Story Discussion: November 19, 2007. "Sleazy Motel" by Bunnymaster

I realize this story is written in the (for some) awkward 2nd person.
I think it packs an erotic charge, particularly if you have a kink for humiliation.
So Does this story adequately convey the humiliation kink?

I'm also interested in discussing the 2nd person as a literary voice.

Most significantly does the 2nd person voice harsh your buzz too much?

So go ahead and throw bricks, but I would like some feedback.
You know...as long as it's not too humiliating

http://www.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=301600

Oh yeah...

If you should like it (and it's OK to ask here) would you vote for it please?

You have the humiliation-kink down, and done well, with the dialog and the scene setup. The second-person POV sounds forced. I think it would have been much better done in first-person, from the woman's POV. You'd be able to get inside her head and better express what she's feeling, that way.

You can still use the dialog from her partner and the others in the hallway and outside, because she can hear all of it. So I don't think you lose anything from changing POV, and it makes it less awkward sounding.

S.

Thanks for the fish (HHGU)

Seriously Singularity thanks for the feedback and the positive strokes.
I've got a newer story I haven't posted yet that's in the 3rd person.
I'm sure it will read better.

I wrote "Sleazy" in the 2nd for (as they say in Olympic diving) degree of difficulty (not for the reader but for me).
I write a lot (mostly main stream feature stuff-some news) and I've never written anything else in the 2nd person.
So it was largely a lark.

It was also written for my lover at the the time.
She was the you and I was hoping it would get her going.

Maybe someone can offer some title advise for the new story.
When you write for an editor they always title your stories-mine do anyway.
I've quit thinking up titles.
Are there any ground rules?

hi bunny

you might look at the second person thread.

i don't think the second person helps in this story, esp. since you don't resist 'thought reading' on several occasions. further the 'he' is pretty opaque; he's a blank whose states we infer from his talk and acts.

so you are reduced to a series of actions, described from without. and yes i understand they are written for a specific person.

i think the story heats up, once the foreman show up. until then it lacks surprise, although mechanically well written.

i found the transition to the foreman a bit awkward:

story: You hear the door open and you hear him growl, "What the fuck do you want?"

"I want you to close those fucking curtains so I can get my crew back to work."

"You better talk to her," he says. You hear the foreman enter the room, you hear them both walk towards you.

"Christ," the foreman says, "this fucking room reeks of pussy."

You sense the foreman is standing close to you but you're too mortified to look up.

"Talk to her, "he says, "she's the one who gets off on an audience." You think you feel your pussy lips quiver and you hope neither of them sees this. Then he says, "You'll see what I mean. Watch this."

------

Pure: "Talk to her, she's the one...." does not sound like a "master" or 'top', but more like an 8 year old. After all, he is running the show, as you tell it.

Not to second guess you, but more plausible would be something like:

[alternate transition, a sketch by pure]

"I want you to close those fucking curtains...."

Master to foreman: "We have a scene. I'm in charge, but the little slut was getting off on the open curtains, so i let it be. I thought it was amusing. Look at her. [to her] Tell the foreman how much you like it, and maybe he'll change his mind."

Woman: "I like it...."

Foreman to master, "Listen, she's a prime slut; fuck her, exhibit her, degrade her, whatever, just don't distract my men. You're in charge; close the curtain."

Master "Yes. [to her] Sorry slut, i'd like to indulge you, but... we'll think of something else."

----
Let me run this by you. Supposing it is designed to turn on ms. x, mightn't "his" thoughts and reactions be relevant? Alternatively, the thoughts and feelings of the subject might be suggested to ms. x. further, i may have missed it, but what is the state of his cock? mightn't she be interested?

In either case, first or third person allows more substance, e.g. putting an "i" for the master and a 'she' for the woman.

--
in all, competent writing, and some good signs of both 'heat' and 'humiliation' in the latter part.

Hi BM,

Overall, I thought this piece was well-written, but I'm not quite sure second-person was the best choice and, even if it was, the perspective is a little loose here and there. This seemed to be one of those stories where the 'you' character was really meant to be the reader and not someone else to whom the narrator relates the story. This presents an immersion problem because I don't want to go to some sleazy motel dressed like an even sleazier woman and I don't enjoy being embarrassed, much less humiliated.

In hindsight, I think I would have enjoyed the tale more had it began with the 'you' character reading that first set of instructions and then looking up at the motel entrance. I'd have known more about why she was there, which would have reduced the mystery a bit, but not like it's a big mystery anyway. Also, if the instructions address someone by name, then it's clear the narrator is addressing someone other than me- and I think this might have helped too.

Another little thing that's not included when she's outside is the time of day. When the construction workers showed up outside the window, I was forced to adjust my interpretation because I'd assumed a trip to a sleazy motel would occur at night, not in the middle of a workday. Why not show the reader the construction workers up front, show us how she reacts when they whistle at her? Plus the clerk- that glossed-over exchange could carry some meaning or foreshadowing too. I'd also like to see the motel exterior, rather than just being told it's sleazy. Once inside, the stains and smells were a nice touch.

In general, I wanted more detail in the opening and a slower pace. Later, I thought the detail and pacing were much better.

Now, how about that perspective?

"Turn around bitch".

Click to expand...

This is where the second-person perspective really diminished my involvement. I was already having some trouble identifying with the character, but this was the end. While I guess some women may enjoy this kind of banter, I saw it a total disrespect and wanted to leave. In a sense, I did just that since I was no longer willing to be the 'you' character. Had I not felt like I was supposed to actually be the 'you' character in the first place, my reaction might have been different. If I can understand what a character wants, sometimes I'm willing share her experience, even if what she wants is not something I want. Does that make any sense?

When I mentioned the perspective could have been tighter, this is what I had in mind:

Your hand unconsciously drifts to your crotch.

Click to expand...

If my hand did do something like this, I wouldn't know it because it's not a conscious act. Therefore, I don't think the story should relate the action in this way because it's not how the character would experience it. Something like: You feel fingers begin to rub the warmth of your crotch. With a gasp, you look down, confirming the fingers are your own.

You feel the cold steel of his switch blade tracing an arc across your upturned ass.

Click to expand...

The character wouldn't see the knife- she'd feel the knife, so I don't think you want to show it to the reader either. Sticking with what the character feels- the cold, hard metal, maybe the tug against the fabric and then the coolness when the fabric falls away, this might have worked better.

Here are a few other places where I think the perspective could have been tighter:

He reaches down into the bag and pulls out a wicked looking, braided leather riding crop.

Click to expand...

Can she really see him reach into the bag?

You hear him sniff his hand.

Click to expand...

Again, I don't think she can see his hand, so I don't think the reader should see it either.

A construction worker stops in his tracks mesmerized by your swaying tits.

Click to expand...

Relating why the construction worker stops is a minor POV shift.

In contrast, I thought this piece was much better simply because the reader has to determine who is at the door in the same manner the character does:

You hear the door open and you hear him growl, "What the fuck do you want?"

"I want you to close those fucking curtains so I can get my crew back to work."

Click to expand...

This might be kinda minor, but then again maybe not.

He's gently tugging on your labia majora ... Now he's tugging on your labia minora...

Click to expand...

The narration to this point leaned toward the crude side, so the use of formal terms seemed out of place, maybe even clinical. Clinical is rarely sexy.

Lastly, there was a little redundancy scattered throughout, mostly involving adverbs. The most glaring one for me was:

Quietly you let out a soft," Yes."

Click to expand...

So Does this story adequately convey the humiliation kink?
Well... maybe? I can see how this story might work if I did harbor a humiliation kink.

Most significantly does the 2nd person voice harsh your buzz too much?
How does one know if her buzz has been harshed?

You know...as long as it's not too humiliating

This piece is better than most second-person narratives, because it is well written and does appear to involve some change in the central character. On the other hand, it is a bit formulaic and doesn't cover the character's relationship enough for me. I might have been more interested reading about the events leading up to her decision to go to the motel. I think this story's an excellent example of how second-person can work, but it still may not have been the best choice if broad appeal was a goal.

Did I answer all of your questions somewhere above?

Take Care,
Penny

bunnymaster said:

I've quit thinking up titles.
Are there any ground rules?

Click to expand...

'Sleazy Motel' may not be the strongest title, but nothing better comes to mind at this moment. There certainly aren't any rules.

bunnymaster said:

It was also written for my lover at the time.
She was the you and I was hoping it would get her going.

Click to expand...

And....?

pure said:

"Talk to her, she's the one...." does not sound like a "master" or 'top', but more like an 8 year old. After all, he is running the show, as you tell it.

Click to expand...

Good point. I totally missed that. So is this a character misstep or is it really meant to be a hint about the true nature of their relationship?

pure said:

i may have missed it, but what is the state of his cock? mightn't she be interested?

Click to expand...

Interesting question. While reading, this issue didn't even cross my mind.

Hi, Bunny,

I think you've done a good job with second person, at least, on the technical level. As you might have read on the second person thread, most of us had no problem agreeing that you/he (as opposed to I/you), despite being unusual, can be made to work.

As far as common second-person complaints go—"Dude, you're so not whipping my ass"—I think your piece avoids them well. Readers have a clear option of distancing themselves from the you character, there's no sense of peering uninvited in someone else's privacy, and the narrative rarely, if ever, reads awkward. Your clean and competent writing certainly didn't hurt, either.

That said, the question, as with anything else, is why choose second person, instead of just asking why not. You wrote the piece for a lover, so I guess that answers it, but just for the sake of discussion, I don't see how the piece benefited from being told in second person, what made it suitable for that narrative approach, or how it would lose anything (indeed, gain seems more likely) were it told through more conventional means. The least that has to be noted is that you made an unusual stylistic choice for no appreciable reason.

What left me less than taken with your piece wasn't second person, though, nor was it the fact that it's a scene rather than a story. Penny's words from another thread—"There's just no way a scene can affect me the way a story can"—could well be my own, but I also have to acknowledge that an unpretentious, steamy sex scene can be delightful in its own right. The reason yours wasn't, though, not for me, is in characters or, I'm almost tempted to say, the lack thereof.

The man remained completely impenetrable, but that seems to be such a sadly common feat in BDSM genre that it's almost unfair to bring it up as a problem particular to your story. The woman was only marginally more approachable, though, which left you not with one but with two characters without much juice to them.

On a basic level of responding to stimuli, her reactions did strike me as verisimilar, but there was nothing there that would breathe life into her as a reasonably unique character; no idiosyncrasy, no hint of motivation apart from a generic lust, no attempt to set up even the vaguest of contexts for the encounter. The nature of her relationship with the man is unknown, as well as whether it's the first or the hundredth time she's doing an S/M scene, or why she came to that motel room on that particular day and not some other. We know she responds erotically to humiliation, but that's all we know. She, and with her her partner, remain automatons moving through a rather predictable set of actions.

Structurally, this was reflected in a rather rigid and immutable sequence consisting of stimuli (always pain and humiliation, always administered by the man) and responses (always humiliation and arousal, always experienced by the woman), which tired me after a while in its repetitive rhythm.

None of which is to say that you should have dedicated extra sections to characters' histories (or God forbid, flashbacks and long bios), but just that the answers to at least some of the questions I posed above should have come across naturally, as a part of her perceptions during the scene.

As one simple example, a woman meeting her hubby for a kinky hour inevitably has different feelings than a woman meeting an illicit lover, and hers are different again from that of a woman meeting a stranger, or the next in a succession of strangers. From just that one differentiating point, outlines of her character could have emerged and with them those of the man and the story itself. That I couldn't even decide which it was with your heroine demonstrates a bit of what I mean by generic.

To bring it back to second person, I suspect it was the culprit after all, for what I thought the shortcomings in your story. Not because you weren't capable of handling the technical side, but rather because it likely blinded you to the necessity of conveying some details that were known to you and your original audience but aren't known to the rest of us.

All the nitpicking aside, though, it has to be pointed out that your piece stands well above average for a first effort, and probably miles above average among second person pieces. Thanks for sharing it, and best of luck with your future submissions.

Verdad

Holy Cow

Veredad, Pure, Penelope Street,

Thanks.
Wow!
I mean it.
If I said this before in this thread let me have it for bragging...but last week I found out a straight (obviously) piece of mine was accepted for publication in a national trade/professional magazine (after peer review). If I said it before I apologize, but I'm a bit giddy about it.

Still your comments both the positive (thanks) and the negative are appreciated almost as much as "getting published".
You criticisms go into such detail and are so thoughtful I'm completely floored by the consideration you shown.

I'm on my way to the pool right now (just got home from work) but I'll respond at greater length to your patient, thoughtful words.

Seriously thanks for donating so much time.
I'll WBS.

oops

Verdad sorry for sp error on your name...my apologies!

Clarity

Pure said:

Pure: "Talk to her, she's the one...." does not sound like a "master" or 'top', but more like an 8 year old. After all, he is running the show, as you tell it.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure if "He" is supposed to sound like a top, I can tell you what "He's" going for here though.

Let's call our heroine Maggie, if you were Maggie and you were mortified (albeit getting turned on) by the foreman's presence would you want to speak to him.
Would you want "Him" telling this stranger that being finger fucked on a table in front of his crew was getting you off?

Would you be humiliated if "He" did that to you?

That's what "He" (I) was going for at that point.
Maggie's humiliation.

Homina, homina

Penelope Street said:

Hi BM,

Click to expand...

Bunny is OK, Bunnymaster (which has meaning between "Maggie" and I) is Ok, You can call me Ishmael or you can call me Ray... but you doesn't has to call me BM.

Mickey

Pure said:

you might look at the second person thread.

i don't think the second person helps in this story, esp. since you don't resist 'thought reading' on several occasions. further the 'he' is pretty opaque; he's a blank whose states we infer from his talk and acts.

so you are reduced to a series of actions, described from without. and yes i understand they are written for a specific person.

i think the story heats up, once the foreman show up. until then it lacks surprise, although mechanically well written.

Click to expand...

This is significant too: Pure said," he's a blank whose states we infer from his talk and acts."
[I'm not comparing myself to Hemingway-except in a mechanical construct] Hemingway did this in the story that follows "The End of Something" (the title escapes me at the moment) in "In Our Time".
Unless you read that story closely you'll never pick up that the boys are getting drunk. The only way it's ever put across is by what you infer from their actions and speech.

Again I'm no Hemingway but I think implying mental states by reporting on characters actions implies that you have faith (which in your case is apparently deserved) in your readers' intelligence.
It also lacks the ham-handed storytelling as evidenced in (for Example) "The Davinci Code"

I'd have a leg to stand on here if weren't for my slipping into an omniscient voice (as you all pointed out) by interpreting that "the construction worker was mesmerized by her dangling breasts".
That stung but I dropped the ball there (and elsewhere).
That's the kind of thing I'd nail an author on and you're all dead right.

Actually what prompted me to post the story here is... I was looking at the 2nd person thread combined with the morbid fixation I have about the 2nd person.

Beyond that:
The second person is no way to convey a story (unless you're reading it to your "you" while gently stroking her labia minora (that's for Verdad-clinical) and biting her neck).
But as a stand alone story (how did you put it?) it's too opaque.

I hope someone will pick up on this notion:

IS THERE REALLY A SECOND PERSON VOICE?

If you think about it the so-called 2nd person is really a disembodied voice speaking to or about the "you" character.
Doesn't that make them a 3rd person voice?

My theory is (and does English grammar even permit people to have theories?)there really is no such thing as a second person voice.
There is definitely a 2nd person pro-noun but no voice.

Sorry that's been eating me since about the 7th grade and I had to get it off my chest.

Mickey

PS more later I've got classes tomorrow.

good effort!

Hi Bunnymaster,

You wrote a good story, it set a vivid scene and was nicely arousing. The second-person view wasn't to my liking - possibly because I'm a guy; if I were a woman looking for just this sort of story to get me off, then second-person would have been just the ticket. So third- or first-person, of the woman's POV, would have been better for me.

My only suggestion, a minor technical one: every now and again you've got him and her talking on the same paragraph. It's a bit jarring; I always try to keep disparate quotes on separate paragraphs, to help maintain a flowing structure, to better help define who said what and when. You also sometimes separated his quote into consecutive paragraphs; that's okay, but as a tool I'd use it selectively, to emphasise a particularly important or hard-hitting quote.

Cheers for the story - I'll keep an eye open for the next one!

Too Right

aussie_101 said:

My only suggestion, a minor technical one: every now and again you've got him and her talking on the same paragraph. It's a bit jarring; I always try to keep disparate quotes on separate paragraphs, to help maintain a flowing structure, to better help define who said what and when. You also sometimes separated his quote into consecutive paragraphs; that's okay, but as a tool I'd use it selectively, to emphasise a particularly important or hard-hitting quote.

Cheers for the story - I'll keep an eye open for the next one!

Click to expand...

Thanks Aussie.
You make an excellent point about separate paragraphs for separate speakers.
I'm surprised I did that.

The next story has been submitted-"Margaret's Experimental Orgasms".
Last time I checked it hadn't been posted.
It's told in the 3rd person and is a lot longer.
When it's posted I'll copy it here.

Whoops

Quote:
Originally Posted by bunnymaster
It was also written for my lover at the time.
She was the you and I was hoping it would get her going.

Penelope Street said:

.

And....?

Click to expand...

Um... yeah!
It was an extremely torrid affair.
At the point I read the story to her we were speaking but she had decided to curtail physical relations (she was/is married).
I held her in my arms and read the story.
I was surprised by the effect (blissfully surprised).

My next story ( I just sent it in this week) was written for her as well.
It's called "Margaret's Experimental Orgasms".
It's longer and written in the 3rd person-hopefully that will be an easier read.
I'll copy it here when it's posted.

Bunnymaster said:

...

I hope someone will pick up on this notion:

IS THERE REALLY A SECOND PERSON VOICE?

If you think about it the so-called 2nd person is really a disembodied voice speaking to or about the "you" character.
Doesn't that make them a 3rd person voice?

My theory is (and does English grammar even permit people to have theories?)there really is no such thing as a second person voice.
There is definitely a 2nd person pro-noun but no voice.

Sorry that's been eating me since about the 7th grade and I had to get it off my chest.

Mickey

PS more later I've got classes tomorrow.

Click to expand...

Hi Bunny,

Haven't read your story yet, but this question caught my attention.

Not sure, but I would say you have 2nd person voice when speaking directly to another person. Telling somebody else, for instance in a BDSM scene.

I'll look at your story and will come back later, if I have anything to contribute.

Black Tulip said:

Not sure, but I would say you have 2nd person voice when speaking directly to another person.

Click to expand...

I'm not totally certain, but I think the idea is that, no matter what we label the perspective, a 'you' character cannot tell the story.

First of all, I enjoyed the story as a reader that likes BDSM stories. It's good and it's hot.

After reading the story, I think the 2nd person voice would be like a voice whispering in your ear. Which can be very good for a D/s situation.

Good example:

You hear voices from the hall. They sound like they're coming nearer. The air is split with the hiss of the crop. It hits your ass, burning like fire. You let out a yelp. Just then you hear footfalls right outside the door. The footsteps pass. Then you hear the voices, boys', receding down the hall, "Did you see that shit?"

Click to expand...

Like others have said, you could tighten the view point in your telling. Keep it all close to her. What is going on in her head, what is she seeing, feeling, hearing.

Examples:

He steps up close to you and places a black leather bag on the floor.

Click to expand...

You hear him getting closer and from the corner of your eye you see him place a black leather bag on the floor.

He reaches down into the bag and pulls out a wicked looking, braided leather riding crop. In the instructions there was a safe word. But the instructions clearly said once you use the safe word the session comes to an end. You hear him crack the crop into the palm of his hand.

Click to expand...

You see him reach down into the bag, pulling out a wicked looking, braided leather riding crop. You remember the instructions. There was a safe word with them. You hear him crack the crop and you quiver. How much will it hurt? But the instructions clearly said... Do you want to end it?

I'm only trying to clarify my remark about staying close to the woman in the story. This is not meant to be a rewrite because I think you did a louzy job. LOL

There was something in his attitude that angered me. The start of the story suggests it's a first time encounter. I would think that exposing her body would be enough of a humiliation for her to get off. Showing her face to strangers in the process is way too much to ask, in my opinion. You can do that when you're comfortabel with one another. There has to be a whole lot of trust before you will allow a Dom to push you that far.
But then again, maybe that's a personal matter. I'd never show my face, it could lose me my job.

On his taking command of the situation. This has been mentioned before as well.
Once he takes command, it's his. No going back for him either. You can't push a sub beyond her boundaries and then ask her to make a decision. That is bad practice.

"I want you to close those fucking curtains so I can get my crew back to work."

"You better talk to her," he says. You hear the foreman enter the room, you hear them both walk towards you.

Click to expand...

If this was meant to be part of the humiliation you should refrase it, so we hear it through her ears and learn what that does to her.

All in all, I think you wrote a story that is good. I truly enjoyed reading it. If it weren't for this thread I would not have had "complaints".

The only thing that really bothered me as a reader was the fact that the man in the story pushed her too far. Maybe not, but I didn't feel she liked all of it.
As far as I can tell, the humiliation comes from the shame of getting turned on by exposing yourself or whatever else that is humiliating in the eyes of most people. The Dom is pushing the sub beyond the shame, accepting the pleasure.

Hope this helps.

Bingo!!!

Penelope Street said:

I'm not totally certain, but I think the idea is that, no matter what we label the perspective, a 'you' character cannot tell the story.

Click to expand...

Penelope Street, I dig your chili!
That's definitely what I'm getting at.
No YOU could tell a story.
Hence when you [the storyteller] speaks to a YOU it is not a second person voice, it is first or third but I'm not sure which.

As you so brilliantly put it: a you character can't tell a story.
Think about it if a you character told a story they'd no longer be a second person either.
Back to my original theory: I don't think the 2nd person voice exists.

Oh the fun we have!!!!

I hear you

Black Tulip said:

First of all, I enjoyed the story as a reader that likes BDSM stories. It's good and it's hot.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the positive comments.
I'm glad you thought it was hot.
That to me is the entire point of erotica.

How does that old argument from Humanities 101 go?
It's Art if it affects you emotionally.
VS
It's not Art if it affects you emotionally.

I side with the first thesis.
If my writing warmed you up it did the job.
I also think that tighter writing only makes a story hotter and for that reason I appreciate your (and all) critique(s).

I hope you'll check out my next story.
I posted it last week and for some reason it is not showing up.

Also I appreciate you (in an earlier post) speaking to the 2nd person notion.