AwkwardMD and Omenainen Review Thread

[StillStunned]

I think that's a great idea. I thought about doing a thread as you did, but most of my stories are fairly long, and I don't think it's fair to expect people to read 20 pages just to critique.

I'll be doing some shorter pieces this year, maybe I'll put a couple up for comments.

I've focused on shorter pieces because they're easier to analyse in a forum post. But you could highlight a particular scene or fragment.

I've also thought about doing a few that aren't story-specific: for example how I do descriptions in different stories - male and female gaze, say - or paragraph structure. I've even come up with a phrase: the IKEA paragraph.

 

[AG31]

I'll be doing some shorter pieces this year, maybe I'll put a couple up for comments.

My latest mini-campaign is to get the Feedback forum woken up. (Aroused from sleep, not made politically correct.) I realize that AH gets way more traffic than Feedback, but may I suggest putting a short post in AH with a link to your Feedback post.

 

[AG31]

But you could highlight a particular scene or fragment.

I've recently done just that with bits that I thought were problematic. I got really helpful responses, resulting in changes that I have and will have submit for edit revisions.

I've also thought about doing a few that aren't story-specific: for example how I do descriptions in different stories - male and female gaze, say - or paragraph structure. I've even come up with a phrase: the IKEA paragraph.

Excellent.

 

[MediocreAuthor]

...grammar is rarely critiqued, and rarely this harshly. Plus these snippets add fuel.

Awkwardmd, July 7, 2023: “A simple example is the way I use short sentences and simpler word choices in my sex scenes to feed the animal brain that takes over. I want the reader to feel that breathless rush, and so when characters get naked my sentences get choppy. Bad grammar but who fucking cares. Simple. To the point. Tactile. All feeling, no thinking. Tongues, and panting, and nails scratching across my skin.” (Speaks for itself)

As someone who didn't really have a stake in this drama, ironically this is the second time the review of my story has been mentioned. Haha

That's fine. I'm very fond of that particular review. And the story. You can't imagine how fond I am of that particular story.

But I will say that in this instance, I believe you are missing the entire point of AMD's take on bad grammar (at least from their review of Eldritch Pact).

"Bad grammar but who fucking cares" sounds pretty damning when you present it to a reviewer who lambasted another work for bad grammar.

BUT you missed the context. This is at the beginning of the same review

I’ve talked elsewhere in this thread about my writing theory: everything is a tool. I think this is a good approach for learning because it helps give context to the process. Word choice is a tool. It’s an important tool, and it might be a little more important than, for example, POV (first versus third), but it’s a tool.

AMD is explaining that bad grammar (like everything else) can be a tool. Words and thoughts can get choppy and flawed in the heat of passion, and so improper grammar might be acceptable in, for example: certain instances like a first-person present-tense narrative where the narrator is near climax.

That is not the same as bad grammar used throughout a story.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Questioning the impartiality:
If I’m not mistaken, there was a prior disagreement of sorts between Omen vs Emily, right? Before the review, although perhaps after the request for a review. Also loosely around sex work.

As we know all too well, this is a sensitive topic with potential for animosity. Given that, I'd suggest, very gently, that even with the best intentions it might be unwise to raise such things on a standard of "if I'm not mistaken"; it might be better to check for specifics and link/quote them before adding something that could end up becoming fuel to the fire. Even if the recollection is correct, without giving specifics there's a risk that people fill the gaps with imaginings and we end up further away from a shared understanding of what happened.

In this case one option might be to use the advanced search functionality to look for posts by Omenainen mentioning EM, or vice versa, from before the date of the review.

With that looming in the background, perhaps a recusal would have been better? Or just admitting some sprite was involved in the review? Because to my memory and scanning (admittedly I don’t read walls of text (nor Walls of Ston of text,) so I could easily have missed it,) I don’t recall strict grammar rules being applied to dialogue as a regular occurrence in the awkward-omen reviews. So, dwelling solely on just that, the very first citation, prominent and lengthy with regard to grammar-within-dialog, it makes the review not seem typical. It makes it seem like a little revenge took place for the prior tiff or other history.

This has been said elsewhere, but given how much has been posted in the last view days it's easily missed, so I'll note it again: the issue that A & O were discussing with sentence fragments is not limited to dialogue. It can be seen elsewhere in the story, including the opening.

Had I written the review, I'd have chosen a non-dialogue example to make the point, in order to avoid this lengthy detour. But I don't think it's fair to go to "revenge" as a motivation for raising an issue that occurs prominently in the story, including non-dialogue passages. Isn't it easier to suppose that they genuinely saw this as a weakness and just didn't pick the ideal example for illustrating that point?

AMD is explaining that bad grammar (like everything else) can be a tool. Words and thoughts can get choppy and flawed in the heat of passion, and so improper grammar might be acceptable in, for example: certain instances like a first-person present-tense narrative where the narrator is near climax.

That is not the same as bad grammar used throughout a story.

Indeed, the latter makes it impossible to do the former effectively. It's the difference between highlighting key passages and highlighting the whole document.

 

[Andrew1968]

I haven’t spent much time reading this thread. I noted lots of comments and lots of views when I wandered around Story Feedback. It appeared to be valuable and interesting. Suddenly, this EmilyMiller story drama erupted in the Author’s Hangout and I came here to read about it.

I read Emily’s story and the review by Omenainen and thought the review was spot on and excellent. I didn’t realize high quality criticism of this sort was available here at Literotica. Obviously, I should have read the thread earlier, then I would have been aware of that fact. Thanks so much for what you do. It takes time and effort to provide good criticism. Thanks for adopting/maintaining a standard and comparing work against that standard.

I spent several years at art college, and I recall “crit sessions,” where staff and students would move from one sensitive artist’s work to the next and basically pick at it and pull it apart. It was a harrowing and at times humiliating experience, as if being subjected to "surgery with minimal anesthesia," but from that pain came growth, clarity, strength and at least some objectivity.

To Emily, if you’re reading this. I think you’ve written this story far too quickly. It comes across as rushed like you were in some mad dash to do the next thing and then the next. It comes across as unplanned, superficial and not completely thought out.

 

[mirafrida]

You could try what I've been doing over in the Hangout: choose a story (or an excerpt) and analyse it, explain what you were trying to achieve, why you choose a particular style or imagery. I always ask people to respect the story for what it is, just critique the aspects I've highlighted and discuss my thought processes.

A couple of other authors have posted their own threads too.

Thanks for the suggestion!

The fact is that there is a small group of people out there who enjoy what I do, fantasy-wise and style-wise. For them (as well as myself), I try to create interesting and well-written stories. In my mind, it's a creative endeavor, and if not "high art" then perhaps some sort of "art."

But what I've gradually come to internalize is that most people will very much not appreciate what I do, or find it in any way artistic, and that's fine. I can't blame them for feeling that way, and I have no desire to inflict my stuff on them. And I'd probably also be unwise to ask them to review my work publicly.

Well, when you think about the narrow group of people who would like my stories, and the even narrower set of people hanging out on the AH and Feedback forums and interested in talking about the process of writing, the overlap is small, and the number of potentially offended people is high. So I try to avoid going into the weeds of my stories, and stick to discussing general technical issues. If any other writer out there has seen my stories, and did happen to like them, and actually wants to engage in a discussion of the creative process, they'd be welcome to PM me.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

All right, here it is. 1/2



I first intended to write only something along the lines of improving the reviewing process, because I think that there are things you could improve in your approach. These would be friendly suggestions only, of course. To make my motivation clear, I have voiced my support for your reviewing thread a few times before because I truly think it is a good thing. You have also established the tone of the thread and there are plenty of earlier reviews for any potential reviewee to see. You also have a good number of your own stories on the website, so people can judge your own writing skills and make an informed decision. We are all adults here and we can make an adult decision.



That being said, I expected and hoped for this thing to die down before I wrote any of this, but it seems that isn't going to happen anytime soon. So, since it can't be helped, I decided to read the story in question, and, having obtained Emily's permission to review it, I now plan to review the story, compare it to your own review and comment on your review, AND do what I first wanted to do, which is write about the reviewing process itself.


Let's start. A Hard Day's Night, by @EmilyMiller.

The piece is what I would call a medium-length story that covers one (typical) day in the life of a sex worker named Mimi.


Technical things:

I have mixed impressions here. While Emily can clearly write good, coherent, grammatically sound sentences, she also makes plenty of mistakes, in punctuation mostly, but there are a few other mistakes as well. On many of those grammar errors the original review touched, with good reason in my opinion, but I will try to present some examples as well.

She gave a twirl, her skirt flicking outwards as she did. Offering just a glimpse of white panties. This construction doesn’t work in my opinion.

She gave a twirl, her skirt flicking outwards and offering just a glimpse of her white panties - This would be one of the right ways to write this.

To avoid repeating myself, I’ll just write the original sentence and then one of the ways it could have been written properly.


Mimi's sailor-themed school uniform owed more to Japan than her actual heritage, but customers seemed to like it; Alan was clearly no exception.

Mimi's sailor-themed school uniform owed more to Japan than her actual heritage, but customers seemed to like it, and Alan was clearly no exception.

Then she took pride in her work.

Then, she took pride in her work.

Alan seemed to relax a little. Mimi took a chance.

Alan seemed to relax a little, so Mimi took a chance.


Alan screwed his eyes closed. Put his hands on the back of Mimi's head, pushing her down onto him. And threw his head back.

Alan screwed his eyes closed, put his hands on the back of Mimi's head - pushing her down onto him, and threw his head back.

There are more such examples. While I can’t say that there is a massive number of such problematic spots, they do exist, and they break the flow of reading in a strange, WTF kind of way. Commas, semicolons, the way she starts certain sentences… Since we are at starting the sentences part, I’ll point out some, where starting with And or But works in her story, and where it doesn’t.

How much did these people know about their employer's peccadilloes? And did the employer even care? – an example of starting with And working

A grand, canopied bed was the most obvious element. But glass-topped and mahogany furniture was dotted around. – not working because BUT isn’t opposing anything.

“Put your hands on your knees. And look ahead, no peeking." – not working.

“Put your hands on your knees and look ahead. No peeking.” - this would work.


Moving on from the grammar and punctuation.


The story itself: This is the part where I will contest much, although not all of the original review.

The story resists categorization in the classical Lit sense, but I don’t see that as an issue at all, beyond the obvious problem of “In which category should I put this thing?” The story is a mix of kinks and themes, without truly committing to any of them. Maybe Fetish would have been the best place, but it is still irrelevant, except for maybe some category puritans giving the story a low score because of that.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

2/2​

Now, the heart of the matter.

I had no problem understanding the tone and the intention of this story. I have absolutely no idea if that is what Emily wanted to convey, but as I said, I latched on the idea of the story as I saw it on the very first page. That being said, I don’t understand why you felt the need to go look through comments to understand what she wanted to say with the story? If you felt that the story missed its point completely, then you should have simply said that the story failed to speak to you, and that would have been okay in my opinion. But going through comments and finding one where Emily said “Slice of life” and then taking that as an axiom is just wrong in this sense. Emily could have wrongfully used that term. She could have disagreed with what that term meant in contrast to the google definition you found and used. She could have just loosely meant slice of life in the sense that she just meant an episode in the life of a sex worker, but heavily romanticized in a way. Or anything else, really.

What I am trying to say is that it was wrong, on principle, to take author’s comment and then base the review on that comment. You should have just focused on how the story itself spoke to you. If it failed, it failed, and it would have been a valid point in your criticism. Yet this approach you took I can’t approve of. Once again, this is just my opinion.

The sex worker depiction:

This is where I take major issue with your approach. I’m not sure if you noticed, but out of 2.5k words of your review, you used 1.5k to point out how her portrayal of sex workers was unrealistic, without mincing the words, and without failing to convey your outrage. All of that based on Emily’s comment “Slice of Life”

I understand that this subject is touchy for you two. I understand that you two feel like activists in this sense, correct me if I am wrong here, and I can’t express anything but absolute and wholehearted support for your activism. But I also must criticize you for letting it seep into your review. Your outrage at Emily’s portrayal of sex work is quite obvious, and to me it shows some very counterproductive bias. 1.5k words out of 2.5k used just for that. I will, of course, say my view of this portrayal later, at the end of this review, because it is essential to put it into perspective along with the tone of the story, the way I saw it.

My suggestions for this thread

This is your thread and you make the rules. I’ve already said my thoughts about it at the beginning so I won’t repeat myself. But I would like to offer a few suggestions in hope that you might at least consider them.
I know you take pride in giving honest reviews, no matter how harsh they can end up being, and I am okay with that. You certainly haven’t given any false impressions in that sense. But I want to suggest introducing an additional touch.

Truth and honesty are all good, but as I am sure you know, we aren’t producing cans here. These are human beings pouring their souls into their stories. Being a teacher myself, I often have to think about how to approach a certain student, how to communicate it to them when they failed at something and how not to discourage them while doing so. The pedagogical approach. Since my school offers some courses for the adults as well, some of us have gone through some training on how to approach adults. Believe me, it is twice as hard, at least. Adults are much more sensitive about their mistakes being pointed out, especially if you are doing it publicly, in front of other random adults, so you always need to try to find proper words to convey such things.

The approach I described is what is lacking in this, and some other reviews that I saw in this thread, although I can’t claim that I have seen all of them, or even most of them. What should have followed all the criticism of Emily’s story is some positive, pedagogical approach. By that I don’t mean saying things that aren’t true to make her feel better. No, that would be deceiving her and giving her false hope. The problem is that you failed to recognize a single positive side to her story. You should have found some, and I believe there are plenty, and then offered it, together with all the criticism. The honey mixed with bitterness. It goes down the easiest that way.



My own opinion of the story:

I said I would come back to this. I offered plenty of criticism, and there will be some more, but first I want to say how I experienced this story. I never felt like this story aimed to be a realistic portrayal of sex work - not even close. I understood it as a heavily romanticized view of that same sex work, and in that sense it worked very well for me, and I can even say I enjoyed it mostly, even if the kinks and themes in it aren’t really my thing.

The MC, Mimi - aka Lauren, I saw as an homage to all the sex workers out there. She is portrayed as a sort of superhero sex worker who can get anywhere and fulfill all the needs of the clients, no matter what they are. Why do I see that as an homage? Because it paints sex workers in an obviously positive light. It paints them as compassionate, caring human beings. We also see Mimi play all the roles she needs to play to do her work well. Beyond the actual sex, that includes understanding her clients, judging their moods and level of arousal, offering a sympathetic ear when needed, negotiating with clients if needed, and so on. It shows how complex being a sex worker truly is, if only through the more positive sides of the work. In this story, we don’t see any of the ugly sides of that same work, and that is why I never thought the story was intended as realistic.

Imagine if she went for a truly realistic story? A sex worker, having to kiss, to endure the sweat, the alcohol or cigar breath of some random, likely unattractive person who is groping her, penetrating her, expecting her to blow him, to take his load on her face or mouth. I see her feeling disgust while performing her job, even if she is hiding it so as not to offend the client. It gives me the creeps even as I write this thing, and I really don’t think anyone would find that portrayal erotic. We ARE on Literotica, after all.

Yet even in this romanticized sense, giving WhatsApp to a random client is a complete WTF moment. It makes no sense. Also, the BDSM scene with the old guy is way over the top, not in the sense of kinks, but in the sense of realism, even in this romanticized view of the story that I experienced. Having read a few of Emily’s previous stories, I see that scene as touching on her own kinks, but it wasn’t done right, and your criticism of that same scene mostly stands, without a doubt. That scene should have been considerably milder to work even in this romanticized setting that I saw.

To conclude, I enjoyed Emily’s descriptive style and this romanticized, carefree vibe the story gave off, and I liked Mimi as a relatable, kind, and loving character. The scene at the end was heartwarming and sweet. Maybe a few hints would have made that twist better, but it worked well just the same. Overall, I enjoyed the story very much, considering it really isn’t my thing. I also experienced a couple of arousing moments, something I didn’t expect in such a story.

Good, descriptive storytelling with some hot moments, a positive vibe, but riddled with some grammar and punctuation issues. I hope this review gives some insight to Emily and others.

 

[MediocreAuthor]

Mimi's sailor-themed school uniform owed more to Japan than her actual heritage, but customers seemed to like it, and Alan was clearly no exception.

Am I stupid, or is that clearly a run-on sentence? It seems like you have three independent clauses joined by 2 conjunctions.

I don't mean to nit-pick, but in guide for grammar improvement, I couldn't help myself.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Am I stupid, or is that clearly a run-on sentence? It seems like you have three independent clauses joined by 2 conjunctions.

I don't mean to nit-pick, but in guide for grammar improvement, I couldn't help myself.

To be honest with you, I am hardly the expert here, as I am likely the only one here who isn't a native English speaker. The irony of me talking about English grammar to others isn't lost on me, believe me
The sentence sounds fine to me, but I might be wrong. Feel free to correct me - I would like to learn something as well

 

[AwkwardMD]

To be honest with you, I am hardly the expert here, as I am likely the only one here who isn't a native English speaker. The irony of me talking about English grammar to others isn't lost on me, believe me
The sentence sounds fine to me, but I might be wrong. Feel free to correct me - I would like to learn something as well

If I were editing that story, this is not a correction I'd make. I think it's stronger to take out that last comma. Alan is a feasible subset of Mimi's customers, so the concepts are related in a way that allows them to be expressed in a single passage.

Run-on's stem from attempting to convey too many disparate thoughts in one go. Obviously, *disparate* is doing a lot of heavy lifting there, and is an extremely subjective lens to frame thoughts through. None of us are so quick witted that we might get through an entire day without trying to cram too many unrated things into one breath, so it's hard to draw a line that everyone agrees on.

I would say this one is okay.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Thanks for the suggestion!

The fact is that there is a small group of people out there who enjoy what I do, fantasy-wise and style-wise. For them (as well as myself), I try to create interesting and well-written stories. In my mind, it's a creative endeavor, and if not "high art" then perhaps some sort of "art."

But what I've gradually come to internalize is that most people will very much not appreciate what I do, or find it in any way artistic, and that's fine. I can't blame them for feeling that way, and I have no desire to inflict my stuff on them. And I'd probably also be unwise to ask them to review my work publicly.

Well, when you think about the narrow group of people who would like my stories, and the even narrower set of people hanging out on the AH and Feedback forums and interested in talking about the process of writing, the overlap is small, and the number of potentially offended people is high. So I try to avoid going into the weeds of my stories, and stick to discussing general technical issues. If any other writer out there has seen my stories, and did happen to like them, and actually wants to engage in a discussion of the creative process, they'd be welcome to PM me.

This is the first time I have seen, or discussed, any of @AwkwardlySet’s review. Though - as he said - he did kindly ask my permission.

This may come across as adversarial, particularly in the current heated climate (though I am much calmer now), but this is what I was expecting from a review.

I have not read any of @AwkwardMD or @Omenainen’s previous reviews - which was stupid in retrospect. I thought I understood their general nature by reputation, but I clearly didn’t.

I was triggered by two things in the AMD / Om review and one in a subsequent PM. I have offered to either explain these issues in public or in private.

I now also have some understanding why elements of my story were triggering for them. I honestly had no clue, maybe I should have.

I have written an essay about how I wrote A Hard Day’s Night, my motivations, where ideas for elements came from, what I was trying to do and so on.

While it’s not a self-review, it does comment on where I feel I did what I set out to do, and where I didn’t. This essay mentions neither AMD nor Om and does not mention their previous review.

There are a couple of places where my essay overlaps with things they have said. But the essay is in no way a rebuttal of their review. In places it is in accord with it. Though I don’t mention this.

One theme is the yawning divide between the writer’s intent and the reader’s interpretation. Particularly when you are as inexperienced a writer as me. And particularly when you are writing about personal matters while also trying to preserve some privacy.

I don’t believe that there is anything in my essay that either AMD or Om would find objectionable. But - just in case - I have offered that they can read it and veto anything they don’t like.

I think I’ve been naive in this matter to date. And I may be even more naive in thinking that we can get some closure on it now. Maybe too much has been said.

But, I’d like for AMD, Om and I to understand each other better. I think we are probably at least 90% on the same side re de-stigmatizing sex work. But clearly we have different approaches to doing this.

This note is not intended to fan the flames. So if anyone finds part of it objectionable, please tell me and I will remove that part.

Emily

 

[AwkwardMD]

2/2​

Now, the heart of the matter.

I had no problem understanding the tone and the intention of this story. I have absolutely no idea if that is what Emily wanted to convey, but as I said, I latched on the idea of the story as I saw it on the very first page. That being said, I don’t understand why you felt the need to go look through comments to understand what she wanted to say with the story? If you felt that the story missed its point completely, then you should have simply said that the story failed to speak to you, and that would have been okay in my opinion. But going through comments and finding one where Emily said “Slice of life” and then taking that as an axiom is just wrong in this sense. Emily could have wrongfully used that term. She could have disagreed with what that term meant in contrast to the google definition you found and used. She could have just loosely meant slice of life in the sense that she just meant an episode in the life of a sex worker, but heavily romanticized in a way. Or anything else, really.

What I am trying to say is that it was wrong, on principle, to take author’s comment and then base the review on that comment. You should have just focused on how the story itself spoke to you. If it failed, it failed, and it would have been a valid point in your criticism. Yet this approach you took I can’t approve of. Once again, this is just my opinion.

The sex worker depiction:

This is where I take major issue with your approach. I’m not sure if you noticed, but out of 2.5k words of your review, you used 1.5k to point out how her portrayal of sex workers was unrealistic, without mincing the words, and without failing to convey your outrage. All of that based on Emily’s comment “Slice of Life”

I understand that this subject is touchy for you two. I understand that you two feel like activists in this sense, correct me if I am wrong here, and I can’t express anything but absolute and wholehearted support for your activism. But I also must criticize you for letting it seep into your review. Your outrage at Emily’s portrayal of sex work is quite obvious, and to me it shows some very counterproductive bias. 1.5k words out of 2.5k used just for that. I will, of course, say my view of this portrayal later, at the end of this review, because it is essential to put it into perspective along with the tone of the story, the way I saw it.

My suggestions for this thread

This is your thread and you make the rules. I’ve already said my thoughts about it at the beginning so I won’t repeat myself. But I would like to offer a few suggestions in hope that you might at least consider them.
I know you take pride in giving honest reviews, no matter how harsh they can end up being, and I am okay with that. You certainly haven’t given any false impressions in that sense. But I want to suggest introducing an additional touch.

Truth and honesty are all good, but as I am sure you know, we aren’t producing cans here. These are human beings pouring their souls into their stories. Being a teacher myself, I often have to think about how to approach a certain student, how to communicate it to them when they failed at something and how not to discourage them while doing so. The pedagogical approach. Since my school offers some courses for the adults as well, some of us have gone through some training on how to approach adults. Believe me, it is twice as hard, at least. Adults are much more sensitive about their mistakes being pointed out, especially if you are doing it publicly, in front of other random adults, so you always need to try to find proper words to convey such things.

The approach I described is what is lacking in this, and some other reviews that I saw in this thread, although I can’t claim that I have seen all of them, or even most of them. What should have followed all the criticism of Emily’s story is some positive, pedagogical approach. By that I don’t mean saying things that aren’t true to make her feel better. No, that would be deceiving her and giving her false hope. The problem is that you failed to recognize a single positive side to her story. You should have found some, and I believe there are plenty, and then offered it, together with all the criticism. The honey mixed with bitterness. It goes down the easiest that way.



My own opinion of the story:

I said I would come back to this. I offered plenty of criticism, and there will be some more, but first I want to say how I experienced this story. I never felt like this story aimed to be a realistic portrayal of sex work - not even close. I understood it as a heavily romanticized view of that same sex work, and in that sense it worked very well for me, and I can even say I enjoyed it mostly, even if the kinks and themes in it aren’t really my thing.

The MC, Mimi - aka Lauren, I saw as an homage to all the sex workers out there. She is portrayed as a sort of superhero sex worker who can get anywhere and fulfill all the needs of the clients, no matter what they are. Why do I see that as an homage? Because it paints sex workers in an obviously positive light. It paints them as compassionate, caring human beings. We also see Mimi play all the roles she needs to play to do her work well. Beyond the actual sex, that includes understanding her clients, judging their moods and level of arousal, offering a sympathetic ear when needed, negotiating with clients if needed, and so on. It shows how complex being a sex worker truly is, if only through the more positive sides of the work. In this story, we don’t see any of the ugly sides of that same work, and that is why I never thought the story was intended as realistic.

Imagine if she went for a truly realistic story? A sex worker, having to kiss, to endure the sweat, the alcohol or cigar breath of some random, likely unattractive person who is groping her, penetrating her, expecting her to blow him, to take his load on her face or mouth. I see her feeling disgust while performing her job, even if she is hiding it so as not to offend the client. It gives me the creeps even as I write this thing, and I really don’t think anyone would find that portrayal erotic. We ARE on Literotica, after all.

Yet even in this romanticized sense, giving WhatsApp to a random client is a complete WTF moment. It makes no sense. Also, the BDSM scene with the old guy is way over the top, not in the sense of kinks, but in the sense of realism, even in this romanticized view of the story that I experienced. Having read a few of Emily’s previous stories, I see that scene as touching on her own kinks, but it wasn’t done right, and your criticism of that same scene mostly stands, without a doubt. That scene should have been considerably milder to work even in this romanticized setting that I saw.

To conclude, I enjoyed Emily’s descriptive style and this romanticized, carefree vibe the story gave off, and I liked Mimi as a relatable, kind, and loving character. The scene at the end was heartwarming and sweet. Maybe a few hints would have made that twist better, but it worked well just the same. Overall, I enjoyed the story very much, considering it really isn’t my thing. I also experienced a couple of arousing moments, something I didn’t expect in such a story.

Good, descriptive storytelling with some hot moments, a positive vibe, but riddled with some grammar and punctuation issues. I hope this review gives some insight to Emily and others.

My hat is off to you, sir. I don't need to highlight the disagreements, because they are beside the point right now.

This helps. Thank you.

 

[MediocreAuthor]

To be honest with you, I am hardly the expert here, as I am likely the only one here who isn't a native English speaker. The irony of me talking about English grammar to others isn't lost on me, believe me
The sentence sounds fine to me, but I might be wrong. Feel free to correct me - I would like to learn something as well

While it does sound alright, (I doubt I would have ever complained if it weren't in a grammar lesson) it is technically incorrect.

Mimi's sailor-themed school uniform owed more to Japan than her actual heritage, but customers seemed to like it; and Alan was clearly no exception.

By changing the second conjunction to a semicolon, you can easily keep this as a single sentence.

Although personally, I would probably break it into two sentences and flesh the second one out.

• Mimi's sailor-themed school uniform owed more to Japan than her actual heritage, but customers seemed to like it. It was clear from his reaction that Alan was no exception.

The are a hundred billion different ways to write that that short section of text, and I have no problem with breaking grammar rules when it suits me.

Everyone knows that I abuse ellipses to no end

 

[Devinter]

3. Imagine I write a Gay Male story set in San Francisco in the 1980s in which I never mention AIDS and none of my characters practice safe sex. I suspect I would get lambasted for irresponsibility, and rightly so. I doubt anyone would say "It's okay, it's just a fantasy." The same standard ought to apply in other circumstances, including sex work. Potentially harmful fantasies should be presented as such.

I love your work, Melissa - but I don't agree with this at all. Only if your story aims to portray some sort of high-level realism, and is of some considerable length, and includes many other references to how San Francisco truly was in that time would leaving this out be even remotely strange. In any other case, talking about AIDS is hardly going to add erotic value. If a story is around 10k words, and it's about a hot and spicy hook-up, I don't want that in the story - just like I don't want people to talk about STI's in stories where people are sleeping around with a lot of partners all willy-nilly. It may add to the realism, but it straight up takes away from the arousal aspect which is what those type of stories aim to maximize. Therefore, it strongly depends on what you're trying to achieve with the story if including details like this is an improvement or not in my opinion.

Secondly, if all potentially harmful fantasies can only be presented as such, that vastly limits the author's way to approach a topic and makes stories on the website more similar to one another. You don't have to take a moral stance on everything you write, and you also don't have to force-feed it to the reader. Let them decide. A story that comes to mind is @StillStunned 's Love at first sight - and without spoiling anything, it deals with a harmful fantasy. Sure, there's a few lines in there that acknowledges that the main character might not be proud of all of their actions, but I would not say it's being presented as harmful - and it's intentionally creepy. Stories like that stick out because they dare to challenge the status-quo, and oftentimes that adds to their value, not the other way around. A fantasy is just that; and I personally do not subscribe to the idea that us writing a story or two is going to make people go out into the real world and do horrible things that they wouldn't have found an excuse to do regardless.

 

[XerXesXu]

My take on the aftermath of the EmilyMiller review

It is an important ability for an author to be able to differentiate between themselves and their stories. Your stories are not you, and comments on your stories are not aimed at your person. My review is not me, it’s a comment I make on a story presented to me.

From EmilyMiller’s reaction to the review it seems to me that she lacks this distinction. She doesn’t differentiate between herself and her stories, and our persons and our review, and that’s why she feels like we’re attacking her personally.

Whenever we communicate, in speech or writing, we spray our target with information about ourselves; status, education, wit, life experience, culture, personality and personality disorders.

You accepted the wrong person to review.

 

[AwkwardMD]

I love your work, Melissa - but I don't agree with this at all. Only if your story aims to portray some sort of high-level realism, and is of some considerable length, and includes many other references to how San Francisco truly was in that time would leaving this out be even remotely strange. In any other case, talking about AIDS is hardly going to add erotic value. If a story is around 10k words, and it's about a hot and spicy hook-up, I don't want that in the story - just like I don't want people to talk about STI's in stories where people are sleeping around with a lot of partners all willy-nilly. It may add to the realism, but it straight up takes away from the arousal aspect which is what those type of stories aim to maximize. Therefore, it strongly depends on what you're trying to achieve with the story if including details like this is an improvement or not in my opinion.

The likelihood of talking about AIDS adding erotic appeal is pretty low, but I could easily see a story using this element to add a lot of emotional weight. For some readers, this is almost more important.

That being said, when you take away AIDS you might as well be talking about New York in the 70s or LA in the 90s. What would be the point of telling that story, in that timespan, in that place, with that omission, if not to overtly gloss over something really dangerous?

Secondly, if all potentially harmful fantasies can only be presented as such, that vastly limits the author's way to approach a topic and makes stories on the website more similar to one another. You don't have to take a moral stance on everything you write, and you also don't have to force-feed it to the reader. Let them decide. A story that comes to mind is @StillStunned 's Love at first sight - and without spoiling anything, it deals with a harmful fantasy. Sure, there's a few lines in there that acknowledges that the main character might not be proud of all of their actions, but I would not say it's being presented as harmful - and it's intentionally creepy. Stories like that stick out because they dare to challenge the status-quo, and oftentimes that adds to their value, not the other way around. A fantasy is just that; and I personally do not subscribe to the idea that us writing a story or two is going to make people go out into the real world and do horrible things that they wouldn't have found an excuse to do regardless.

This is not a binary. A thing can be portrayed as harmful AND still work in erotic contexts. Nobody needs to lie. A character can be flippant and throw caution to the wind, and be self-aware, and still put wet spots in the underwear of the readership.

(Read The Christmas In July Luau)

 

[Devinter]

The likelihood of talking about AIDS adding erotic appeal is pretty low, but I could easily see a story using this element to add a lot of emotional weight. For some readers, this is almost more important.

That being said, when you take away AIDS you might as well be talking about New York in the 70s or LA in the 90s. What would be the point of telling that story, in that timespan, in that place, with that omission, if not to overtly gloss over something really dangerous?

Yes and no. Perhaps you want to make a brief mention of the San Francisco cable cars because they fascinate you? Perhaps you're incredibly fond of the golden gate bridge, and find it romantic, so you want them to look out over it for the final scene? Perhaps you want your characters to make comments about Alcatraz island and then have them do some sort of kinky prisoner/guard roleplay? So long as you don't pepper your story with a ton of things describing all aspects of what life was like in that region and time period, I do not think you need to maximize on realism in the sexual department that takes away from the eroticism. In fact, I would rank that as the lowest priority of realism if the intention is to write a stroker, for instance. It takes away more than it adds for many readers. It's a net minus.

This is not a binary. A thing can be portrayed as harmful AND still work in erotic contexts. Nobody needs to lie. A character can be flippant and throw caution to the wind, and be self-aware, and still put wet spots in the underwear of the readership.

(Read The Christmas In July Luau)

Yes, it CAN be portrayed as both harmful and erotic. I agree with that. But what I disagree with is that it HAS to be presented as harmful just because it is. Obviously, in most stories, it would be presented that way quite naturally - so why not let a few of the stories challenge that, and see what happens? Unless you believe it does genuine harm to the real world - which is an opinion I do not share, but can at least understand - then why police such a thing? I do not see the benefit.

 

[AwkwardMD]

Yes and no. Perhaps you want to make a brief mention of the San Francisco cable cars because they fascinate you? Perhaps you're incredibly fond of the golden gate bridge, and find it romantic, so you want them to look out over it for the final scene? Perhaps you want your characters to make comments about Alcatraz island and then have them do some sort of kinky prisoner/guard roleplay? So long as you don't pepper your story with a ton of things describing all aspects of what life was like in that region and time period, I do not think you need to maximize on realism in the sexual department that takes away from the eroticism. In fact, I would rank that as the lowest priority of realism if the intention is to write a stroker, for instance. It takes away more than it adds for many readers. It's a net minus.

These are edge cases that aren't really what she was suggesting. Like all rules, there are exceptions. What if the story was set in Pleasanton, San Jose, or Oakland? Does that still count?

If you got a hundred people in a room, got them to close their eyes, and said "Imagine an erotic story about the gay subculture in the 80's, set in San Francisco", how much of that 100 would picture largely the same thing give or take a few details? 60% 70? 80%

Even if the largest chunk of this pie is 40%, that's still large enough that we all know what talking about.

Yes, it CAN be portrayed as both harmful and erotic. I agree with that. But what I disagree with is that it HAS to be presented as harmful just because it is. Obviously, in most stories, it would be presented that way quite naturally - so why not let a few of the stories challenge that, and see what happens? Unless you believe it does genuine harm to the real world - which is an opinion I do not share, but can at least understand - then why police such a thing? I do not see the benefit.

From our perspective, the only value in pointing out the harm in a story is if it relates to genuine harm in the real world. Harm scales directly with realism. The more fantastical, the less it matters.

Now, from here, it's a tough step to define harm. We are just two people, and we are incapable of drawing that line for anyone but ourselves. One of the things our line includes is sex work and sex workers. That story mentioned above, The Christmas In July Luau, has two distinctly different sub-portrayals of sex workers. When I reviewed it, I loved one and detested the other, but I still recommend that story to anyone I think can handle the intensity.

 

[alohadave]

Yes and no. Perhaps you want to make a brief mention of the San Francisco cable cars because they fascinate you? Perhaps you're incredibly fond of the golden gate bridge, and find it romantic, so you want them to look out over it for the final scene? Perhaps you want your characters to make comments about Alcatraz island and then have them do some sort of kinky prisoner/guard roleplay? So long as you don't pepper your story with a ton of things describing all aspects of what life was like in that region and time period, I do not think you need to maximize on realism in the sexual department that takes away from the eroticism. In fact, I would rank that as the lowest priority of realism if the intention is to write a stroker, for instance. It takes away more than it adds for many readers. It's a net minus.

Consider that @MelissaBaby doesn't write strokers, and including details like AIDS in San Fran in 1980 is part of the story she'd tell.

So consider that context when arguing about how much detail is appropriate.

 

[AwkwardMD]

Yes and no. Perhaps you want to make a brief mention of the San Francisco cable cars because they fascinate you? Perhaps you're incredibly fond of the golden gate bridge, and find it romantic, so you want them to look out over it for the final scene? Perhaps you want your characters to make comments about Alcatraz island and then have them do some sort of kinky prisoner/guard roleplay? So long as you don't pepper your story with a ton of things describing all aspects of what life was like in that region and time period, I do not think you need to maximize on realism in the sexual department that takes away from the eroticism. In fact, I would rank that as the lowest priority of realism if the intention is to write a stroker, for instance. It takes away more than it adds for many readers. It's a net minus.


Yes, it CAN be portrayed as both harmful and erotic. I agree with that. But what I disagree with is that it HAS to be presented as harmful just because it is. Obviously, in most stories, it would be presented that way quite naturally - so why not let a few of the stories challenge that, and see what happens? Unless you believe it does genuine harm to the real world - which is an opinion I do not share, but can at least understand - then why police such a thing? I do not see the benefit.

I would also like to point out, somewhat relatedly, that we have always argued that authors not go back and edit their work. Take in what we're saying, and use that to make the next one better (even if you get there by ignoring what we're saying). We've never ever suggested anything even remotely to the effect of "And you should take it down" I can't imagine how bad a story would need to be to cross that line.

A published story is done. It's out there. We can't police anything. The only reason to seek help is for the next one.

 

[Devinter]

Consider that @MelissaBaby doesn't write strokers, and including details like AIDS in San Fran in 1980 is part of the story she'd tell.

So consider that context when arguing about how much detail is appropriate.

I am aware - and I am a big fan of her work. But that only adds to my argument, not the other way around. Are we saying that the way Melissa writes is the only way to write? Of course not. And so just because she does things a certain way, and does it brilliantly I might add, that doesn't mean that I have to agree when she says that one MUST include details like that, or approaching things from a certain angle. As I said above:

Only if your story aims to portray some sort of high-level realism, and is of some considerable length, and includes many other references to how San Francisco truly was in that time would leaving this out be even remotely strange.

Melissa certainly does write stories of high-level realism, of considerable length, that includes many references to both the location and the era. I love that. But that doesn't mean that we all have to follow that example, and that is the argument I'm making. Her statement was that people wouldn't say "It's okay, it's just a fantasy" if a story was written differently and I don't agree with that at all.

If you got a hundred people in a room, got them to close their eyes, and said "Imagine an erotic story about the gay subculture in the 80's, set in San Francisco", how much of that 100 would picture largely the same thing give or take a few details? 60% 70? 80%

Even if the largest chunk of this pie is 40%, that's still large enough that we all know what talking about.

That's exactly why I made examples featuring things people commonly associate with San Francisco. The cable cars, the golden gate bridge, and the Alcatraz prison. These are also things people might think about when picturing the city. I could make similar examples about the 80's as a time period, and of course several about the gay subculture. Now you say that the AIDS part must be included, assumingly because it would be irresponsible otherwise, but none of the other things commonly associated with this city or the time period or the subculture must be. Why? It's a fantasy. An erotic fantasy. AIDS isn't erotic.

We've never ever suggested anything even remotely to the effect of "And you should take it down" I can't imagine how bad a story would need to be to cross that line.

Challenge accepted. (Mostly just kidding. Mostly.)

 

[MelissaBaby]

Yes and no. Perhaps you want to make a brief mention of the San Francisco cable cars because they fascinate you? Perhaps you're incredibly fond of the golden gate bridge, and find it romantic, so you want them to look out over it for the final scene? Perhaps you want your characters to make comments about Alcatraz island and then have them do some sort of kinky prisoner/guard roleplay? So long as you don't pepper your story with a ton of things describing all aspects of what life was like in that region and time period, I do not think you need to maximize on realism in the sexual department that takes away from the eroticism. In fact, I would rank that as the lowest priority of realism if the intention is to write a stroker, for instance. It takes away more than it adds for many readers. It's a net minus.


Yes, it CAN be portrayed as both harmful and erotic. I agree with that. But what I disagree with is that it HAS to be presented as harmful just because it is. Obviously, in most stories, it would be presented that way quite naturally - so why not let a few of the stories challenge that, and see what happens? Unless you believe it does genuine harm to the real world - which is an opinion I do not share, but can at least understand - then why police such a thing? I do not see the benefit.

I offered my opinion, I have no intention of policing what anyone writes.

 

[Bramblethorn]

The likelihood of talking about AIDS adding erotic appeal is pretty low, but I could easily see a story using this element to add a lot of emotional weight. For some readers, this is almost more important.

That being said, when you take away AIDS you might as well be talking about New York in the 70s or LA in the 90s. What would be the point of telling that story, in that timespan, in that place, with that omission, if not to overtly gloss over something really dangerous?

I can imagine one scenario where it might make sense to do so: somebody who'd lived through that episode in history writing it as an intentional departure from reality, showing a "what might have been" world as a form of mourning, in the same way that I sometimes imagine talking with loved ones who are gone. But that's a very specific situation and the only way it'd get away with not explicitly acknowledging the reality is when both author and readers know the reality so well that it doesn't need mentioning.

I don't have time for a long post just now, but a search on "pyjamafication of history" or "pajamafication of history" may bring up some interesting discussion about the complications of taking liberties in storytelling about sensitive topics when the readers may not be aware of the reality. (The name refers to John Boyne's "The Boy In The Striped Pyjamas".)