wine.
Erotica is all about characterisation and these many layers of communication. And the most powerful stories transform one or another character in the process -- not by the hot sex (or really bad sex, I've written that too), but by what these people bring about in other's lives, good or bad.
Anyway, I've rattled on and of course I'm preaching to the choir. He's a good writer, but he doesn't know how to write erotica yet. It's a different genre with its own pitfalls.
Of course, the story I've written today is... I don't think it's going to be something you want for erotica. I'm at the opposite extreme with this one. It goes too much into the background and set up, and doesn't have the hook of sex early enough to pull in the reader who's looking for that.
Hmmm.
Right off the bat I could give him some things to watch out for in writing erotica.
First, in good erotica you use the sexual tension as characterisation. There's a kind of alchemy when people meet, they act differently with one person than they do with another.
You get to see a different side of a character when they're in "pick up" mode, and see what the two bring out in each other. A good practice exercise is to create - separately - two radically different characters with nothing in common, and then... find something that connects them. And that's what will be brought out in that relationship, and that describes their flirting, the sex, and may even tell you the plot.
By "in common" I mean not just they like to ski, but, oh, say perhaps they both are rather sarcastic and blunt. The one may be very educated and toss around elegantly sculpted stinging phrases, while the other may be sort to say, "hey, I just tell it like it is." But this tells you these two together would be aggressive and possibly even love/hate.
Both main characters have to be well-rounded. You can't go through a great deal of effort of developing one character and then have a cardboard cut-out walk in the door. You can do that with porn (where the impact is in the physical description), but you can't do it with erotica because so much of it's in the reader's head.
The other thing is to very carefully avoid "Mary Sue" or "Gary Stu" characters. This is an online fanfiction term for self-inserts. The self insert is obviously the writer. Generally if a "Mary Sue" has flaws, they are charming ones... and the character is just sickening. The world revolves around them and roses spring up at their feet. They never have bad breath. Women have flowing hair. The men are befuddled professors with darling coeds falling at their feet.
Somehow, where the writer manages to avoid a Mary Sue, the opposite character is often better realised. Funny how that works.
Though another way they can avoid flat characters is to avoid limp, vague words like "young" or "pretty." They're meaningless. Too vague, subjective, and really doesn't tell the audience anything. Let them decide if they find your characters attractive. I find people are more interested in believable people, and characters with physical flaws. I don't know if this is a male-female thing (90% of erotica is read and written by women) or if it's because we like to look at pretty people on the silver screen, but on paper we want to be able to identify with them.
Dialogue should be the cue of those things like "she's young" unless you're really deep into the protagonist's thoughts.
"'Oh, hi Professor. Sorry, I just -- had to get my things. I'm Amber bytheway. I'm new here and," she interrupted herself with a giggle, "oh I mean, that's obvious I'm new or I wouldn't have to introduce myself, right? Anyway, nice to meet you!" She hurried out the door, but glanced back with a bright smile, her blond curls bouncing. Along with the rest of her. Professor Thackaway shook his head, convincing himself that he hadn't noticed that and wouldn't the next time -- which classes was she in again? This one, and nine am tomorrow morning."
Last... never, ever focus first on the physical features, brown hair, freckles etc. (unless they're Erin Brockowich impressive and two forces she uses for good in the plot). Really, if that's all that's interesting about your opposite character, you better hope she doesn't turn sideways or she might just disappear. You gotta deliver the whole package, what really makes everyone's head turn. Is it really the color of the hair? Or the force of personality?
The professional Domintrix shouldn't have "flowing black hair and red lipstick."
No.
She has "a wry smile, and looked him up and down frankly as if taking his measurements. Then her smile broadened. What was that supposed to mean? He fought the sudden desire to move his menu to his lap. She flipped a dark strand off her shoulder with one fingernail and asked without prelude, 'Does your wife know?' Her tone was mildly curious, as if asking what model car he drove.
How did she know he was married? He instantly began to think of identity theft and credit card scams. He knew this was a mistake, and now it was going to cost him."
Okay, so I worked in the flowing black hair.
It's the sensory detail, things like body language that you want to describe, to convey the unspoken communication, the electricity between people. Here the dynamic is one of nervousness and intimidation. It acts like intimate close-up shots in film-making. Only you have a broader palette. You can bring in the smell of wine.
Erotica is all about characterisation and these many layers of communication. And the most powerful stories transform one or another character in the process -- not by the hot sex (or really bad sex, I've written that too), but by what these people bring about in other's lives, good or bad.
Anyway, I've rattled on and of course I'm preaching to the choir. He's a good writer, but he doesn't know how to write erotica yet. It's a different genre with its own pitfalls.
Of course, the story I've written today is... I don't think it's going to be something you want for erotica. I'm at the opposite extreme with this one. It goes too much into the background and set up, and doesn't have the hook of sex early enough to pull in the reader who's looking for that.
Hmmm.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-04-11 11:07 pm (UTC)(actually, this is a badly disguise *squee* at your icon. is it from "Death Eaters at the Malfoy Estate"? XD I don't really remember the title, but I do remember the Pants of Erised.)
no subject
Date: 2004-04-11 11:17 pm (UTC)Icarus
no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 12:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 02:48 pm (UTC)Icarus
no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 02:37 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 10:27 am (UTC)That sounds appalling. It must be a sign of masochism that I really want to read an example of this. :D
Icarus
no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 03:23 am (UTC)Also, I am squeeing like mad because I know exactly where Keego Harbor is! Hee!
no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 10:31 am (UTC)Icarus
no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 12:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 07:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 08:46 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 09:04 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 04:48 pm (UTC)If the self-insertion doesn't force the rest of the characters out of character, I don't see why it should be problematic, fanfiction or no.
no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 05:37 pm (UTC)Otherwise, there's no real difference between the effect of self-inserts in original fiction and the same in fanfic.
Effective characterisation is a different, though not separate, ballgame.
My point is that sexual tension is crucial in erotica, and the sexual tension is echoed in the reader if they identify with one or both of the characters. Self-inserts stand in the way of that close identification and diffuse the tension. You stand outside and watch a self-insert and it robs your sex scene of some of its power.
Icarus
no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 05:55 pm (UTC)I think this is one of those cases where I'd have to read the scene you're referring to before I'd accept the generalization.
no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 10:56 am (UTC)But here I mean to say that I think that with erotica even the more benign sort of well-rounded realistic self-portrait if obvious (and this writer definitely has a likeable self-portrait), puts a distance between the reader and the characters that leaves the reader out in the cold. It takes some of the steam out of the story.
Icarus
no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 10:47 am (UTC)But in erotica and slash obvious self-inserts are ineffective. When they are obvious, they stand as a barrier. They make your reader feel like they are a witness to someone else's fantasy rather than experiencing the fantasy themselves. It creates distance you don't want in a genre where intimacy is the point. You can do a self-insert. That's okay. But you have to be pretty smooth to get away with it so the reader never figures it out.
Icarus
no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 10:57 am (UTC)Perhaps we're not witnessing a fantasy but an actual event, fictionalized? The fantasy aspect would be clearly evident in fanfic, but not in original prose.
no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 11:23 am (UTC)There's a difference between a self-insert and "fictionalizing" real life experiences. In fact, these are opposites.
Taking real life experiences and using them for fiction is bringing the reader into an experience you've had. The focus in not on you and your lovely ego, but on sharing something you've really seen and felt. I use personal experiences all the time in fanfic. The Beg Me For It (http://home.earthlink.net/~dinkbird) series is very personal and contains a lot of experiences I've had. Guy Talk (http://www.riddikulus.org/authorLinks/Icarus) is based on a true story.
A self-insert is ego-centric, not experience-centric. It isn't about drawing the reader into something they've experienced, but rather the world revolves around the character and that he or she getting what he or she wants. It's... selfish and sets the reader up as a spectator.
Even when the character is believable and has depth, a self-insert has a self-indulgence to it, as the world revolves around that character getting what they want. They are over-whelmingly important to and dominate the story often to the detriment of immersing the reader in the experience.
Icarus
no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 11:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 11:44 am (UTC)Icarus
no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 09:31 am (UTC)(....and then everyone's upset cuz their character didn't achieve orgasm. bwaha)
no subject
Date: 2004-04-12 03:05 pm (UTC)That is all.
no subject
Date: 2004-04-14 08:54 pm (UTC)methis girl cat claws and cat eyes.That is a classic self-insert. Because really, it was all about me. *blushes* And the girl with the cat-claws and cat-eyes was Way Cool.
Icarus
no subject
Date: 2004-04-14 08:23 pm (UTC)i'm silly. even after reading all the comments, i still don't think i understand what is meant by "self-insert"...could you maybe splain in laymens terms to me?
no subject
Date: 2004-04-14 08:55 pm (UTC)methis girl cat claws and cat eyes.That is a classic self-insert. Because really, it was all about me. *blushes* And the girl with the cat-claws and cat-eyes was Way Cool.
Icarus
no subject
Date: 2004-04-15 01:15 pm (UTC)