New spins

[RoperTrace]

Someone blind from birth would have no point of reference.

'Your golden hair gleams like the morning sun.'

What would that mean to someone who has never seen gold or the sun?

It would be the description of the blind-from-birth character. She wouldn't be able to view or describe herself with a mirror, hence the casual observer, to give the reader a reference.

 

[PrimalDual]

As I say, porn can be literary.

Do you draw a distinction between erotica and porn?

 

[FrancesScott]

Do you draw a distinction between erotica and porn?

I think erotica is literary porn. It’s just semantics. Erotica, or erotic literature, are terms I sometimes use myself, but it’s all just porn. Again, I don’t look down on the term. Some do clearly.

 

[RetroFan]

When someone's fantasy finally comes true, it usually disappoints the person, or isn't as spectacular as they'd originally thought.

That's probably true in real life, but in erotic fiction it wouldn't work so well if that's how the story turned out.

For example in one of my stories, the stepfather narrator lusts over his pretty stepdaughter, a major factor in this being that his wife (and obviously the girl's mother) while attractive herself is close to frigid in bed, unresponsive to or completely resistant to sex.

If in the story the stepfather after getting into the stepdaughter's pants found that she was as bad at sex as her mother and just lay there looking bored the whole time, it would be a let-down not only for the stepfather, but for those reading the story too.

 

[PrimalDual]

I think erotica is literary porn. It’s just semantics. Erotica, or erotic literature, are terms I sometimes use myself, but it’s all just porn. Again, I don’t look down on the term. Some do clearly.

You didn't ask for this tangent so I will leave it at just this. Using dictionary.com as my reference, erotica is "written works, usually fiction, dealing with sexual love" while porn is "sexually explicit ... writings ... produced to elicit sexual arousal." While neither is defined in terms of the other, I see them describing erotica as encompassing more, while porn's got a specific intent to either lubricate or stretch one's undergarment.

Neither one is described in terms of literary quality or merit.

I was surprised to discover while looking into this that the website has a specific page for it: https://www.dictionary.com/compare-words/erotica-vs-porn, The question must up more than occasionally.

If it were a Venn diagram or similar, to dictionary.com porn would be a subset of erotica, or nearly so, while to you erotica is a subset of porn.

It's just semantics (and I didn't research other sources), but if you choose to think of it your way, expect to be perplexingly misunderstood at times.

 

[FrancesScott]

If it were a Venn diagram or similar, to dictionary.com porn would be a subset of erotica, or nearly so, while to you erotica is a subset of porn.

I think you mean an Euler diagram. Venn diagrams have an intersection, but no wholly contained subsets. I’ll keep using my terminology, but thanks for playing.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

That's probably true in real life, but in erotic fiction it wouldn't work so well if that's how the story turned out.

For example in one of my stories, the stepfather narrator lusts over his pretty stepdaughter, a major factor in this being that his wife (and obviously the girl's mother) while attractive herself is close to frigid in bed, unresponsive to or completely resistant to sex.

If in the story the stepfather after getting into the stepdaughter's pants found that she was as bad at sex as her mother and just lay there looking bored the whole time, it would be a let-down not only for the stepfather, but for those reading the story too.

Ah, but if the stepdaughter was amenable to learning and becoming interested, you've got a whole potential plot arc. If the stepdaughter happens to talk to Mom about how great sex can be, then you could get a whole second act going.

My only I/T story was even called Only One Bed, Again! and didn't do much subversion - it went from shared bathroom leading to accidental close sight of brothers cock, then lonely older brother, sister wants to make him happy, two nights on a trip have them sleeping next to each other, they're mistaken for a married couple, so the idea is put into their heads, then, exhausted, they get put into the honeymoon suite and just don't resist being thrown together any more. Pretty unoriginal.

I don't think I've done the mirror thing, beyond someone checking before entering an event. I usually have the narrator describe other characters and reveal bits about themselves in the process, e.g. "I lean my head on his shoulder. He's tall; I'm only five-nine, so it works. I tuck my long hair back behind my ear and listen..."

Or in response to surroundings or events:
I tugged my leather jacket closer round my neck and strode down the station steps.

One other passenger alighted, but wandered away into the station car park. Middle-aged white man. I was glad I was wearing jeans, my Docs, and the blazer-like jacket -- it meant I wasn't obviously female, despite a long, low ponytail. Not a target, for a lecherous bloke late at night. Not that that stopped guys trying to pick me up almost every time I went on a brightly-lit Tube train. I was twenty-two, tall, slim, white with long dark hair and rosy cheeks -- your typical English rose, I guess, which might be why every lone foreign man seemed to want to give it a go. And half the locals.

It got tedious, which is why on the way home late I'd roughly tie my straight hair back, not reapply any lipstick, and remove any dangly earrings, hoping to avoid attention. Add a confident stride and men would simply step round me, muttering "all right, mate?", not looking closely. Much better, when wandering suburban London in the wee hours. (Gas Station Guy)

 

[Bramblethorn]

You didn't ask for this tangent so I will leave it at just this. Using dictionary.com as my reference, erotica is "written works, usually fiction, dealing with sexual love" while porn is "sexually explicit ... writings ... produced to elicit sexual arousal." While neither is defined in terms of the other, I see them describing erotica as encompassing more, while porn's got a specific intent to either lubricate or stretch one's undergarment.

In reality, there is not a sharp line between these things. Authors may have more than one purpose in mind when they write, and every reader has their own interpretation of the author's motives. Plenty of mainstream films not categorised as "porn" do contain content that was almost certainly intended to elicit arousal (Basic Instinct, e.g.) and plenty of posters here have talked in previous threads about the sexy content they've found in "mainstream" literature.

But most countries have some kind of law distinguishing between permitted (erotica) and restricted/forbidden (porn) depictions of sex, and that makes it very hard to have a nuanced conversation that recognises the shades of grey. People who are able to stay on the "permitted" side of things usually want to do so, which means denying any intention to provoke arousal (no matter how blatant it might be in their work). People who've decided to work on the "restricted" side of things, for whatever reason, are competing for audiences who are seeking out arousal and that often means soft-pedalling anything that isn't about arousal.

It's something that frustrates me about a lot of media, the way we separate the "sex" content from the "everything-else" content, which makes it hard to explore the interesting territory where those things interact. One of the things that draws me to Literotica is that it's a place that has a bit more room for that middle ground.

 

[PrimalDual]

In reality, there is not a sharp line between these things. Authors may have more than one purpose in mind when they write, and every reader has their own interpretation of the author's motives. Plenty of mainstream films not categorised as "porn" do contain content that was almost certainly intended to elicit arousal (Basic Instinct, e.g.) and plenty of posters here have talked in previous threads about the sexy content they've found in "mainstream" literature.

But most countries have some kind of law distinguishing between permitted (erotica) and restricted/forbidden (porn) depictions of sex, and that makes it very hard to have a nuanced conversation that recognises the shades of grey. People who are able to stay on the "permitted" side of things usually want to do so, which means denying any intention to provoke arousal (no matter how blatant it might be in their work). People who've decided to work on the "restricted" side of things, for whatever reason, are competing for audiences who are seeking out arousal and that often means soft-pedalling anything that isn't about arousal.

It's something that frustrates me about a lot of media, the way we separate the "sex" content from the "everything-else" content, which makes it hard to explore the interesting territory where those things interact. One of the things that draws me to Literotica is that it's a place that has a bit more room for that middle ground.

I think I'm with you on this. Though, the various shades you mention could mean I'm interpreting something wrongly, and this is already an inadvertent threadjack so I won't explore the several rabbit holes, intriguing though they are.

I was Yesterday Years Old when I learned the incontrovertible fact that erotica is "literary porn," which makes me question why the founders of this site chose a name that looks like a portmanteau, resulting in a perceived redundancy on a par with "ATM machine."

 

[Kumquatqueen]

I was Yesterday Years Old when I learned the incontrovertible fact that erotica is "literary porn," which makes me question why the founders of this site chose a name that looks like a portmanteau, resulting in a perceived redundancy on a par with "ATM machine."

It's a good definition, but I think it's more like one of those declining nouns:

I enjoy erotica.
You like porn.
They have weird-ass kinks.

 

[Rob_Royale]

Accepting the cliches and tropes as such and adding our own spin is what we do here.

I did a backseat loving story about a married woman but I put them in a fantasy world in the back of a covered wagon.

 

[StillStunned]

Cliché: the character watching themselves in the mirror.
New spin: the character is spying on someone else, via a mirror. They catch sight of their own reflection and see the guilt on their face.

 

[Bamagan]

Cliché: the character watching themselves in the mirror.
New spin: the character is spying on someone else, via a mirror. They catch sight of their own reflection and see the guilt on their face.

Or, for Dark Fairy Tale purposes, the Evil Queen uses her magic mirror to spy on Snow White's fun times.
Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who now is the horniest one of all?

 

[StillStunned]

Or, for Dark Fairy Tale purposes, the Evil Queen uses her magic mirror to spy on Snow White's fun times.
Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who's now is the horniest one of all?

I already did this for the Fairy Tales Writing Exercise: https://forum.literotica.com/threads/writing-exercise-8-fairy-tales.1618774/post-100382679

 

[Bazzle]

Or, for Dark Fairy Tale purposes, the Evil Queen uses her magic mirror to spy on Snow White's fun times.
Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who now is the horniest one of all?

I've written a dark take on that one too

https://www.literotica.com/s/sarah-white-a-smoking-fairy-tale

Smoking/Drinking/Voyeuring and the like

 

[Bamagan]

I've written a dark take on that one too

https://www.literotica.com/s/sarah-white-a-smoking-fairy-tale

Smoking/Drinking/Voyeuring and the like

Clearly it's an older spin than I realized!

Maybe a witch who uses a crystal testicle to scry?

(Guard your family jewels!)

 

[Bazzle]

Clearly it's an older spin than I realized!

Maybe a witch who uses a crystal testicle to scry?

(Guard your family jewels!)

Do have a quick read...its not that bad...the evil queen, is evil, there is prince, and Snow White is pretty and likes to go swimming in the nude.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

I vaguely recall .... something.... movie, TV show?

The other side of the mirror is a different world of sorts. Too fuzzy now, but might have been a surveillance or intelligence gathering operation, maybe 'earthly', maybe not. Only certain people/agents/entities could pass through.

Took the whole 'one way mirror' thing to extremes.

 

[NuclearFairy]

Hmm, lemme give the mirror one a try.

Stumbling sleepily into the bathroom, I rubbed at my gummy eyes until I arrived at my sink. Once I had thoughtlessly swept my messier than usual honeyed locks up into a hair clip I started making faces in the mirror to help wake myself up. Using my hands as well I deformed my freckled skin this way and that while sticking my tongue out or grinning at myself. I took one last look into my sparkling hazel eyes before reaching for my toothbrush, only to halt when I spotted the large bruise upon my shoulder.

I examined it in shock for half a minute before letting loose an indignant shriek. "Felix! I'm gonna fucking skin you!"

Soo, new spin, subversion, or same ole same ole?

 

[StillStunned]

Soo, new spin, subversion, or same ole same ole?

It could have felt fresh, but it goes a bit overboard with the "honeyed locks", "freckled skin" and "sparkling hazel eyes". If you can't imagine yourself having those thoughts about yourself, it will generally come across as forced.

You'd be better off with something like "The same face stared back at me as ever. The same reddish hair, the same freckles, the same eyes that Mum always said were hazel but just looked brown to me. But today something was off. I rubbed at my eyes again, waiting for my mind to catch what my eyes were trying to tell it. It was several moments before I noticed what was out of place: the bruise on my shoulder."

 

[Britva415]

It would be the description of the blind-from-birth character. She wouldn't be able to view or describe herself with a mirror, hence the casual observer, to give the reader a reference.

Would the reader need one?

If a first-person narrator is blind, their appearance simply isn't part of their experience. Except to the extent that other people tell them details of their own appearance. Is there even any reason that would have to happen for the story's sake? Describing them for the reader's sake isn't a plot requirement.

And I assume it's a first-person blind narrator we're talking about, because, if the narration weren't by the blind first person, then there wouldn't be any obstacle to get around, regarding "how to narrate that character's visual appearance."

 

[Britva415]

Cliché: the character watching themselves in the mirror.
New spin: the character is spying on someone else, via a mirror. They catch sight of their own reflection and see the guilt on their face.

I like this, because the act of looking in the mirror precipitates an event, an experience - something happens, story wise. It's not just shoehorning in a description for the reader as an easy trope of convenience for the author.

The only time I have had a character look in the mirror and had that yield any information for the reader was an instance where it was directly plot related and the character - not the reader, the character - needed the information they saw there. It wasn't just familiar-old-me hey let's step out of the action so I can spell it out for the reader.

Clumsy artifices like that are breaking the fourth wall without directly addressing the reader. But it's so transparently being done JUST to provide the reader with visual description that I count it as a stealth fourth wall break even though it doesn't directly address the reader.

 

[RoperTrace]

Would the reader need one?

If a first-person narrator is blind, their appearance simply isn't part of their experience. Except to the extent that other people tell them details of their own appearance. Is there even any reason that would have to happen for the story's sake? Describing them for the reader's sake isn't a plot requirement.

And I assume it's a first-person blind narrator we're talking about, because, if the narration weren't by the blind first person, then there wouldn't be any obstacle to get around, regarding "how to narrate that character's visual appearance."

Well if the reader doesn't need one, why bother to write or tell the story?

 

[Britva415]

Well if the reader doesn't need one, why bother to write or tell the story?

That is really going nuclear, isn't it. You can leave things out of the story without leaving out the entire story.

If it's important to the story, AND the story is being told by a blind character, then, nothing that character isn't aware of should be part of the story, should it.

If the reader needs it that bad, then why would one make a narrator who can't know, tell the story? Another character or an impersonal third-person narrator could tell it, if this info were critical to the story.

Alternatively, the blind narrator could say what IS important to their experience, and narrate how they received that information, if not with eyes. Visual appearance isn't included in that.

What element of plot does the visual appearance drive? That's what I was talking about. It's certainly possible to have a blind POV character narrate a story in which someone's visual appearance was a necessary element of what happened in the story, but, to say that there is no story without including visual appearance which the blind first-person narrator can't perceive is pretty extreme.

Anyway, I don't know whether you're talking about some specific story you actually wrote, or if we're both just speaking in generalizations. I'm generalizing, I'm not trying to say you fucked up specifically.

 

[NuclearFairy]

Speaking of blind, there is a story idea I've been kicking around in my head for a few years about a blind girl where there are no visual descriptions. But I don't think I'm up to doing it justice yet.