Authors who aspire to literary writing...

As a writer I think I aspire to create a good story first, and in that story titillate. I try not to be verbose and I try to avoid the obvious sexual content, so perhaps I aspire to be more high-brow erotic literature than mere written pornography. Yet I suspect many of the very "worst" writers treasure their submissions as I do, they are labors of love (and lust), proudly offered to sometimes scrutiny, sometimes scorn or even neglect in the mass of stories found here. I suspect no author here wants his or her words simply unread. If there are diamonds out there, they shine most brilliant after the struggle to bring them to the day, so I suppose the burden is having to read more stuff here.
 
As a writer I think I aspire to create a good story first, and in that story titillate. I try not to be verbose and I try to avoid the obvious sexual content, so perhaps I aspire to be more high-brow erotic literature than mere written pornography. Yet I suspect many of the very "worst" writers treasure their submissions as I do, they are labors of love (and lust), proudly offered to sometimes scrutiny, sometimes scorn or even neglect in the mass of stories found here. I suspect no author here wants his or her words simply unread. If there are diamonds out there, they shine most brilliant after the struggle to bring them to the day, so I suppose the burden is having to read more stuff here.

I forgot that part in my post. Everyone thinks his or her own shit is good. Doesn't make it true.
 
I forgot that part in my post. Everyone thinks his or her own shit is good. Doesn't make it true.

You are correct, only the audience can weigh on whether the art is good or great or not, we decide for ourselves, but I have read that which critics and audiences rave over and find it to be shit. I find it my own lone burden to find great art, I cannot merely rely on what others think. But we are a harsh audience since we aspire to be writers, above average ones I assume.
 
I forgot that part in my post. Everyone thinks his or her own shit is good. Doesn't make it true.

Ah, but then there is the one that you thought was just "okay" that explodes on you and you're swamped with dozens of demands for a sequel.

I've had a couple of those.
 
Ah, but then there is the one that you thought was just "okay" that explodes on you and you're swamped with dozens of demands for a sequel.

I've had a couple of those.

I have as well

And if "Porn Shoot with my Sister" does not scream literary writing I don't know what does.
 
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.
 
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.

My point is that a lot of authors think that their stories include the elements you've mentioned. Doesn't make it true. If we have a "Literary Porn" category, who judges whether or not the story actually reflects any of these things? The author himself? Everybody likes their own stuff. They wouldn't write it otherwise.

Unless "literature" is being judged by someone other than the author (and Laurel's not going to take the time to evaluate the literary worthiness of the stories), I don't think a new category is in order.
 
I, of course, have the solution to everyone's problem. Go straight to smashwords. Do not pass go. Buy all the stories written by Robert Reams. There you have it! literatoor!

TA DA!
 
And to illustrate: :)


...literary elements include heavy use of description...

Her boobs were huge with nipples that could poke your eye out.



.
...emphasis on setting...

They hurried to the bedroom.



...atmospherics...

The air smelled like stale tobacco and hot sweaty sex.



...characterization...

She knew he was a stupid jerkoziod with the personality of a lobotomized gnat, but he was also endowed to the point where it was a miracle that he could stand upright without a counter-weight attached to his ass.



...rich language...


"Hi there, Its a pleasure to meat you."
"FUCK MY FUCKING FUCK HOLE YOU MOTHERFUCKER"
"Stretch My Balloon Knot Like A Clown...oh yea, oh yeaaaaa."
"ooh, look at that. right in your shit-pipe."
"I think I'm gonna fookin spunk ya now!"
"Gnarh rhohn hennth carth uugh ugghhh unh unh unh..."




...and emphasis on theme...

Of course he was black. All of her lovers were. Because once you go black...



...or philosophical point...

"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..."
 
What the hell makes you think you know what the average education level of my readers is, Zeb? :D

Maybe you should speak only for your own readership.

I didn't. Try to improve your comprehension of what you read.

Gee...I though the moron had me on ignore?

And what gave you the impression, guilty conscious, that I was talking to you. The world, no matter how much you would like it to, does not revolve around you fat ass.
 
I grow veggies and fruits and flowering shrubs, and I'm pert nearly always competent to judge the quality of my stuff. There are standards, and I know the standards. Ditto sheet metal work, I know the standards. Ditto another 2-3 activities that have standards. And I suspect writing has standards, too, but most writers are clueless of what they are, and cant recognize them.

Like yesterday. I read an AP story of a crime "at a crack house in Annapolis, where the Navel Academy is located." The writer and her editor shoulda caught that blooper. Plus snagged the many static verbs; it was horrible to see.
 
Like yesterday. I read an AP story of a crime "at a crack house in Annapolis, where the Navel Academy is located." The writer and her editor shoulda caught that blooper. Plus snagged the many static verbs; it was horrible to see.

What's the problem, JBJ? Those navel oranges have to be educated somewhere. :)
 
I grow veggies and fruits and flowering shrubs, and I'm pert nearly always competent to judge the quality of my stuff. There are standards, and I know the standards. Ditto sheet metal work, I know the standards. Ditto another 2-3 activities that have standards. And I suspect writing has standards, too, but most writers are clueless of what they are, and cant recognize them.

Like yesterday. I read an AP story of a crime "at a crack house in Annapolis, where the Navel Academy is located." The writer and her editor shoulda caught that blooper. Plus snagged the many static verbs; it was horrible to see.
There we go again. JBJ knows what most writers think, feel, and whether or not they have a clue. Of course he has read ALL the stories in the world so he is particularly aware of the cluelessness of the writers. I wish we could all be like him.
 
There we go again. JBJ knows what most writers think, feel, and whether or not they have a clue. Of course he has read ALL the stories in the world so he is particularly aware of the cluelessness of the writers. I wish we could all be like him.

I've read a good share of them.

Writing aint gay rocket science, Bob.

What became of your hero The Nookie Monster?
 
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?
 
I, of course, have the solution to everyone's problem. Go straight to smashwords. Do not pass go. Buy all the stories written by Robert Reams. There you have it! literatoor!

TA DA!

LOL this thread needed that bit of levity.

I write stories that I hope the audience enjoys. I know it's probably never going to be on par with a Dickens or Chaucer and that's ok, I'm fine with that. So long as the audience enjoys reading what I write and I have fun doing it, then there's no real point to caring if it's considered literary or not. Really, I think too many writers and editors are so wrapped up in their own ego's that they place themselves and their work among those authors and works that are now considered literary.

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...
 
What good is great literary writing when your audience, on average, only reads at a 8th or 9th grade level?

You can write all those big words you want, but if you readership doesn't know what you are talking about they are more likely to put it aside than pull out a dictionary.

All I want to do is tell the story so that everyone can understand what is happening. If that means using several small words instead of one big one, then so be it, just so the small words are put together the right way to tell the story.

Literary doesn't necessarily mean using long or obscure words. Literature can be written that is accessible to 8th or 9th grade level readers.

It might be harder to express the story with a restricted vocabulary but it can be done.
 
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?

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.
 
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?

This is pretty much how I feel. I probably don't have the talent to be "literary" but perhaps I can write something that is enjoyable, to me and others. That is what will satisfy me.
 
Last edited:
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.

Maybe in your mind but not in everyone's. :rolleyes:
 
Good writing

If you give the reader the same imagimation as when you write it
 
Back
Top