![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
On Writing Erotica
So 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.