Erotica v porn.

Yes, Beswetherick I think we do need to tackle this issue head on. What is needed is a quite startling matter-of-factness about sex and a sexual honesty about one's predelictions. What must be left behind are two diametrically opposed sexual schools of thought: one is the Ben Elton school, the right-on form of 'non-sexist' prudery which inadvertantly engenders a sense of shame which is almost as strong as that imbued by protestantism. The other is the lad culture, composed of cliched porn which only serves as bland masturbatory subject matter; pretending to hanker after very thin, very dull stick women who get their baps out for money, and pointless 'thrill-seeking' in one night stands and other forms of attention-seeking exhibitionism. I don't think you can really enjoy a woman if you only lust after her. I think the idea of making love spiritually and with the whole person is the most intense experience possible. Erotic literature should be then about the whole person and the whole relationship - whatever the dramas involved. I think as writers that yes, we should show our partners whatever filth has leaked from our minds. What is the worst she will think - that one is heterosexual? I think beneath all the politeness and 'anti-sexism' our wives and girlfriends are actually pretty keen to please us - my policy is, go on, ask her - she'll probably say yes! When we men feel like having sex, the underlying thoughts and physical sensations are not respectable, nor intellectual, and this is what is so wonderful about them. Women I think can feel as sexually aggressive and acquisitive as men can, and this is what makes them so endlessly fascinating. Woody Allen once remarked: 'One thing intellectuals have proved is that you can be brilliant and have absolutely no idea what's going on.'

My book BTDYK has been called pornographic by one critic, and I know of at least two people who bought it and hated it because of the sex in chapter two. They both stopped reading after that. The book is 190K words, maybe 2k cover sexual issues. How can anyone call that pornographic? Now, before I sell a copy I always feel that I have to appologise for it and give a verbal decency warning. On the other hand my auntie 76, took copies and sold them to all the old ladies at her CHURCH for God's sake! they loved it and keep asking Mavis when the next one's due. Erotica, like literature in general, is subjective. What's tame and normal to one person, is highly offensive to another. I belive an underground copy of Devil is currently doing the rounds of naughty boy's desks in Chetwynd School for Nice Children :-)

Hiya Sooz where've you been? Funnily enough last night I was doing a sweep of all the cherried stories in oldest-first order and it wasn't long before I got to "Return Of The Hellcat"... couldn't resist another read of that! It's at the explicit end of the market but I don't find it offensive because a) it's consensual (well, sort of!) and b) it doesn't resort to crude street language - which has its place I suppose but not there! Where can I get your book by the way? Neil [%sig%]

Oh that's easy... I can send you a copy , or you can get it from amazon.... and it's got the added bonus of a new edit after the publisher bollocksed up the last one. I haven't had my new batch yet so don't know how much better than the last one it is. The story can hold its own in mixed company though :-) how are you, long time no talkie? Sooz.

Sooz Please can I have a few links so I can read your work. Many thanks in anticipation.

Maybe I'm wrong but isn't porn basically writing or images with a specific function - to aid in masturbation? Whereas erotic writing is art , which happens to be related to sex and aims to turn the reader on rather than bring them to orgasm? Sometimes it shocks and this is valid as I believe shock and surprise have some erotic connotation. Porn might shock and turn the reader on by virtue of its coarseness but it is usually predictable and doesn't lead to much thought beyond the immediate response.

Freda I'm not sure you can differentiate between porn and erotica by ascertaining whether or not it brings the reader to orgasm. You can masturbate over anything, the act itself does not make the image or text pornographic. I do however think that porn is defined primarily by its predictability, and its tired old cliches. I think erotica appeals to the spiritual side of sex - the emotional intensity, not just the need for a quick knee trembler. I suppose erotica is sex infused with 'love' ('love' understood as a spiritual connection between people) or with drama, passion and emotion. Porn is simply unchallenging, and deeply unsatisfactory, whereas good erotica explores themes and suggests dramatic encounters that keep the reader daydreaming for months.

I would like to congratulate Philip for making post no. 69 on this thread.

Ha Ha! Wonderful.

Hi Neo, welcome to ABC. I suppose that you could say that one persons erotica is another persons porn to some degree, but I do agree that there is a vast difference. There are however, many similarities. We do get quite a bit of both posted on ABC, but only ever in the gallery when it is given an age rating to protect minors. Pleeeease dont post it on the forums which are not age restricted! WE hope to have the rest of the site up and running really really soon now, where you can enter (oo er) as much work as you like - I look forward to seeing it. Liana

Looking forward to seeing new work L or just the porn... sorry, erotica ? [%sig%]

Oh hello stuart... fancy you popping up. No, I am looking forward to being bombarded by hundreds upon thousands of new pieces when the site gets back up. Cant wait...

You know me Liana, i enjoy 'popping-up' where ever I can. Don't know if i'm comfortable with being called 'stuart' anymore tho'... someone might confuse me with another 'taler.

'Porn' I would say is the description of the act itself, taken out of context. 'Erotica' has literary themes interwoven - more of a complex background. Like the difference between a porn film and a sex scene in a more 'mainstream' film.

I don't normally solicit responses on particular work of mine, but I've recently posted a story - "Whipping Post" - in the erotica section and I'd like feedback, specially from contributors to this thread. I'm trying to write a story which is sexy but without laboured details of intercourse, a bit kinky without resorting to excessive S+M cruelty and with interesting but not physically attractive characters. Oh, and it's supposed to be sweet and romantic too! Does it work for anyone - and if not, why? Don't worry about offending, I daredn't take this one to my writing group so you can kick it to bits instead!

I find nothing erotic in anything erotic, so far. I'm too cerebral and I keep analyzing stimuli till they become devoid of instincts and feelings, but I would like to read or see something that would make me appreciate eroticism as a form of Art. I think there are a lot of readers like me, readers that "prefer" to remain unaffected by "sexual" writing. I can't see the point. Perhaps I'm a frigid reader. I want facts, I want reason, I want answers. Maybe if an erotic piece involves psychology would be interesting.

They say men think about sex every six seconds - this is probably a slight exaggeration but it is probable that because men spend longer on average thinking about it, they are more likely to be 'turned on' by 'erotic' writing. There is of course also the age-old mystery of what it 'feels like for a girl' so to speak. For anyone a genuinely successful piece of erotic writing - appealing to both sexes - is quite a difficult thing to pull off. Perhaps also because in the end individual sexual desires and fantasies tend to be quite mysterious and idiosyncratic. One of the most effective erotic passages I've ever read comes from Salvador Dali's autobiography (quoted by George Orwell). I'm paraphrasing - "I held her roughly and pulled back her hair. "Now, what is it you want me to do to you? Say it slowly, only using the filthiest of words which are guaranteed to fill us both with the greatest shame." She looked into my eyes, and spoke: "I want you to kill me!"

PS Often in erotica what is engaging is not what is done, but what is not done.

Pornography and erotica are identical in that they are pictures/words that create sexual excitement. But porn has no artistic value, therefore the argument resolves into what constitutes 'art'. [%sig%]

Chooselife - your'e right. Now that's a topic! Who fancies going first?

The problem with most erotica, in my opinion, is that it simply isn't very good. As Philip says, it leaves nothing to the imagination and often neither the story nor the characters are interesting, just a backdrop on which to hang the same old explicit sex scenes. However, if you put together all the cherried items in ABCTales "Erotica" section there would be an excellent and varied collection with a lot of humour, intensity and originality. [%sig%]

neil, where did philip say or infer that? I thought he was saying he was an advocate of erotica, no? The best line from philip's posts must be this: "a genuinely successful piece of erotic writing ... is quite a difficult thing to pull off." I MUST include that in my next piece. As the french say, je t'aime double entry ... or was that my accountant? Chooselife, I'm not so sure about your analogy. You cannot dismiss porn as having 'no artistic value' anymore than you can dismiss Hirst's cow. Sure, a porn film featuring heavily mustachio'd germans and silicon blondes banging into one another on a sofa and shot by a camcorder has no artistic value. The same scene shot by a skilful camerman, cleverly edited and without a fake soundtrack, possibly a storyline too, could be considered 'artistic.' And the same goes for writing. I could simply cut to the quick and describe some sex or I could create some tension, some witty dialogue, describe the act without using the usual cliches, perhaps just giving you a hint of what is happening without saying 'he put his throbbing ...' It also depends upon the reader's desires. Some, no doubt, like the upfront porn approach. To them, that is art (perhaps.) It is no different to life. What attracts you most? the woman in a short skirt on a bar stool crossing her legs, the same woman in a bikini or the same woman naked? (for the pc brigade - read man in shorts and so on) So, to me, you cannot resolve this argument into 'what constitutes art?' without consigning the entire tate modern into the bin (porn has no artistic value) then debating whether van gogh was an artist or not. It's like saying 'punk rock has no musical value, therefore the argument resolves into what constitutes 'music'.' and we go round in circles. I would say the 'aims' of porn and erotica are identical but, dependant upon the reader, one or the other often doesn't succeed. A bit like poetry/short stories on abc. the aim of the writer is to entertain or get a message across. The good writer may succeed in this occassionally. the bad writer will never do so. nice debate, keep it going.

My question are then, "Should an erotic piece be read withing the scope of eroticism only?" "Is the purporse of an erotic story/poem the influence of sexual writing on readers?" "Should Art include only the forms of expression that don't bias the recipient of somebody's work in favour of the artist using human weaknesses without finally reaching catharsis or noble feelings of love and respect, facts and answers to the emotional problems of a reader ?"

permit me to correct : questions..

and "influence over", or can I use "on" as well?

Sorry Neil - I was being a bit of a wimp and hoping for someone else to start. The story was well written and disciplined in a way that I can never manage with my stuff, but my initial problem with it was that your description of the female protagonist made her sound frumpy. There are lots of different body types and we are all sexy in our own way, but for me personally you seemed to be labouring to make her as sexless and ugly as possible - of course flesh is attractive - skin and bone is not - but I just think the heroine would have been better depicted as a voluptuous tart rather than some kind of prematurely aged spinster. For some reason also I found myself visualising the male interest as a kind of phantom of the opera monster, odd as that may sound. The S & M probably was fairly effective but I'm not sure about the public lecture scene - the furtive alleyway whippings were the most successfully erotic parts of the work. It was very compelling though, and did sustain my interest. Maybe the story tries to do too much. I think the final romantic scenes are maybe too 'sweet' for comfort.

"PS Often in erotica what is engaging is not what is done, but what is not done." That's what Philip said; I presumed he was referring to leaving details to your own imagination to supply. I don't agree with Philip that men are more turned on than women by erotic writing; I reckon most men are more turned on by erotic pictures than words, and that most written erotica has a female audience in mind (anyone agree or not?). Nicoletta, to your first question, I think that an erotic piece should be read within the scope of writing in general otherwise it's hostage to whatever turns you on. I'm a bit careful about consigning anything to the category of porn with all its negative connotations; it's got a nasty habit of coming back as well-respected art or literature. [%sig%]

This person is the best erotic writer I have ever come across (yes yes har har etc) - her book "Behind Closed Doors" is an astonishing work of literature imho. No doubt that my great aunt Ivy would find it pornographic though, so yet again, its in the eye of the beholder.

Neil, and how will you understand if an erotic piece is successful, surely you must have some kind of reaction to it, so since it deals with sexual activity you will be affected within that scope am I right?

Liana, strictly in terms of being critical one must not be affected in a sensual way to judge an erotic piece, which then would be the purpose of reading erotic pieces if you have to remain unaffected by its content in order to be a valuator? In my opinion a reader of erotic literature must decide whether he/she will be reading it and simultaneusly draw pleasure from it or ignore its strong genre and focus on the writing skills.

pardon?

do you want me to clarify my previous post Liana? what exactly was it that you didn't understand in my reply?

well... all of it Nicoletta... maybe i am way out of line here, but for me, myself only - we can only judge our own reaction - porn tends to make me feel slightly nauseous and is often (though by no means always) badly written, whereas well written erotica makes me feel entirely different. I wouldve thought that to judge a piece one must definitely be affected - it's surely easy to judge a piece in conjuction with the writing skills - isnt that a part of it? As far as I can make out, you disagree - or am I still confused?

My point is [ since the whole argument is based on "what constitutes Art" (neo) "the 'aims' of porn and erotica" (neo) "the aim of the writer is to entertain or get a message across" (neo) "The good writer may succeed in this occassionally. the bad writer will never do so" (neo) ] that in order not to "go round in circles" (neo) we should find a parameter within which we can more easily apprehend the objective aims and benefits of erotic literature so like in every other genre (of literature or art) the "its in the eye of the beholder." (Liana) theory can be applied without indefiniteness and haziness or personal criteria influenced by sensuality, but with clarity and diachronism. And what I said had to do with "drawing pleasure" from it or stay as objective as possible. so I wonder how untrammelled should anyone be by prejudices or inherent related ideas or urges to focus on the literary value of erotic writing and wouldn't this mean to defy its "strong genre" (strong because it affects sexuality)? It would be like reading a fantasy poem without permitting yourself to dream, or reading a thriller without experiencing some sort of fear. well that's a perfect example, theoritically when we read a thriller the story is successful if we actually feel fear.

"one must definitely be affected ...it's surely easy to judge a piece in conjuction with the writing skills - isnt that a part of it?" right, but the pleasure deriving from sexuality is more effective and insidious (with regards to objectivity and alertness) than any other feeling, the reader will be extremely affected by the content because sex is the most powerful instinct. How can we judge and value erotic literature or the writing skills (the plot etc) if our hormones have "heated" our perception in favour of what we read? So the purpose of erotic literature would be to arouse carnal lusts and the more it arouses the better writing it is? what differentiates it from porn then? OBJECTIVITY.

Nicoletta...you said - "I find nothing erotic in anything erotic, so far. I'm too cerebral and I keep analyzing stimuli till they become devoid of instincts and feelings." Nicoletta, i mean this in a positive way - do you ever read something, or listen to something, without trying to see a worthiness, a message, or dissecting it to such a degree that it becomes a jumbled mess of what the composer/writer intended? How about reading it, and garnering an uncluttered reaction first?

I try to be as objective as possible and as fair as possible and not misjudge erotica that's why I maintain we should search for certain values in such sort of writing that makes it less porn and more intellectual that's why I said "I want facts, I want reason, I want answers. Maybe if an erotic piece involves psychology (it) would be interesting." and "reaching catharsis or noble feelings of love and respect, facts and answers to the emotional problems of a reader" I dare to divide Erotica into two categories "Porn" and "Sexology" fully aware of the connotations of these two categories and the objections arising from such a crude division. Just like there are good thrillers worthy of being considered as high quality novels (with a lot of psychology, sociology, psychoanalysis, practical philosophy, lots of facts, reasoning and answers to people's inveterate fears) and thrillers that consist cheap horror booklets (with lots of unnecessary bloodshed and cruelty), there are erotic writings whose supreme aim is sexology (helping the reader to confront sexual inhibitions/frustrations/dilemmas and understand the nature of his/her erotic problems providing possible solutions) and pornography that only aims at sexual gratification. Liana is there a cure for frigid readers? I don't search for mistakes or inadequacies, I search for meanings and answers that are not part of my psychology yet.

Fine advice Liana. But it's so difficult to do that somehow... to simply experience a piece of work (writing, text, film, poetry, monologue, whatever) as new, without analysing or judging or reacting to irrelevancies. Yes. Yes. Garner an uncluttered. . . . . reaction mm.

Erotica vs. porn There is a vast difference between the two. The performance of sex is the same in both but it is in its 'artistically subtle representation’ that the differences are best expressed. In other words when one is starved, a steak or a hamburger fills the gut but personally I'd rather be served a medallion of beef and let me make hamburger out of it rather than the opposite. Alex Nodopaka

Liana, you asked "i mean this in a positive way - do you ever read something, or listen to something, without trying to see a worthiness, a message, or dissecting it to such a degree that it becomes a jumbled mess of what the composer/writer intended? How about reading it, and garnering an uncluttered reaction first?" I will reply to you with a rhetoric question: Does the world accept me without trying to see a worthiness in me? Does society accept anyone without dissecting each one of us to such a degree that we become a jumbled mess of our own priorities and ambitions? Why should I or you or anybody else react differently, even freely or without analyzing too much to anything that already has no intention due to its nature to accept us and appreciate us as we are? Being the kind of reader that simply reads would probably if not eventually make me a victim of a writer's ideas. I cannot reply to the writer, just like I reply to you and you reply to me. Where there is no dialogue, there is only one way to react : scepticism or logic or analyzing methods or whatever you prefer to call it.

Alex: "The general 'accepted' significance of such religious writings are to 'enhance' spirituality which is also as much of a 'high' as a fulfilling sexual act." Hey, a complex point, disagree with both parts. But not sure whether you are saying that spirituality is a high in-itself.. or that enhanced spirituality is a high... or what you are saying "spirituality" is... what you seem to want to argue is that all writing ultimately stimulates the genitals via diverse pathways. Hmmmmmmm.

The sheer energy being extended in this discussion is enough to wear an eavesdropper out. Simplistically erotica v. porn is subjective, though with modern mass consciousness, most can agree that erotica is better written, even artful, and doesn't depend on cheap, stereotypical devices to move the reader. But the lines blur, and it is subjective. Beyond that, I do think that Nicoletta is one of the most determinedly "intellectual" human beings alive on the planet. But my dear Greek, can also write some of the most stunning, natural, gorgeous lines from the subconscious, that one would ever want to read. Which is to say, that the cerebral girl doesn't always maintain control, which i.e. control, is the death of good art. I would have to echo Liana, perhaps because that's the way I approach art of all kinds, by saying that I read a poem and receive an impact, an infusion at the fount, in the 1st and 2nd reading, and have no real desire to explicate it. I know what it means, how it moved me, how it might have changed me. Its deadening for me, to dissect it, even as the live frog would prove, put to the scalpel.

A seductive argument, comparing a live frog to a poem; but a frog is hardly explicated by a scalpel. Language is so thrilling...

One of my favorite words; seductive, that is. But I'm not arguing, though one can make the case for art/a poem being living, and organic. Or should I have said, a poem is hardly dissected by a frog. The world is erotic. Smart women are erotic. And yes, language is thrilling.

Maybe those who are closer to the source of eroticism seek a way out of it and those who are far away looking from the cold and carnally unrewarding safety of their remoteness the alluring fire of sensuality seek a way to reach the source which devours its karmic victims. There is a middle path scarcely appreciated by those distant creatures or rarely followed, because just like when one finally gets away from the source the feeling of mental freedom strengthens the karmic victims by introducing them to subtle ideas urging to reach extremes of abstinence, those who approach gradually become enchanted and proceed always ready to sacrifice the intellectual joys for the sake of carnal lusts. There, somewhere in the middle, those totally different souls - different because of their experiences according to their proximity to the unbearably hot source of sensuality - meet and argue. Warning each other of the dangers involved in their actions, no reasonable explaining can stop those escaping from the most hospitably tyrannical prison, no unreasonable scalds will persuade those who want to play with fire. And if they are artists, their art reveals their agonies, their experiences, their priorities, their ambitious plans. Inside their phrases, music, paintings, the karmic victims of the source still aflame convey a feeling of orgasmic warmth underneath their colder sophisticated dialectics, hues, musicality and the adventurers who set off full of desire cannot hide their frigid deprivation beneath their warmer acceptance of what MAN is supposed to deny to reach perfection, to find freedom and peace of mind. In the end, the ones escaping never cool off enough, the frigid area evaporates them forcing them to return closer to their earthly origin, and the ones who are ready to accept to be consumed by fire, they become cold particles lifting themselves again to their frigid origin. They both return hungrier for what they have slightly tasted. The middle path witnesses this transitional exchange between heaven and earth, almost sure that trying to go further will send them back they decide to stay where they are, condemned too, whether all they ever wanted was to play with fire and now are afraid of doing so, or all they ever dreamed was to defeat temptations and now reluctant to fight more.

My dear Nicoletta, you are oft-times a wonderful poetess, but you have worried a simple subject to extreme. There is always another step to be taken, if one proceeds intellectually against the world, even as atoms gave to quarks, three dimensionality gave to superstrings and their ten, or eleven dimenions. etc. Joan Miro, the Spanish painter, worked ten hours a day for nine months, doing, and re-doing a canvas of the farm on which he grew up. He intended to include everything he had known, and knew, up to that point. Eventually, he gave up, and realized that one can't list, can't literally represent experience, and he became one of the most joyful, pleasureful painters in the world. His works are aften non-figurative, and suggest, intimate, what moved him to paint the piece. All of which is to say, that everytime you name something, describe it verbally, you create a separate, and new thing. You are so quick, and so intense, that you fashion your own obstacles to the very understanding you seek. I speak directly to you, and though my tone at times has been criticized as authoritative, I mean what I say in the most amicable way.

clouds of different origin charged positively and negatively, the clouds fighting to return and the clouds fighting to remain where they are. and then the storm, the lightning, the thunder. and then the promise of the rainbow, the promise of light diffracted through the remains of the battle. blessed are those who become a rainbow.

And so, the resolution, a rainbow. Well done.

Here's an early piece of erotica on ABCTales from someone who didn't stay long. I think it's stunning; funny, warm, sexy, original and not at all crude. This could never be porn! [%sig%]

I suppose the religious sculptures and paintings of Michaelangelo or Bernini are erotic. You can't say that the nude bodies of Christ or others had to be represented in such a fleshed out fashion. They are feasts for the eyes and often, even the marks of suffering and death are scraped out for the fine finish. Michaelangelo's David is also erotic, but it is not pornographic. Pornography denotes nakedness, power, and a sexual exchange akin to prostitution... that is its meaning. No matter how much eroticism sets itself to divorce itself from a primary feeling of love, adoration of the other, it never cuts off the link with the emotions. People are known in a sense and find the drive for their eroticism in getting to know the other person as someone who is nude, driven by the need for love somehow. Eroticism denodes nudity, love, and a exchange of parts of the body as meaning. What of Mapplethorp who critiques the formalism of the image itself as denoting nothingness? What matters to Mapplethorp is formal relationship between the parts and the whole and whether that constitutes a proportion of what can be called beautiful. The meaning is the formal beauty of the artwork, following Oscar Wilde. So such artworks are neither pornograhphic or erotic, according to the artist. However, we can't divorce the subject matter (content) from the style. The style is the extension of the subject matter into a specific form. So that, in taking photographs of hard-core sado-masochistics, he is being blatantly pornographic. I may then ask, "Can pornography have a social value?" Well, it shows what happens to people when they cease to speak to each other, when words are not seen as the answer. Since humans are fixed into the same types of behaviours all the time, it is only through an exchange of sexual and criminal power that they can come to terms with their identity. Foucault finds in sado-masochism the modern form of "personal" crime and punishment, and he must have found it intensely bizarre that, having started from the position that there was no such thing as an individual, he ended with the sado-masochist as the ultimate rebel, the individualist who refuses to be corrupted by naked power, taking responsibilities for oneself and not giving a hoot about the establishment. I suppose two sado-masochistic could be very happy with each other if there were no such thing as authority. Pornographers also argue that they are preventing a crime by showing sex acts. Instead of committing a crime, the person will simply toot his own horn. The problem, here, is that that only happens with people who apprehend the sexual act itself as a crime, so that they can substitute the sex act with another crime since it is a more socially acceptable crime. People who live in rigidly repressed homes have this experience, and even in the normal home, sex is apprehended as something that one does when one is an adult.