Non-stroke Erotica

[lovecraft68]

Like so many things here this just falls under personal opinion and taste. My 'non stroke erotica' might be seen as a more stroky piece to someone else etc

A tag line I've used for years in the selling market is "My smut has depth" because I rarely write just flat out strokers, and when I do, they go into anthologies consisting of three or four of those in the same genre, but full length stories I like to add depth.

I have quite a few e-books-and some pieces here-that are long enough to be novellas and even novels. But there's plenty of story to get into and plenty to stroke to as well. It doesn't have to be a choice, you can do both

 

[KeithD]

Erotica. Non-stroke Erotica. Who cares?

Everything you write sucks either way. Just reading three paragraphs of yours was sufficient to discern its quality.

The venom in this loses its punch when you don't identify who you are addressing. And of course you would engage in such attacks. No need to even read anything to make this childish jab. I'm sure that whoever you were addressing is simply mortified--simply mortified, I say--by such a judgment from you and is off softly sobbing in the summerhouse.

 

[SimonDoom]

The venom in this loses its punch when you don't identify who you are addressing. And of course you would engage in such attacks. No need to even read anything to make this childish jab. I'm sure that whoever you were addressing is simply mortified--simply mortified, I say--by such a judgment from you and is off softly sobbing in the summerhouse.

He's writing about me, I suppose. You are correct in your (sarcastic) assessment of my reaction. I have a thick skin anyway, but even if I didn't, Tilan's writing credentials are sufficiently thin, and his long history of outrageous performance-art like Hangout contributions sufficiently rich, that it's easy to dismiss him as just trying desperately to be the forum's Andy Kaufman.

 

[SeraphNocturne]

Kudos on an engaging topic.

I suppose if I have to choose between the two, I lean heavily on non-stroker style both as an author and a reader. Which isn't to say I don't enjoy or condemn stroker material for being anything but highly erotic literature, it is what it is, and I don't consider that a bad thing.

The cultivation of a story, erotica or otherwise, lies therein the creation and familiarity of the characters and how engaging I consider the environment. If I can't visualize your main character and supporting cast, if their personalities are lackluster or difficult to decipher, they really are not going to make an imprint. I'm not going to care about them.

Admittedly, my list of favorite authors on Lit is short, only because so few onsite write in a style most appealing to my personal tastes. But a few of those on my list write material the way you're describing it; stories intended to be erotic while either not ticking off the things that do it for me or having a central focus that would otherwise not seem erotic overall. I'm reading these stories most definitely for the plot and characters and not so much the erotic parts, and if I am inspired to feel arousal by those parts it might be a bit of a shock to me, and I consider that damn good writing.

 

[SimonDoom]

Vent your anger against the shoe—rage against the hummer. The roach may annoy, and the needle might tickle, but ultimately, they all end up in their proper place, subdued and humbled.

And on the pedestal, these words appear:
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

PB Shelley

 

[yowser]

As a reader, for me the continental divide on Lit is when a story no longer reads like a porn script, but has roped me one way or another into one or more of the characters' emotional landscape.

Once I am in a character's head, however slightly, things become vastly more interesting. If you can provide a quirky plot, or a slight twist on the expected outcomes, then there's gold.

 

[mirafrida]

I don't understand the question. You seem to be saying, "It's not my kink, but I can see the story is erotic."

i read the OP that way too.

Reading i don't seek out stuff that misses my kinks - though I've certainly read stories that did end up missing my kinks, but were well written, and possessed an undeniable emotional spark that was erotic in nature. One can't help but respect that.

Writing, i do stuff i would like and don't make any real effort to broaden my portfolio to appeal to other people's kinks. (And honestly, whether they are "stroke" or "erotica" i wouldn't venture to say)

So i guess the upshot is that I'm rather parochial about it.

 

[Kittten32]

I enjoy a good story that's non-stroke but definitely erotic. It is possible for me. I like to think I just published such a story, but who knows. It really depends on how you look at it.

I prefer non-stroke stories cuz a lot of times, when they aren't meant to be stroke stories, when they enter the sex, it's like, where did this come from? But I'm not sure if those come from erotic stories or not.

 

[Djmac1031]

Erotica...
A story that titillates, or arouses. It is not the depiction of the physical mechanics. It is the prelude. The seduction rather than the act itself.
Perhaps the chase rather than the catch...
Personally, I love the erotic elements of a story. When it comes to the sex scenes, I skip them entirely.
For me it is the emotional elements of the story.
We are all different thankfully. What arouses me, will leave others cold...
That's life, and long may it last...
A wonderfully crafted seduction IMO is far nicer than the in and out of the act...

Cagivagurl

Came to say sorta the same thing. Although I don't skip the sex scenes, unless they're too long / too many.

But I do tend to find the scenario more "erotic" than the sex itself.

Even if the story is more or less a "stroker," if the scenario in which it's presented doesn't interest me, or bores me, no amount of sex scenes will fix that.

But if it's a fun, unique, INTERESTING scenario, with some build up, maybe some tension, and some well written characters that make me care whether they get laid or not... I find that kind of stuff "erotic."

I certainly don't masturbate to every story I read here, and that's rarely even my goal anymore when I pick a story.

What I look for more are stories that stimulate my imagination more than my nether regions.

If they get things tingly while reading, even better of course.

 

[MelissaBaby]

I just finished reading JG Ballard's Crash, which is an novel about a group of people with an erotic obsession with car crashes. It's not a stroker (at least, not to me--maybe it is to some), but it's undeniably erotic. It's well-written and it captures the dark, obsessive, and sometimes dangerous aspects of erotic desire. I get its erotic appeal even if the particular subject is one that doesn't seem at all erotic to me personally.

I think the whole point was to treat something that virtually no reader would find erotic as if it were, in order to create the distance to examine the whole subject of erotic desire more dispassionately. I'm not sure where Ballard thought that was going to take his readers, but it seems to me that he proved the point that the concept of eroticism in and of itself is erotic on a subliminal level. In other words, if something turns other people on, the fact that they are turned on triggers erotic impulses in others, even if they can't relate to the eroticism of the subject.

The whole idea is more easily expressed by the old lady in When Harry Met Sally; "I'll have what she's having."

 

[SimonDoom]

I think the whole point was to treat something that virtually no reader would find erotic as if it were, in order to create the distance to examine the whole subject of erotic desire more dispassionately. I'm not sure where Ballard thought that was going to take his readers, but it seems to me that he proved the point that the concept of eroticism in and of itself is erotic on a subliminal level. In other words, if something turns other people on, the fact that they are turned on triggers erotic impulses in others, even if they can't relate to the eroticism of the subject.

The whole idea is more easily expressed by the old lady in When Harry Met Sally; "I'll have what she's having."

I think you put this better than I did, and captured what I was trying to get at with the thread.

When I come up with erotic story ideas I don't always limit myself to the things that personally turn me on or tend to bring me to orgasm. I like the idea of writing about weird topics that I can try to present as erotic despite their weirdness and my personal distance from them. I think that's what Ballard did, and it's something I want to attempt as well. I would find it artistically and erotically fulfilling, for example, to write a good gay male story that turned on people who like that category, even though it's a subject that doesn't do anything for me personally.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I think that's what Ballard did, and it's something I want to attempt as well. I would find it artistically and erotically fulfilling, for example, to write a good gay male story that turned on people who like that category, even though it's a subject that doesn't do anything for me personally.

I hear you, but I think folk can always spot when your heart's not in it, or you're faking it just for the sake of it. That certain je ne sais quoi has got to be there, I reckon.

Life's too short to write something that doesn't interest me. Why would you paint a room pink, if you don't like pink? That's a bit of a head scratcher for me.

 

[JaxRhapsody]

I hear you, but I think folk can always spot when your heart's not in it, or you're faking it just for the sake of it. That certain je ne sais quoi has got to be there, I reckon.

Life's too short to write something that doesn't interest me. Why would you paint a room pink, if you don't like pink? That's a bit of a head scratcher for me.

I guess it's like writing characters that don't reflect ones self?

 

[ElectricBlue]

I guess it's like writing characters that don't reflect ones self?

It's more about wondering why you'd bother write a kink that does nothing for you, which is subtly different, I think.

I see erotica as tapping into my sexual psyche, I don't see it as an intellectual exercise. I'd go write something else entirely, if that was my goal.

 

[Bazzle]

I would say that most of my stories are non stroke fiction.
Yes I am playing to a fetish, ramping up addiction or process.
But the need for sex is minimal in the stories?
Therefore it's not stroke!
B

 

[BobbyBrandt]

There's no reason why it can't include the carry through.

One very good reason is a desire to get it represented by an agent or published by most mainstream literary publishers. Soft-core versus hard-core, as it were.

If done successfully, maintaining strictly "teasingly" erotic situations among the characters will arouse the readers, and not turn off the larger marketplace.

Listed by agents and publishers as simply "erotica", is typically a step beyond the more traditional "romance" genre and becoming more acceptable every day. They do differentiate it from "porn" by the detail of the acts provided, or the "carry-through".

 

[AG31]

We all get the idea of "stroke" erotica: a story that helps somebody get off, in one way or another. But what about "non-stroke" erotica? Does that mean something to you? If so what? I'm not talking about non-erotic stories. I'm talking about stories that are definitely erotic, whatever that means, but that aren't necessarily something you'd want to get off to.

I just finished reading JG Ballard's Crash, which is an novel about a group of people with an erotic obsession with car crashes. It's not a stroker (at least, not to me--maybe it is to some), but it's undeniably erotic. It's well-written and it captures the dark, obsessive, and sometimes dangerous aspects of erotic desire. I get its erotic appeal even if the particular subject is one that doesn't seem at all erotic to me personally.

Great question! I've just returned to Lit. about 2 weeks ago, and have been finally learning how to negotiate the forums. Confusing though they might be to a novice, they're absolutely great for fostering conversation once you learn the tools. Just today I found out I could search for a word in all threads! I searched for "stroke" for the same reasons that fostered your post, I think.

I do appreciate really good writing of any kind. Even if it features erotic perspectives that don't work for me. Although, to be honest, I don't choose to read them if I understand them well ahead of time. My go-to example for this is Georges Bataille. He writes like a bat out of hell (cliches are allowed in posts, right??), but his content is surely not arousing for me.

But are you talking about stuff that is meant to be arousing by the author, but just doesn't work for you? Or are you talking about someone writing about "erotic" content with no intent to arouse the reader? I can't think of an example of such a thing. Can anyone else?

In my mind, the thing that distinguishes erotica from romance, or "literature," with sex scenes, is the intent to bring sexual arousal to the reader. "You know it when you see it."

I think "stroke" should be more narrowly defined as just describing sexual activity without a lot of attention to language. I want to promote the concept of "pure" erotica, like The Story of O, where there's virtually nothing that doesn't contribute to arousal on the part of a reader who's "into" the scene. No back story. No self reflection. But the writing is careful. A "stroker" in my mind is a story with the same absence of attention to plot and character, but also absence of attention to the craft of writing.

But back to your question:

In your own reading or writing, do you carve out a space for erotica of that kind? Do you enjoy erotica that takes you to places that don't erotically interest you in a real-life way?

I carve out a space for "appreciation," but not total "enjoyment."

I do, often. I enjoy it when an author can make me erotically interested in a subject that in real life wouldn't interest me at all.

My appreciation is the same whether the book purports to be "erotica" or not. In other words, I don't "enjoy" erotic experiences as portrayed in a story unless they're the kind that turn me on.

And, to address the question implied in your title. For me, until the notion of "pure" ertoca takes hold, there's no such thing as "non-stroke erotica" as viewed from the author's perspective. If it's not designed to arouse the reader, it's not erotica.

 

[AG31]

Though I assume the draw of that is more from a sense of curiosity and want of understanding versus any tangential interest to the subject at hand. (it baffles me people are so quick to attach significance to research/writing as proof of "want' when writing is as much about working through/figuring out this oddball world to me (and the page just happens to be the venue that works best for me)

Yes, well said.

 

[AG31]

I've read stroker stories that were not only highly erotic but also literary masterpieces. I like to think I've written them. I certainly tried to do so.

Absolutely!! Well said! The Story of O is my go-to example. And I've been delighted to have a reviewer pan one of my books for being like "old school French erotica."

Can you point me to some of those stories? Just this a.m. I made a post in Feedback about the Hardesty series, talking about how it "worked" for me even though it wasn't a literary masterpiece. I'd like to read some of your other stuff, but you've got too much to just work through all of them.

EDIT: Never mind. I see where you gave a link to Tilan.

 

[AG31]

There's no reason why it can't include the carry through.

I totally agree! There's a way to write lovingly and carefully about even though most humiliating or painful sexual acts. Again, as elsewhere in this thread, I point to The Story of O.

 

[AG31]

I feel like some people use stroker as a category and some use it as a derogatory term, so you're unlikely to get agreement here.

But, it's erotica if it's meant to excite the reader, and it's good writing if you're drawn into the world and you care about the characters, no matter how long it is.

Totally agree on all points.

 

[AG31]

What I think of as "non-stroke" erotica is about the relationship that leads to sex, and about the story that wraps around it. It's far from non-erotic.

This sounds to me like you're describing romance with, maybe, some good sex scenes.

 

[AG31]

It's more about wondering why you'd bother write a kink that does nothing for you, which is subtly different, I think.

I see erotica as tapping into my sexual psyche, I don't see it as an intellectual exercise. I'd go write something else entirely, if that was my goal.

Yes. It's a question here on Lit. Not so much a question elsewhere, as the answer is "to earn money."

 

[AG31]

and is off softly sobbing in the summerhouse

 

[AG31]

I hear you, but I think folk can always spot when your heart's not in it, or you're faking it just for the sake of it. That certain je ne sais quoi has got to be there, I reckon.

I think there certainly is a je ne sais quoi quality to stories where the heart's not on it. But I don't think stories where that is not present are "faking it." I think people who are taking pride/pleasure in the craft of erotica can write super stories, even if they are missing that quality. In fact, I think that quality is rare, at least as I'm understanding it. I stumbled across one the other day which convinced me that it sprang from a fantasy that the author had been relishing for a long time. I don't know if the writing is "good," but it certainly swept me along, in large part because of what seemed to be authenticity (although it's no way real world - not fantasy either). It's Pleasure and Pain. The author only wrote one and never participated in the forums. I'd be interested to hear if any of you agree with me.