Authors who aspire to literary writing...

I think it is an amazing honour that so many younger people and new writers are jumping in here and submitting all this stuff, admittedly, much of which is not great.

The reason they do it is because they have read a few people here who inspired their desires to write.

Some of these new writers will get a lot better than they are right now.

But the fact remains they have been inspired to write.

'Literary' erotica or adult fiction in the modern era's principally digital format demands a brevity that was somewhat unusual in the past - although not entirely unknown. This is in my view something of a 'new' or 'modern' form of writing in reality and perhaps still subject to a bit of 'pathfinding.'

I certainly get the point of what the OP is saying, but then I also think the whole thing is the other way around - today's world virtually DEMANDS that any serious contemporary writer is going to have to deal with very hardcore sex, sexuality, and the transgressing through or across old social mores. It would be 'false' and artificial if a real literary writer tried to avoid those things now. A real literary reflection of modern people, modern life, modern themes, necessitates the inclusion of pretty hardcore erotic content - I think.

So what does that all add up to?

In my mind it adds up to a redefining of the word 'literary.' You can't create parodies of 'old school' phraseology and writing styles and highly studied English and then assume that you're necessarily being literary; English is a living language.

I just had a conversion with the marketing manager of a major local art gallery this morning - in the middle of a huge proxy fight in a public company meeting...! (Yep. True.) The gallery put on an expensive showing of up-to-the-minute NY and Europe-sourced high brow 'current' art/music/film. The exhibition was poorly attended.

And that's because people are snobs and don't get what's going on -, yet. Chris Martin of Coldplay is an immense talent (my opinion). He isn't any different to say, Van Gogh. His wife won't publish in Vanity Fair - what WAS the world's leading upscale, social, cultural literary venue. Dominick Dunne and Gore Vidal wrote for Vanity Fair's editions.

And I won't have anything published there either. Does that make either me or Gwyneth Paltrow literary writers or literary figures?

Yes it does.

My stories - and many or most of the writers responding in this thread's stories - here are read by more people than anything that would be printed and published in Vanity Fair today.

They are read, and presumably enjoyed too because they keep coming back.

So if you want to amp up the literary tone of some writing, I think there IS a rule to have the work try and fit into the reading styles of today's readers, but I think THIS IS the place to do it.

In the past, really great writers would compete with their perceived rivals' latest works and cutting-edge stories or writing - painters did it too.

I would thoroughly recommend the OP attempt something of the kind he is talking about, let us know in the Authors' Hangout when he sticks it up and I for one will definitely be on the look-out to read it.

To be 'literary' means to say something important about the human condition. And the human sexual condition, the erotic manners and fashions and so on, are absolutely key to any understanding of today's human being and of today's social culture. I'm not sure I ever tried to have 'something important to say' in any of the stories I have put up here so far. But it isn't a bad challenge to think about eventually doing so or trying to. And then again, maybe just straight out 'erotic' stories, ARE the something important about today's culture.

Are we, afterall, living in the best of erotic times?

Hypoxia said:

I just cracked my copies of the old Famous Writers Course books. Vol 3 is about writing fiction. The author (some Famous Writer, right?) mentions three types of short stories: pulp stories (for newspulp trash mags); slick stories (for slick-paper mass-market magazines); and literary stories (for the New Yorker, Atlantic, Paris Review, Harpers, etc).

Questions burned my mind: How much Literotica content *might* be published by a 'literary' journal? If the answer is ZERO, then can anything submitted here be considered 'literary'?

I have a goal: to write interesting stories, and to write them fairly well. For me, it's cheap therapy. I don't aspire to literary recognition. And much of what I see in lit.mags (even Granta) is NOT really interesting. Can I be literary? Can I produce sufficient boredom to appear in the Atlantic?

Click to expand...

Well, now there's the thing. What I like trying to do with many of my stories is to write stories that could go into Atlantic except for what I do is that I don't close the bedroom door at the crucial stage--when it's time to have sex, the sex is fully covered in the story. I very much want my movies to do that too--have everything slick and top drawer in movie presentation and when they get to the sex scene, show it all. Conversely, when they get to the violent scene, I want to close the door on the actual depiction of that.

That said, I don't purposely sit down and think, "how can I make this literary?" I just sit down and write. The only authors I try to capture the atmospherics of are John LeCarre, Graham Greene, and Lawrence Durrell.

Just for the fun of it, how many people posting to this thread started posting their stories here at Lit or a site like it?

Maybe not the first stories you wrote but the first ones you put on line.

Have you improved since you started posting here? I know I have.

Lit is a proving ground. You talk about the bad stories but how many of those writers wrote again and again or just gave up after one or two stories. There isn't much of a way to tell but I think the good writers continued and the bad ones are replaced ever so often by a new crop.

Just MHO of course.

sr71plt said:

All cynical reverse snobbery aside, literary elements include heavy use of description; emphasis on setting, atmospherics, and characterization; rich language; and emphasis on theme or philosophical point.

They won't bite you, but you certainly don't have to try to include them in what you write. If you're scared of them, I guess you'd make an effort to mock them.

Click to expand...

If you're scared of them?

Oh please.

If literary fits a story so be it.

But for an author to constantly try to force it at people and claim anyone who doesn't do it is incapable or if a reader does not like it they are to stupid to understand it is just more of your typical arrogance.

Here we write to a readership driven by erotica not by how many $10 words someone can use
Too much literary comes across as pompous pretentious and it seems as if the author is talking down to the reader

But you speak down to everyone so I can see why you defend that style.

TxRad said:

Just for the fun of it, how many people posting to this thread started posting their stories here at Lit or a site like it?

Maybe not the first stories you wrote but the first ones you put on line.

Have you improved since you started posting here? I know I have.

Lit is a proving ground. You talk about the bad stories but how many of those writers wrote again and again or just gave up after one or two stories. There isn't much of a way to tell but I think the good writers continued and the bad ones are replaced ever so often by a new crop.

Just MHO of course.

Click to expand...

I posted at Lustylibrary and Menonthenet for about a year before posting here. It was someone who read me there who suggested that I post here.

TxRad said:

Lit is a proving ground. You talk about the bad stories but how many of those writers wrote again and again or just gave up after one or two stories. There isn't much of a way to tell but I think the good writers continued and the bad ones are replaced ever so often by a new crop.

Just MHO of course.

Click to expand...

I tend to find that maybe half of the authors I really like wrote no more than 10 stories before leaving. I would assume (given that they're not around to ask) that some of that 50% left because of low ratings due to their style not offering gratuitous satisfaction (at all, or) quickly enough. In my opinion it is difficult to write something which appeals to both the literary minded and the casual reader who wants porn with a bit of a plot. You either bypass your own goals or develop a thick enough skin that you don't need telling what a great writer you are after every submission.

sr71plt said:

All cynical reverse snobbery aside, literary elements include heavy use of description; emphasis on setting, atmospherics, and characterization; rich language; and emphasis on theme or philosophical point.

They won't bite you, but you certainly don't have to try to include them in what you write. If you're scared of them, I guess you'd make an effort to mock them.

Click to expand...

I can't say what is "literary" for others, but I guess I could speak well enough for what I personally think makes a story literary. And in that case I agree with the quoted post on the elements he listed.

For me, (speaking only for me) those elements are what separate a literary work from scrawled incomplete scenes on a notepad somewhere.


Description:

I don't think a story could be a story without it in some way, shape, or form. (Granted that doesn't just have to mean describing everything directly in detail with adjectives). But I wanna be there, I don't wanna read the story I want to see it, smell it, to experience it. Do this well and I'll be lost in your story.


Setting:

Well we have to be somewhere. This is the board the pieces move across. I wanna be able to be there. Is it a luxurious hotel? A dark alley? A twenty story rooftop? Another country? Another planet? The locker room? I can't imagine a story where I couldn't discern where it was taking place. I suppose it could be done with very minimal setting at all, but for my purposes, setting is crucial.


Atmospherics:

This is intangible and powerful. Without it, I personally experience a dull read. I'd rather experience the electricity and tension in the air betweem two peoples lips than to be told "they kissed." It's that tension when you're heart is pounding while feeling your way around in that dark house. It's that gritty flair and edge in a crime novel. Its the very personality of the story you're reading. Just planting me in a brothel and telling me they were all nekked doesn't do it. I want to feel it in the air.


Characterization:

Well we cant have good stories with out characters right? For me, I don't like cardboard cutout characters. Amy the blonde with big tits and a sexual appetite is okay. I don't really like okay. I want characters that bleed, characters I hate, characters I love, cry with, laugh at, and in general, characters I care about at all. Building them isn't just Frankentsteining characters together with stitches. Its jolting them to life. Stale characters and characterization is boring and flat to me.


Rich Language:

This doesn't necessarily mean "big words". It means knowing how to use the language to convey a more interesting story. To have the mastery of language means you have whatever tools you need to do this. Or else we'd see. "I saw a girl. She was hot. She wore a red dress. I talked to her. She didn't like me. I drank another beer. I went home." Rich language is good grammar, punc, sentence structure, vocabulary, clever word play and imagery. I don't wanna just read words and commas and periods and quotes. I want the story to flow, and do so in such a way that it fits every other element listed. Otherwise, I lose interest.


Theme and Philosophical point:

Here's that deeper meaning to a literary story (IMO). Readers may not even see it. It's the underlying struggle, the statement made, the main idea. That could be as simple as "Fantasy Realized" or as intricate as "Power struggle for a throne and control of Westeros decimates all within it." I suppose you don't have to have a theme. But I like to see them in what I read because I don't enjoy reading bland stuff like police reports and warranties. A theme or point is like a "OHHH" or light bulb moment to me. It makes each little detail come together in one full satisfying "what does it mean" moment. To me, good literature pulls this veil over your eyes creates a world relatable to you. Or me. Just in my opinion.


I don't know what the hell you'd call literary. But most of the stuff I consider great works of art involve elements like these. Deeper more involving elements that pull you down into a story, as opposed to your uncle's account of the lines being too long at the grocery store Saturday, or guys at work talking about the weather.

Do I write literary stuff? I dunno. I give it my best shot to write what I like to read, and hope others follow me there. But whatever literary means, to me it's deeper than just writing something.

Agreed.

I found this site through the stories and have been an avid reader of them for a few years. It's getting harder and harder to find a good author, or at least, one that appeals to my tastes.

Good and appealing to one's taste are entirely different criteria though.

And there is no reason to believe that readers on Literotica are any better at identifying "good" as the writers on Literotica are.

I don't really see the point of picking on the story file at Literotica. It's a huge resource base with the full range of "good," regardless of the criteria you use. If you find it too difficult to find your view of "good" stories here, go read elsewhere--or write and post what you think is better--for others to knee-jerk mock.

patientlee said:

Good and appealing to one's taste are entirely different criteria though.

Click to expand...

Aye, but personal tastes always plays into any situation dealing with art. That's why I'm not really sure what the meaning of "literary" means.

There's taste, but there's also generally bad and generally good. Think about a singer. Right when they start singing, you either continue to listen, get swept off your feet, or cringe immediately. That last one? You could kinda look around the room and know everyone's thinking the same thing. "Wow, that sounds horrible, they can't sing."

That person could get better at singing over the years of course, but that's in the future. In the NOW we think, "damn she can't sing. That sounds awful." Regardless of if I myself can sing good or not, I know a bad sound when I hear it.

But tastes, right? There will be those that might actually think that screeching is really unique vocal ability and beautiful in its own way. That's their taste.

But generally speaking, I think OP was talking about the "bad singers" at Lit that seem to be in abundance. The ones where the grammar and punctuation and just overall quality of the story is so generally bad that you couldn't imagine making it further than a paragraph or two. Sure those writers could improve drastically and end up on a book stand in your home town. But like, right now? ....

And you can make these observations without being really snobbish. I mean, I look at some of my crap from earlier times and don't count myself the better than any other "bad stuff". But I mean as a reader, don't I have the right to say "I think it's bad enough that I don't wanna read it." Regardless of whether my fledgling attempts as a writer would be any better?

Literary is ALWAYS some noble endeavor or personal triumph. I call this LITERARY with CROSSED SWORDS & DIAMONDS. War & Peace, where Natasha dominates her childish impetuosity and immaturity and becomes a mature woman.

Then there's LITERARY 2nd CLASS with OAK LEAF CLUSTER. Elizabeth Taylor prevails upon all the cool kids to stop harassing her pregnant 16 year old friend. Then talks Andy Rooney into marrying the girl. Liz gives them a stable stall to live in, and plenty of fresh straw to sleep on.

Last is the PEOPLES LITERARY CHOICE. Mulatto teen is carrying the preachers baby while her brother is servicing all the white ladies in town. Both are paid in used underwear.

JagFarlane said:

You know, I don't think JK Rowling gives a shit if her work is considered literary, she pleased the audience and made a bundle out of it. In a lot of ways that's a better way to end than say, Poe whose works weren't really appreciated till after he died alone in a gutter. Thoreau had to pay for the publishing of his own book and sold only 300 of the 1,000 copies he made. Food for thought...

Click to expand...

Exactly ONE of EA Poe's books was republished in his lifetime. His only second edition? A field guide to seashells. Nonfiction. The lesson? If you want an income, write tech manuals.

SecondCircle said:

And you can make these observations without being really snobbish.

Click to expand...

True, but the snobbishness comes into play when folks post to the forum their superior views of what others should be writing--or what X percentage of stories here don't do (like the poster has read them all--or even very many of them).

Hypoxia said:

Exactly ONE of EA Poe's books was republished in his lifetime. His only second edition? A field guide to seashells. Nonfiction. The lesson? If you want an income, write tech manuals.

Click to expand...

Poe did earn a (bare) living from his writing. It just wasn't books. And it doesn't mean much to say it was a bare living, because he was reputed to be the first American writer to even try to make a living off of writing short stories and poetry.

StrangeLife said:

"Last night I dreamt that my cock was a steam locomotive thundering across the endless tracks of the Trans-Australian railway pulling a large load of zinc ore from Kalgoorlie to Port Augusta..."

Click to expand...

Clive Palmer, is that you?

30 stories is a good statistical sample of LIT wares. So you can read 30 stories for a good idea of whats there.

sr71plt said:

True, but the snobbishness comes into play when folks post to the forum their superior views of what others should be writing--or what X percentage of stories here don't do (like the poster has read them all--or even very many of them).

Click to expand...

Well, yes. I don't think I rate to tell anyone how they should or shouldn't write. Everyone has their own way and reader's have their own preferences. I can only speak for what I prefer.

There is some merit to the "X percentage of stories do this" view though. I mean, no person here has read every single story on the site, of course not. But a reader can read plenty of them and it can be frustrating to wade through what they may consider sub par material to find just a few that are up to their personal standards.

I think that's all the OP and supporters were saying, and not as any insult to any up and coming writers honing their craft on this site. For what it's worth, I don't have to much trouble finding what I like to read here.

JAMESBJOHNSON said:

Writing falls into 3 distinct groups: 1. cosmic justice, 2. helping an old black woman get a living wage, 3. getting a piece of ass or putting a cap in someone's ass.

Click to expand...

# 3 has two diverse parts so it should be four groups.

I want to clarify that I am not mocking a "literary style" if that's how you write, more power to you and there is a niche crowd for it here like there is for everything else.

What I am mocking and I think others are kicking sand over is the attitude that if a reader does not like that style its because they are stupid and if a writer does not have that style its because they are not capable of it.

This is an erotica site. People come here to unwind and relax with sexy stories. That's not to say they dislike a deep well written story, but if they want to read purple prose and read paragraphs that are so full of ten dollar words that they have to really focus on it then they may as well read a "serious" work.

I read, understood and greatly enjoyed Paradise Lost and Inferno back when I was thirteen. I have no issues understanding literary works at all, but why feel like I am wading through something deep and "meaningful when I just want some good old fashioned clean dirty fun.

I joke all the time-and made the remark in an author's note once- "My smut has depth dammit and it does. I write stories with good background, characterization, dialogue and do the best I can to make the implausible, plausible. But I do so in a down to earth manner that says

"Hey welcome to my world, have a seat, stay awhile"

I do not write:

I have seven degrees and am far more intelligent than you and my writing is so much better than you even deserve to read, so count yourself fortunate I have lowered myself to post here.

And that attitude does come through loud and clear in certain authors here.

The best writers on this site never have to tell anyone they are. The chest thumping masks feelings of inadequacy.

The "dross" comments always come from people not happy with their scores or votes. It's always an excuse, "my stories are not well received here, I guess these people are to stupid to appreciate me"

Maybe the problem is not the readers, but the writer.

lovecraft68 said:

I want to clarify that I am not mocking a "literary style" if that's how you write, more power to you and there is a niche crowd for it here like there is for everything else.

What I am mocking and I think others are kicking sand over is the attitude that if a reader does not like that style its because they are stupid and if a writer does not have that style its because they are not capable of it.

This is an erotica site. People come here to unwind and relax with sexy stories. That's not to say they dislike a deep well written story, but if they want to read purple prose and read paragraphs that are so full of ten dollar words that they have to really focus on it then they may as well read a "serious" work.

I read, understood and greatly enjoyed Paradise Lost and Inferno back when I was thirteen. I have no issues understanding literary works at all, but why feel like I am wading through something deep and "meaningful when I just want some good old fashioned clean dirty fun.

I joke all the time-and made the remark in an author's note once- "My smut has depth dammit and it does. I write stories with good background, characterization, dialogue and do the best I can to make the implausible, plausible. But I do so in a down to earth manner that says

"Hey welcome to my world, have a seat, stay awhile"

I do not write:

I have seven degrees and am far more intelligent than you and my writing is so much better than you even deserve to read, so count yourself fortunate I have lowered myself to post here.

And that attitude does come through loud and clear in certain authors here.

The best writers on this site never have to tell anyone they are. The chest thumping masks feelings of inadequacy.

The "dross" comments always come from people not happy with their scores or votes. It's always an excuse, "my stories are not well received here, I guess these people are to stupid to appreciate me"

Maybe the problem is not the readers, but the writer.

Click to expand...

LIT is modern pulp fiction, and pulp fiction is OK; and there's excellent pulp fiction and crap pulp fiction.

What I am mocking and I think others are kicking sand over is the attitude that if a reader does not like that style its because they are stupid and if a writer does not have that style its because they are not capable of it.

Tilt. I don't see anyone on this thread doing that. What I see is some engaging in reverse snobbery by mocking literary style. We have a bunch of posters on this forum who want everyone to write just what they like and just for them, because they spend a lot of time telling others what to write and how to write it.

I do have a question about literary erotica.

Does it involve total disdain for periods and 60 word run on sentences that read like a small child telling about their day?

And then and then and then I and then we....

Just curious.

lovecraft68 said:

I want to clarify that I am not mocking a "literary style" if that's how you write, more power to you and there is a niche crowd for it here like there is for everything else.

What I am mocking and I think others are kicking sand over is the attitude that if a reader does not like that style its because they are stupid and if a writer does not have that style its because they are not capable of it.

This is an erotica site. People come here to unwind and relax with sexy stories. That's not to say they dislike a deep well written story, but if they want to read purple prose and read paragraphs that are so full of ten dollar words that they have to really focus on it then they may as well read a "serious" work.

I read, understood and greatly enjoyed Paradise Lost and Inferno back when I was thirteen. I have no issues understanding literary works at all, but why feel like I am wading through something deep and "meaningful when I just want some good old fashioned clean dirty fun.

I joke all the time-and made the remark in an author's note once- "My smut has depth dammit and it does. I write stories with good background, characterization, dialogue and do the best I can to make the implausible, plausible. But I do so in a down to earth manner that says

"Hey welcome to my world, have a seat, stay awhile"

I do not write:

I have seven degrees and am far more intelligent than you and my writing is so much better than you even deserve to read, so count yourself fortunate I have lowered myself to post here.

And that attitude does come through loud and clear in certain authors here.

The best writers on this site never have to tell anyone they are. The chest thumping masks feelings of inadequacy.

The "dross" comments always come from people not happy with their scores or votes. It's always an excuse, "my stories are not well received here, I guess these people are to stupid to appreciate me"

Maybe the problem is not the readers, but the writer.

Click to expand...

Aye, but that's where the "literary" meaning comes in. The "fun sexy stories" you're talking about... I consider them literary. No matter how simple or complex, no matter if they carry as much weight as the divine comedy.

I like all of the elements I listed earlier, but that doesn't necessarily mean I consider a story not literary if it doesn't contain one or more of the elements. They don't even have to use them to extreme degrees.

A fun little romp with a night on the town ending in crazy sex could be literary for me.

I don't think it's what is written as much as how it's written. How it's presented. Big words small words themes whatever....

If I read a story that I really didn't like because the characters behaved unrealistically and the sex wasn't hot, I'd still consider it literary. In my book. Because they made the attempt to put it together, they aimed for those things but didn't quite hit.

But now, say I came across a story that used a lot of "text" speech. Lotta LOLS and random slang. No real attempt to tell a good story. The equivalent of

"We was all out on the lake and let me tell you how I fucked this one girl. She was reel reel hot and I told her we should go somewhere be all alone an stuff. She was blonde and jus starts suck in me off next to this tree.

I tell her bend over and she pulled down pants and we was fucking and my buddy saw us and he took a picture and put it on facebooks and I got this chicks number. But her sister walked out first and took out her bikini. Her tits was huge...."

Okay so maybe that's the worst story ever and a bit of an extreme example.

But I have seen this very type of story before on Lit. It's a mess. Is it a story? Well yes of course. Are they free to submit it here? Why yeah, there's no quality requirements other than making it past Laurel's skim job. Will people read it and like it? Yes, there's an audience for anything, and some people like to read little quick snippets about someone's encounters, whether or not its "literary" and to whom it is "literary." That's the freedom of Lit.

But do I consider that literary? No. It makes my head hurt just to read. It looks like a long chatroom post. And for me it isn't entertaining. For many it's not entertaining. I think these are the stories OP was talking about. (Extreme example I know, but of that ilk.) To me that's understandable, from both sides of the fence.

In the end, I look at the stories on Lit as like browsing CDs or something. (Or iTunes or whatever). Everyone's gonna pick the one that suits them best, regardless of all the "crap" they consider to be on the stand around it.

lovecraft68 said:

I do have a question about literary erotica.

Does it involve total disdain for periods and 60 word run on sentences that read like a small child telling about their day?

And then and then and then I and then we....

Just curious.

Click to expand...

It might do. Try reading my http://www.literotica.com/s/breathless-stargazing aloud.