COVID-19 RESOURCES
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

Cum vs Come

sr71plt said:
Imost publishers of erotic now specify in their style guides
Click to expand...

Are there really such things as"style guides" for erotic literature? I don't remember any mention of them in tenth grade English. I guess you have to get them directly from the publisher, and I haven't made contact with any of them since I don't do this for money.

Maybe we ought to have a style guide like that here, like in the "Blank Manual" section.
 
Cum and cumming are part of the vernacular in erotic wrting now. Traditional writers like to argue against this but I feel like they are being stubborn.

But I'm not a very good writer so what do I know?
 
jehoram said:
Are there really such things as"style guides" for erotic literature? I don't remember any mention of them in tenth grade English. I guess you have to get them directly from the publisher, and I haven't made contact with any of them since I don't do this for money.

Maybe we ought to have a style guide like that here, like in the "Blank Manual" section.
Click to expand...

Publishers have individualized style guides. In U.S. publishing, for fiction, most are based on the Chicago Manual of Style and just amend those with the publishing house's own contrary preferences. Erotica publishers have them too. Often they provide them on two levels--one for authors (usually provided on the publisher's Web site on submissions guidelines) and a more detailed ones for the publishing house editors. The come/cum issue is one that most erotica publishers specifically address in their style guides (because the CMS doesn't). And all that I've seen specify "come" as the verb and "cum" as the noun.

I do think, though, that the trend will eventually go to "cum" as the verb as well, and I welcome that to distinguish it from the common use of the term. I write for publishers, though, so I follow their current guidelines.
 
sr71plt said:
Publishers have individualized style guides. In U.S. publishing, for fiction, most are based on the Chicago Manual of Style and just amend those with the publishing house's own contrary preferences. Erotica publishers have them too. Often they provide them on two levels--one for authors (usually provided on the publisher's Web site on submissions guidelines) and a more detailed ones for the publishing house editors. The come/cum issue is one that most erotica publishers specifically address in their style guides (because the CMS doesn't). And all that I've seen specify "come" as the verb and "cum" as the noun.

I do think, though, that the trend will eventually go to "cum" as the verb as well, and I welcome that to distinguish it from the common use of the term. I write for publishers, though, so I follow their current guidelines.
Click to expand...

This is interesting. Do publishers of erotica keep their style guides as a kind of house secret, or do they publish them? Are the guidelines common to all or most publishers, or does each have its own unique guidelines? I'd be curious what some of the most commonly encountered guidelines for published erotica are.
 
SimonDoom said:
This is interesting. Do publishers of erotica keep their style guides as a kind of house secret, or do they publish them? Are the guidelines common to all or most publishers, or does each have its own unique guidelines? I'd be curious what some of the most commonly encountered guidelines for published erotica are.
Click to expand...

Here's what a publisher that came out of Literotica, Excessica, puts on its Web site in editing guidance for authors. I've found it's all pretty standard with other erotica publishers:

http://excessica.com/submissions/excessica-editing-guidelines
 
sr71plt said:
Here's what a publisher that came out of Literotica, Excessica, puts on its Web site in editing guidance for authors. I've found it's all pretty standard with other erotica publishers:

http://excessica.com/submissions/excessica-editing-guidelines
Click to expand...

This is very helpful. Nearly all of it makes sense, but I have reservations about rule 16, not to head-hop, because in erotica there are scenes where it may make sense to let the reader know what two characters are thinking, at least briefly.
 
SimonDoom said:
This is very helpful. Nearly all of it makes sense, but I have reservations about rule 16, not to head-hop, because in erotica there are scenes where it may make sense to let the reader know what two characters are thinking, at least briefly.
Click to expand...

Head hopping is about the same level of stylistic annoyance as the occasional tense shift, in my book - may be a tad worse ;).
 
electricblue66 said:
Head hopping is about the same level of stylistic annoyance as the occasional tense shift, in my book - may be a tad worse ;).
Click to expand...

Knowing I shouldn't do it, at times I've done it thinking I had no option to achieve what I wanted to achieve. Looking back now, I can see I could have done it another way.

Slowing down the writing/editing process has its merits.
 
electricblue66 said:
Head hopping is about the same level of stylistic annoyance as the occasional tense shift, in my book - may be a tad worse ;).
Click to expand...

I should clarify. What I mean is standard omniscient point of view, where the narrator relays the thoughts of all the characters. Sometimes the line between that and POV-shifting is blurred because the omniscient narrator is able to tell the reader what each character in a scene is thinking and how things look from the perspective of that character. I use this point POV sometimes; it's my favorite POV because of its flexibility.

I'm not always sure what people mean by head-hopping. If they mean don't switch your POV in a scene, I agree. But if they mean you can't use the omniscient POV and peer into the heads of more than one character in a scene, I think that's dead-bang wrong. That's the whole point of omniscient third person, and it has a long and illustrious history in literature.

This might be worth its own thread, because it's got me wondering what people think are examples of head hopping they don't like.
 
SimonDoom said:
I should clarify. What I mean is standard omniscient point of view, where the narrator relays the thoughts of all the characters. Sometimes the line between that and POV-shifting is blurred because the omniscient narrator is able to tell the reader what each character in a scene is thinking and how things look from the perspective of that character. I use this point POV sometimes; it's my favorite POV because of its flexibility.

I'm not always sure what people mean by head-hopping. If they mean don't switch your POV in a scene, I agree. But if they mean you can't use the omniscient POV and peer into the heads of more than one character in a scene, I think that's dead-bang wrong. That's the whole point of omniscient third person, and it has a long and illustrious history in literature.

This might be worth its own thread, because it's got me wondering what people think are examples of head hopping they don't like.
Click to expand...

Just stirring you, mate, my long memory knows where the elephants go to die - remember Amelia?

I fully agree the power of omniscient third person narrator for all the reasons you give. I use it far more often now than when I started writing, precisely because you can give multiple povs. I reckon, though, that you've got to give each character a good long time of their own - sections, certainly several paragraphs, and very, very clearly signify you've shifted pov. Plenty of ways to do that, seamlessly.

I think what drives people insane is head-hopping sentence by sentence, which you very often see. For me, that's a sign the writer doesn't actually know what they're doing, and is up there with sloppy grammar, poor spelling and "for chrissakes find an editor." And tense shifts... ;).
 
electricblue66 said:
Just stirring you, mate, my long memory knows where the elephants go to die - remember Amelia?

).
Click to expand...

I can't forget because you won't let me. What I remember is that I liked the story. But I said something about tenses, and have been getting shade from you ever since.

What's the Oz equivalent of an elephant? You have lots of weird and deadly stuff down under, but not lots of really big critters, as far as I know.
 
SimonDoom said:
I should clarify. What I mean is standard omniscient point of view, where the narrator relays the thoughts of all the characters. Sometimes the line between that and POV-shifting is blurred because the omniscient narrator is able to tell the reader what each character in a scene is thinking and how things look from the perspective of that character. I use this point POV sometimes; it's my favorite POV because of its flexibility.
Click to expand...

The third-person omniscient view covers an entire work or designated section of a work (and isn't too popular in many areas of publishing as being lazy writing). Head-hopping would be isolated slipping from a tighter, prevalent POV into multiple POVs to avoid better writing in a specific scene/section. Better writing would find a way to show a character's thoughts/reactions in a way that the reader could discern them without coming out of established POV to tell them by head-hopping.
 
sr71plt said:
The third-person omniscient view covers an entire work or designated section of a work (and isn't too popular in many areas of publishing as being lazy writing). Head-hopping would be isolated slipping from a tighter, prevalent POV into multiple POVs to avoid better writing in a specific scene/section. Better writing would find a way to show a character's thoughts/reactions in a way that the reader could discern them without coming out of established POV to tell them by head-hopping.
Click to expand...

Excellent explanation, thank you. I was just about to ask for the definition of head-hopping. I'm writing a story in third person omniscient where it switches between multiple characters, but I avoid shifting views in the middle of a paragraph or too rapidly so it's not a jumble of perspectives.
And I actually never knew there was a cum/come debate. I always used cum/cumming/came to describe the act of orgasming and never considered doing otherwise. I do think 'come' looks more civil, while 'cum' seems dirtier, so I guess I like it dirty...
 
SimonDoom said:
What's the Oz equivalent of an elephant? You have lots of weird and deadly stuff down under, but not lots of really big critters, as far as I know.
Click to expand...

:)

Big enough for ya?

http://abcnews.go.com/International/croc-takes-shark-wins/story?id=24862582

Saltwater crocs are the biggest native land-going critter - we've got imported buffalo and camels which are big mothers, but not your predator. The great white shark would be the biggest sea predator around these parts.

The shark in the croc pic is just a little one...

Crocs seem to like Germans best, not quite sure why. Perhaps they don't read the signs, despite being targeted:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-31/crocodile-warning-sign-cooktown-queensland/7462162
 
electricblue66 said:
:)

Big enough for ya?

http://abcnews.go.com/International/croc-takes-shark-wins/story?id=24862582

Saltwater crocs are the biggest native land-going critter - we've got imported buffalo and camels which are big mothers, but not your predator. The great white shark would be the biggest sea predator around these parts.

The shark in the croc pic is just a little one...

Crocs seem to like Germans best, not quite sure why. Perhaps they don't read the signs, despite being targeted:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-31/crocodile-warning-sign-cooktown-queensland/7462162
Click to expand...

That'll do. Plus, crocodiles are reputed to have long memories, too.
 
TheeGoatPig said:
Cum and cumming are part of the vernacular in erotic wrting now. Traditional writers like to argue against this but I feel like they are being stubborn.

But I'm not a very good writer so what do I know?
Click to expand...

It comes across as unnecessary pedantry. Like trying to use gay to still mean happy. Yeah, sure, technically...but why? It bespeaks a sort of tone-deafness to your audience who have moved on with their usage.
 
sr71plt said:
Here's what a publisher that came out of Literotica, Excessica, puts on its Web site in editing guidance for authors. I've found it's all pretty standard with other erotica publishers:

http://excessica.com/submissions/excessica-editing-guidelines
Click to expand...

Thanks very much, this was a good read. I really appreciate the feedback. I haven't done a search for it yet (will soon) but do most erotica publishers give this type of guidance on their sites?

My general plan is to have a go at eventually publishing on Amazon until someone decides to make my dream come true and I'm able to give up my day job for writing :D
 

"Cum" is Latin meaning "with."

Literate and educated writers use the English "come" to mean "orgasm" or "ejaculation."
 
EmpressJosephine said:

"Cum" is Latin meaning "with."

Literate and educated writers use the English "come" to mean "orgasm" or "ejaculation."
Click to expand...

Well, no. According to some of the information provided by others in this thread, "cum" is the standard erotica publishing industry term for ejaculate. "Literate and educated" isn't a synonym for "fixed in stone." Words have no fixed, intrinsic meanings. They have the meanings people give to them, and those meanings change over time. Literate and educated people know this.

Using "come" for both the verb and the noun seems perfectly acceptable to me, but it's not how I do it, and I'm reasonably comfortable with my literacy and education.
 
Yeah. I write in English, not Latin.

Thank God there’s no arbitrary body determining what’s English and what’s not. I like an organic language.

I’d worry about the Language Police cumming to take away my keyboard. But then, I’m neither literate nor educated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mildlyaroused
Do You Like Character Descriptions?
2 3
Replies
70
Views
1K
cababge
C
MediocreAuthor
Cum or Come?
2 3
Replies
64
Views
1K
MillieDynamite
MillieDynamite
AG31
Well, maybe not completely obvious. I need help, foks!
2 3
Replies
69
Views
1K
pink_silk_glove
pink_silk_glove
Rob_Royale
An apology to Dean Koontz
Replies
19
Views
412
StillStunned
StillStunned
AwkwardlySet
"Doing Well" on Literotica
3 4 5
Replies
122
Views
2K
gacor
gacor
Back
Top