Erotica or Porn?

[GforGraham]

I have been told I was wrong, something totally normal in my life, about what I thought erotic was defined.
I got my definition from reading the stories here on what is purported to be an erotic literature site. First mistake obviously as every story I have read contains sex, the more adjectives and adverbs included the better.
So I looked up my trusty dictionary and, yes erotic is about sexual stimulation.
Now I guess you could say that erotic stories is about stimulating the reader in which I guess sex would be classed as the stimulant.
If you take the alternative view that the story must being stimulated to be erotic then you would have no descriptive sex, just inference to such.
Comparing the following sentences.
I think this would be story that is erotic to the reader:
Linda was wetting herself with cream juice and climaxed as John began his humping.
Now here is a story that is itself erotic:
They had sex. (I hope this is not too much for erotic feelings)

I know which would be more erotic to the reader, and which would be called erotic writing.

So why write this post to which everyone can jump and tell me why I am wrong.
Should we expect erotic stories here, or stories with explicitly described sex.

I think I stand by what I originally said in another thread, somewhere. Something like this.
Porn = explicit sex with a little non essential story around it containing characters with at least names although this is not really needed.
Erotica = story with plot, characters etc containing at least a little explicit sex.


note to self, don't watch tv when typing on computer.

 

[SeawitchSlave]

The definition makes sense to me. Erotica to mean tends to mean sensual, without sex necessarily coming into it although it may. Pornography is skipping any story and any plot, just to get to the sex.

 

[beachbum1958]

I quite like Isabel Allende's definition:

'Erotica is using a feather; pornography is using the whole chicken'

 

[lovecraft68]

I quite like Isabel Allende's definition:

'Erotica is using a feather; pornography is using the whole chicken'

I agree, porn is just in your face, no build up, nothing to the imagination, just here it is.

Erotica is the written form of foreplay, it starts off slow, it gets familiar with you, it gets you worked up, it gets you wanting it, then it takes you home.

 

[Handley_Page]

To my mind,
'Erotic' is slightly sensual, more of feelings and mental impressions.
It's best when it is part of a story.

'Pornographic' is very descriptive of the physical bits involved.

A really good story is one where, if you took out the porn, you'd still have a decent story.

 

[Hypoxia]

I have often mentioned my triage:

Non-Erotic: Sex is not essential to the story.
Erotic: Sexual arousal is essential.
Pr0n: Sex IS the story.

Straightforward strokers are pr0n. Nothing wrong with that. Sometimes a fuck is only a fuck, hard, fast, nasty. Erotica is foreplay, buildup, anticipation, sensuality. I have written strokers. I'm now writing a romance with virtually no explicit sex. But it's erotic.

 

[le_kitty]

Interesting.

I've never really thought about it, but when I do write a scene with sex in it, it's the foreplay, the emotions, the back and forth, the dirty words, that's fun to write. I'm still hoping to nail it one day. But that's what I look for in other people's work, it doesn't have to be sweet, it can be very dirty, but most of all, I want a window into a characters mind and not simply what they are doing physically. Writing about the physical act of sex is boring as hell for me so it's generally contained in a couple sentences. But when a writer gives me the character, their motivations, their desires... and how that informs their actions, now that's hot. If that's erotica, then porn does nothing for me But well written porn can still be like that.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

I would tweak this a bit.

There's no reason a straightforward stroker can't be both erotic and literary.

There's a myth out there that there's some kind of insta-orgasm story everybody uses as a kind of baseline to say Well my writing's more than THAT. Does it really exist?

If a story brings you to the point of the big O, it's done something right.

There are stories out there I consider little more than pure, 100% fetish, with just enough story to get it on the page, and I admire them just as much. Doing a fetish and doing it right is a big feat.

Lit-erotica exists on a spectrum with the pure fetish pulling one way and the so-called "literary" pulling in the other. They are different, but it really irks me when the literary half DEFINES itself by distancing itself from the other.

But the Fetish pole can look at the Literary pole and think "poser."

This is a bit of rant not directed towards your comments.

I have often mentioned my triage:

Non-Erotic: Sex is not essential to the story.
Erotic: Sexual arousal is essential.
Pr0n: Sex IS the story.

Straightforward strokers are pr0n. Nothing wrong with that. Sometimes a fuck is only a fuck, hard, fast, nasty. Erotica is foreplay, buildup, anticipation, sensuality. I have written strokers. I'm now writing a romance with virtually no explicit sex. But it's erotic.

 

[lovecraft68]

I would tweak this a bit.

There's no reason a straightforward stroker can't be both erotic and literary.

There's a myth out there that there's some kind of insta-orgasm story everybody uses as a kind of baseline to say Well my writing's more than THAT. Does it really exist?

If a story brings you to the point of the big O, it's done something right.

There are stories out there I consider little more than pure, 100% fetish, with just enough story to get it on the page, and I admire them just as much. Doing a fetish and doing it right is a big feat.

Lit-erotica exists on a spectrum with the pure fetish pulling one way and the so-called "literary" pulling in the other. They are different, but it really irks me when the literary half DEFINES itself by distancing itself from the other.

But the Fetish pole can look at the Literary pole and think "poser."

This is a bit of rant not directed towards your comments.

There's nothing more annoying than seeking out a particular kink then finding out the author of the story has no clue what its about, or turns it into some arsty fartsy piece with a 'deeper meaning' know the platform and know the audience, if I'm reading a foot fetish story or CFNM I want that, not some type of Soliloquy.

 

[GoldenCojones]

...
I think I stand by what I originally said in another thread, somewhere. Something like this.
Porn = explicit sex with a little non essential story around it containing characters with at least names although this is not really needed.
Erotica = story with plot, characters etc containing at least a little explicit sex.
...

Like most definitions I see, IMHO these are way too narrow.

I write Porn. I don't make bones about that. But my stories have plot and I at least attempt to build interesting characters. I define porn as a story that has very graphic explicit sex in it because I see the graphic explicit sex as the defining feature. Porn can have a story; it can have a plot. It can have good three D characters who love, feel, care, hate, cry and much more.

Erotica again IMHO is a wide range as well. It can have sex, even lots of sex and it can describe that sex, but it needs to soften it make it more palatable to the, ahem, more sensitive reader.

I don't think "They had sex" is erotic. It is still, for lack of a better word, rough.

Erotica, in my mind would say, "They came together, their bodies and minds melding into one as blissful ecstasy enveloped them."
Erotica uses euphemisms such as "petals" and "member" instead of porn terms like "pussy" and "cock"

So I guess what I'm saying is that I see both forms of writing as broader than your definition. But hey, what the hell do I know. I write porn

 

[NotWise]

Lit-erotica exists on a spectrum with the pure fetish pulling one way and the so-called "literary" pulling in the other. They are different, but it really irks me when the literary half DEFINES itself by distancing itself from the other.

I like stories that have a little meat to them -- something integrated into it that might be thought-provoking. A story can be hot when it's first read, then simply forgotten afterwards if there's nothing more to it. With a little more value in it a story can be hot when it's read and hot over-and-over later when the reader recalls the story, or maybe shares it with a significant other.

 

[Gorza]

The question is a subjective one, but still we each keep a vague threshold between the erotic and the pornographic.

Without sounding too much the dictionary, the original Greek terms elicit some of the distinction. Pornography is writing/depiction about/by prostitutes: πορνογράϕος (pornográphos), the γραφή (graphē) of a πόρνη (pórnē). Erotica is the genre dedicated to sexual love: ἐρωτικά (erōtiká), the things of ἔρως (érōs), love, even sexual love, personified by Eros (Cupid).

Pornography often bypasses my brain in order to turn me on. Sometimes this is of necessity, as, if I thought about it, I would laugh at its improbabilities. Erotica is what stirs my imagination. As they say, the brain is the greater sexual organ. I can be far more turned on by that which stirs my imagination, and it can continue to turn me on with repeated thought. Naturally, the written word demands more of the mind than visual representation. Though that need not be the way of all things; there are stories on Lit where I would have to disengage my analytic function in order to be aroused.

 

[sr71plt]

I have been told I was wrong, something totally normal in my life, about what I thought erotic was defined.
I got my definition from reading the stories here on what is purported to be an erotic literature site. First mistake obviously as every story I have read contains sex, the more adjectives and adverbs included the better.
So I looked up my trusty dictionary and, yes erotic is about sexual stimulation.
Now I guess you could say that erotic stories is about stimulating the reader in which I guess sex would be classed as the stimulant.
If you take the alternative view that the story must being stimulated to be erotic then you would have no descriptive sex, just inference to such.
Comparing the following sentences.
I think this would be story that is erotic to the reader:
Linda was wetting herself with cream juice and climaxed as John began his humping.
Now here is a story that is itself erotic:
They had sex. (I hope this is not too much for erotic feelings)

I know which would be more erotic to the reader, and which would be called erotic writing.

So why write this post to which everyone can jump and tell me why I am wrong.
Should we expect erotic stories here, or stories with explicitly described sex.

I think I stand by what I originally said in another thread, somewhere. Something like this.
Porn = explicit sex with a little non essential story around it containing characters with at least names although this is not really needed.
Erotica = story with plot, characters etc containing at least a little explicit sex.


note to self, don't watch tv when typing on computer.

Yep, I still disagree with you on erotica. Sexual stimulation isn't the same thing as sexual fulfillment. It's the stimulation that makes it erotic, not the completion of a sex act.

And there's nothing in a definition of erotica as sexual stimulation that requires plot or characterization.

You are just bringing issues into the definition that aren't ipso facto there.

 

[DreamCloud]

The best erotica I have ever read is the Kushiel's Legacy series by Jacqueline Carey. I can still see the plot in my mind. I still wonder what would have happened if the main characters took a different path.

The best porn I've read is...... I don't remember.

Erotica stays with you!

 

[HeyAll]

The best differential I've heard is "if you have to think about it, then it's erotica."

That makes the most sense. With porn you don't have to think, you know immediately what it is. Erotica is more of a mix between blatant arousal and art (or whatever).

 

[GforGraham]

Yep, I still disagree with you on erotica. Sexual stimulation isn't the same thing as sexual fulfillment. It's the stimulation that makes it erotic, not the completion of a sex act.

And there's nothing in a definition of erotica as sexual stimulation that requires plot or characterization.

You are just bringing issues into the definition that aren't ipso facto there.

Yes I partly agree, but this website is devoted to stories. So ipso factoing all the stuff about stories is included. You cannot have a porn or erotic story without the writing. And even if you only write a little paragraph describing just the sex or erotic act you cannot do this without some or the other story stuff.

I also point to part of my original post that is the story erotic to the reader or is the story erotic in itself.

Besides I just love it when one person sets himself as the be all and end all of knowledge and if you think differently then you are wrong. Sounds like my worm-in-laws.

I always concede that I am wrong. I know this because everybody keeps telling me this. So it does seem pointless to argue with me as I am knowingly wrong. I write wrong things to give rise to comment so that the 'knowledgeable' ones can feel better about themselves that they have set an imbecile like me on the right path. "See everyone the idiot writing this is so wrong as you can see because I am right."

Disagreeing about topics brings out different issues never before thought about. That is how many great inventions came about, well that and prize money.

This topic got me thinking about a short story idea that I sent in tonight, my time of course. I mean it is 3:30am here and just spent 30 minutes pumping out a silly story and not even sure where it should go, but will find a spot.

To actually explain what I really think defines porn and erotica would take much more than a single line. I don't even want top start as it would possibly get to long and I would forget what I started saying. To discuss it intelligently should actually be done on a real forum where you at least know the people you are discussing things with. Too many trolls visit open forums and the topic gets lost.

OK if you are still with me, here is a thought about the difference between porn and erotica. you can have two photographs showing similar naked person. Perhaps it is a female person shown lying on a bed. The first shows her on her tummy and looking sexily at the camera. The other has similar on tummy but the knee is bent to the side with leg still fully on the bed. It gives a message that she could be in the process of lifting her body, perhaps her rump into the air.
Maybe she has a smile and a flirty look on her face instead of a sexual look.

The porn shot is obvious as it just contains a naked body. The erotic shot contains the impression of more, and gives a more sensual message to the viewer. The model becomes a real person instead of a camera model.

Then again what do I know. Wrong again doofus. Get back to your worms.

Anyway as much fun as it is to bicker in an open forum I have better things to waste time on. Time to leave forums again until the urge gets the better of me.

 

[RPgirl2016]

Simplest explanation of the difference:

Erotica is a lot of story with a little sex.
Porn is a lot of sex with a little story.

 

[jehoram]

The best differential I've heard is "if you have to think about it, then it's erotica."

Kinda like a definition I read here on this forum a few years ago: If you can remember anything of the plot after your orgasm, it's erotica. Otherwise, it's porn.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

There's nothing more annoying than seeking out a particular kink then finding out the author of the story has no clue what its about, or turns it into some arsty fartsy piece with a 'deeper meaning' know the platform and know the audience, if I'm reading a foot fetish story or CFNM I want that, not some type of Soliloquy.

I'm the opposite. If it's just about a fetish, I'm bored. I can get that faster from a porn video and in general I don't bother because pure mechanics and a monomaniacal focus on a single idea don't do much for me. If I was simply into girls' feet (I'm not) there's not going to be anything you can write in a story that's going to beat a well done video.

It's the emotions and the inner world that matter. And very few videos (especially in porn) do a good job with those.

I've seen some CMNF pictures that have sent my imagination (etc) soaring, though.

 

[SlightlyGone]

Gasper Noe is erotica: shitty movies, hardcore sex that is not the focus of the shitty movie ...

Rocco Siffredi is porn: no shitty movie, all hardcore, intense sex. Much better than Gasper Noe.

... One in the same as far as I'm concerned.

 

[sr71plt]

Simplest explanation of the difference:

Erotica is a lot of story with a little sex.
Porn is a lot of sex with a little story.

Don't agree with this one either. It's working the word "erotica" too hard. For erotica, all you need is sexual arousal--it can be limited to emotions invoked. You don't need a complete story and you don't need the sex to be fulfilled.

(And porn doesn't need a story at all.)

You guys are overthinking and overtaxing this.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Simplest explanation of the difference:

Erotica is a lot of story with a little sex.
Porn is a lot of sex with a little story.

That covers a lot of cases, but I don't think it's watertight.

For example, John Donne's Love's Progress and To His Mistress Going To Bed are pretty much entirely about sexual desire, with no storyline to speak of beyond "man appreciates woman's naked body". One of his most famous condenses to "hey this flea bit both of us so we should have sex".

Yet those would generally be filed under "erotica" not "porn". So I don't think it's enough to say that erotica is stuff that has other bits in it besides the sex. I will say that a lot of good erotica has enough material that it'd still be a serviceable story without the sex, but not all.

Slight digression: despite the Victorians' reputation for prudery, they actually churned out a lot of thinly-disguised porn. Stuff like The Victory of Faith: two naked women sleeping together, holding one another tenderly, but if you look carefully at the background there's a cross scratched on the wall. Which means they're Christians about to be martyred, which means this is officially Religious Art and hence acceptable for Respectable People to appreciate.

IMHO "porn" vs "erotica" is largely a false distinction created for the sake of respectability. Sure, there are differences of degree between works in how much sex they have and how that sex is handled, and I have my preferences within that.

But I think a lot of the terminology is about people trying to separate their own tastes (highbrow and respectable, with "serious literary or artistic value") from those other people and their base urges.

 

[Gorza]

That covers a lot of cases, but I don't think it's watertight.

For example, John Donne's Love's Progress and To His Mistress Going To Bed are pretty much entirely about sexual desire, with no storyline to speak of beyond "man appreciates woman's naked body". One of his most famous condenses to "hey this flea bit both of us so we should have sex".

Yet those would generally be filed under "erotica" not "porn". So I don't think it's enough to say that erotica is stuff that has other bits in it besides the sex. I will say that a lot of good erotica has enough material that it'd still be a serviceable story without the sex, but not all.

Slight digression: despite the Victorians' reputation for prudery, they actually churned out a lot of thinly-disguised porn. Stuff like The Victory of Faith: two naked women sleeping together, holding one another tenderly, but if you look carefully at the background there's a cross scratched on the wall. Which means they're Christians about to be martyred, which means this is officially Religious Art and hence acceptable for Respectable People to appreciate.

IMHO "porn" vs "erotica" is largely a false distinction created for the sake of respectability. Sure, there are differences of degree between works in how much sex they have and how that sex is handled, and I have my preferences within that.

But I think a lot of the terminology is about people trying to separate their own tastes (highbrow and respectable, with "serious literary or artistic value") from those other people and their base urges.

BT citing Donne is definitely erotic, not pornographic though.

 

[Ewobbit]

My old football coach used something on us called the K.I.S.S. principle. It stands for "keep it stupid simple".

At the risk of being overly simplistic;

Erotica; you can read on the bus without worrying who noticed the title

Porn; you wonder if you adequately cleared your browser history

Ergo, even Debbie Does ____ has potential to be pornographic or erotic

 

[ElectricBlue]

In other words, porn is what the other guy reads....

But I think a lot of the terminology is about people trying to separate their own tastes (highbrow and respectable, with "serious literary or artistic value") from those other people and their base urges.