50 Shades, the lemming theory in action.

[lovecraft68]

Right. You ask questions, you listen to the answers, and then you try to portray it according to the answers you get. The best authors think of the most interesting questions.

I think she had a failure of imagination and research. I can extend that to seeing why people would be offended by such for technical and social reasons. And it's as original as writing a story about a stripper with a distant father figure.

As a reader I was just bumped out of the story because of technical and factual assumptions that were wrong, not to mention British usage.

As a writer I'd probably give it a rating on the basis of funny/clever dialogue about 4% of the time. 2.4 on a scale of 10.

I think where James figured she didn't have to try is she really just wanted to re-write Twilight. So she interchanged some things I.E. BDSM for Vampires.

She had no intention of doing anything original and it happened to catch on. A lot of people don;t like different, so they now get a chance to buy more of the same and be comfortable reading it.

 

[Recidiva]

I think where James figured she didn't have to try is she really just wanted to re-write Twilight. So she interchanged some things I.E. BDSM for Vampires.

She had no intention of doing anything original and it happened to catch on. A lot of people don;t like different, so they now get a chance to buy more of the same and be comfortable reading it.

I think that's true. I think it was a potboiler format and she didn't bother to get advice about American English usage or BDSM realities and motivations. Sad thing might be that she did think she was trying, I can't tell. I think she put effort into dialogue.

It did remind me of Twilight a lot just because it had the same exact sense of "attraction/argue/sex/conflict" mix and match that resulted in no growing, no learning, no understanding. The same tiring "I'm going to forget everything I learned or should have learned from the previous conflict and we're going to segue into the next conflict, which is exactly the same as the previous conflict" feel to it.

Harry Potter suffered from this because although the book had intricate plotting, the characters never really developed any trust in each other and ultimately every summer Harry's back thinking everyone is ignoring him.

 

[3113]

So you believe in teaching them that everything they read is true and they should believe it?

Hm. Did I say that? Let me re-read what I said. Hm. No. I did not say that. You did. Please don't put words in my mouth. And where does teaching them to "consider the source" come in to teaching how to read? That's the sort of thing you teach once they can read and you're giving them literature, like Mark Twain and his use of the "N" word. It doesn't come when that kid who is having trouble reading finally finds a book that he can't put down and learns how to enjoy reading.

I mean, really, how many times have you said "consider the source" to beginning readers? When kids were reading Harry Potter like crazy, did you say, "Consider the source!" to any of them? I'm sure you weren't worried that they'd think they could do magic, but there were other messages in Harry, messages I happened to like and was delighted to see being spread around. But others didn't like them, and guess what, they were right. There were readers who explored alternate religions like Wicca after reading Harry Potter. And there were readers who were more gay-friendly after reading Harry Potter and learning that Dumbledore was gay.

So. Why didn't you say, "Consider the source" when kids were reading Harry Potter?

Once again, I ask, if the Klansman was a popular book, would you be happy they were reading it because it was teaching them how to read? And HOW would you teach them to consider the source rather than believe, even a tiny bit, in the gripping reality of the world they'd entered? There isn't any magic happening in the Klansman--it's a thrilling, pulpy book where the evil side is all black, the good side is all white. How can you teach new readers, getting into a book for the very first time, seeing some author as their new hero, to both enjoy the book (and thus learn to enjoy reading) while also teaching them that everything it's about is false, racist and can't be trusted?

Sorry. You're avoiding the question, and I stand by my statement. We shouldn't be so glad that people are reading that we ignore WHAT they are reading, because even teaching them to consider the source won't make them ignore the ideas in a book if those ideas are compelling enough. The Bible, after all, is still the biggest seller there is, and there are people who believe every word of it is true. Including a lot who learned to read by using it.

 

[lovecraft68]

Hm. Did I say that? Let me re-read what I said. Hm. No. I did not say that. You did. Please don't put words in my mouth. And where does teaching them to "consider the source" come in to teaching how to read? That's the sort of thing you teach once they can read and you're giving them literature, like Mark Twain and his use of the "N" word. It doesn't come when that kid who is having trouble reading finally finds a book that he can't put down and learns how to enjoy reading.

I mean, really, how many times have you said "consider the source" to beginning readers? When kids were reading Harry Potter like crazy, did you say, "Consider the source!" to any of them? I'm sure you weren't worried that they'd think they could do magic, but there were other messages in Harry, messages I happened to like and was delighted to see being spread around. But others didn't like them, and guess what, they were right. There were readers who explored alternate religions like Wicca after reading Harry Potter. And there were readers who were more gay-friendly after reading Harry Potter and learning that Dumbledore was gay.

So. Why didn't you say, "Consider the source" when kids were reading Harry Potter?

Once again, I ask, if the Klansman was a popular book, would you be happy they were reading it because it was teaching them how to read? And HOW would you teach them to consider the source rather than believe, even a tiny bit, in the gripping reality of the world they'd entered? There isn't any magic happening in the Klansman--it's a thrilling, pulpy book where the evil side is all black, the good side is all white. How can you teach new readers, getting into a book for the very first time, seeing some author as their new hero, to both enjoy the book (and thus learn to enjoy reading) while also teaching them that everything it's about is false, racist and can't be trusted?

Sorry. You're avoiding the question, and I stand by my statement. We shouldn't be so glad that people are reading that we ignore WHAT they are reading, because even teaching them to consider the source won't make them ignore the ideas in a book if those ideas are compelling enough. The Bible, after all, is still the biggest seller there is, and there are people who believe every word of it is true. Including a lot who learned to read by using it.

This falls under people needing to "know better" and to be "responsible" which is an all but forgotten word these days, no one wants to be held accountable for anything, its always some one else fault.

A book, movie, or music, or even anything some one else says or does is not excuse for you to do it. Shades cannot be held responsible if some idiot loses the use of his/her fingers because they spent hours bound with zip ties.

Goes back to when I was a teen and Dungeons and Dragons was considered evil kids were killing themselves over it.

Ozzy Osbourne's suicide solution was blamed for suicide. Bullshit anyone that killed themselves was sadly disturbed and something was going to trigger it.

Fiction is fiction and its up to the reader to have some common sense.

My only point is that I'm Leery of it being referenced as a "source" for BDSM, because it is very misleading.

If Christian Gray were real, I know plenty of women who'd have his poser ass licking their feet and thanking him for the privilege. He isn't a dom he comes across as an arrogant bully, big difference, but still he is "fictional" and people need to take that into account.

 

[3113]

And then we need parents and teachers and etc. to teach critical thinking skills about what they read. None of it happens in a vacuum. (We hope, at least.)

Um, I hate to break this to you, but once you teach 'em how to read, that's pretty much that. The genie is out of the bottle. Or did your parents know everything you were reading all the time? Your teachers?

This will date me, but Ah! how I fondly remember a group of girls passing around of "The Exorcist," all of us reading with gasps that dirty little passage about masturbating with a crucifix. I'm sure neither my parents nor teachers would have approved and would have very much liked to have taught me a little critical thinking at that point. But no one ever found out that I'd read it. I mean, teaching me--at that age--critical thinking skills to discuss the death of the dog in "Island of the Blue Dolphins" would have been considered apt, but to discuss the masturbation-with-the-crucifix scene from the Exorcist? What teacher or parent would have anticipated I'd read that and have prepared me to critically think about it?

I knew how to read, however, so the genie was out of the bottle. They didn't know, couldn't stop me, and not knowing what I was reading, had no way to put what I was reading into perspective for me.

As for teaching critical thinking/reading skills in the here and now? In the U.S.? Please! With school boards that want teachers teaching creationism? With people in power telling text book companies not to mention slavery (Texas)? With education money going to private schools (Louisiana) where even the math will be Bible based and they've avowed that no critical thinking will be taught? Not to mention the fact that most public schools are already overcrowded, and teachers are forced to focus on teaching kids how to pass tests with no time left to tech them how to think? Let's not fool ourselves. It's a wonder we can teach kids to read. Teaching them to think critically, isn't' something U.S. teachers are allowed to do, let alone can do. Not in this anti-education climate. We're screwed.

 

[lovecraft68]

If my daughters were toddlers now, I would consider home schooling.

Things like racism and slavery should be taught.

Brushing that shit under the rug or pretending it didn't happen is wrong.

They have it under the guise of "PC" what it is is propaganda that rivals the crap the US slung in the 50's about how perfect this country was.

The thought process this day is to not deal with anything unpleasant. No, honey that didn't happen, no one ever had slaves. What's next? Hitler loved Jews?

Oh, that upset you honey? It's making you think Oh, shit! My kids thinking, quick doc, I'm not cut out to parent what do I do?

Oh, Ritalin? Oh, okay! Hey wait for me or him? Oh, both? Awesome!

 

[3113]

Fiction is fiction and its up to the reader to have some common sense.

Granted, if the reader is an adult. But the argument is about giving kids ANYTHING so long as they read. Where's the common sense in giving them "The Klansman"? If an adult reads something, believes it and shouldn't, then it's the adult's fault, not the author's.

But if a teacher says, "So long as you're reading..." and lets kids read the Klansman, then the teacher is responsible if they believe it because the teacher gave it to them and let them read it. Trying to explain to the kids to read it but not to believe it is rather like shutting the barn door after the horses have been let out. These are kids, not adults. There are levels of critical thinking and common sense that are still beyond them--which is why parents have a legal responsibility for kids--what kids believe and do--that they don't have for adults. Right?

 

[lovecraft68]

Granted, if the reader is an adult. But the argument is about giving kids ANYTHING so long as they read. Where's the common sense in giving them "The Klansman"? If an adult reads something, believes it and shouldn't, then it's the adult's fault, not the author's.

But if a teacher says, "So long as you're reading..." and lets kids read the Klansman, then the teacher is responsible if they believe it because the teacher gave it to them and let them read it. Trying to explain to the kids to read it but not to believe it is rather like shutting the barn door after the horses have been let out. These are kids, not adults. There are levels of critical thinking and common sense that are still beyond them--which is why parents have a legal responsibility for kids--what kids believe and do--that they don't have for adults. Right?

Then that would then fall under parenting. And before you say, well how did the parents know...

What I mean is everyday parenting instills beliefs and morals and the ability to do some reasoning. Parenting instills a basic "code" in the child.

For example, I grew up in a black neighborhood. My father had a lot of black friends. I saw them as just like me (as they are) so if I were handed racist material or read a racist book, the example set before me would help me do some "critical thinking" on the matter. I'd say "Hey wait a minute"

 

[PennLady]

Um, I hate to break this to you, but once you teach 'em how to read, that's pretty much that. The genie is out of the bottle. Or did your parents know everything you were reading all the time? Your teachers?

No, of course my parents didn't know everything I read, nor did my teachers. And although I try to keep an eye on what my son reads, I can't read every book myself before he does. That's not what I meant. Other things can influence what you think about what you read, such as what your parents might teach you about values or life in general. There's always something else going on and affecting us and what we think and whatnot -- which to me means what we read is not in a vacuum.

I'm lucky to be in a good school district. So far any PC issues haven't come up in the curriculum (PennBoy is only going in to 3d grade, in a public school). When they do, Mr Penn and I will discuss them with him as we feel appropriate to his age. That's the key to any of it -- being involved with your kids' education, which is a lot easier said than done, I know.

 

[3113]

They have it under the guise of "PC" what it is is propaganda that rivals the crap the US slung in the 50's about how perfect this country was.

LOLOLOLOL! Oh, I can't believe this. Your'e blaming the PC folk for not teaching about slavery in Texas? Sorry, Lovey, you can't racial profile the PC'er's this time around and make them the bad guys. Slavery is not being taught in Texas because Texas wants to make sure ante-bellum South, which their state was a part of, can be viewed as heroic, brave, wonderful and justified in wanting to leave the Union. To do that, they have to leave out that little problem with slavery. It makes people look bad, don't ya' know?

In fact, it's the PC folk who are the good guys in this fight. They're the ones want to teach about Native Americans, Mexican Americans, African Americans. It's the other side, the decidedly ANTI-PC side that wants to erase all this front he text books and make sure kids never learn that any of that nasty stuff ever happened. The U.S. was all shiny and bright with brave good white men leading the way.

The PC folk may not want kids reading the "N" word in Mark Twain, but they're not behind changing the history books in Texas or teaching kids creationism instead of evolution in Louisiana. That's all thanks to the most anti-PC folk you'll ever meet. You're on the wrong side if you're anti-PC. In fact, given what you're saying you'd teach your kids, those who are changing the text books in Texas would be calling you PC.

 

[lance gt]

Godwin's Law is right around the corner.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Our history is a mess. Lots gets left out.

For example: During the Cival War Federal Cavalry often murdered slaves who refused to leave their masters; murder was lawful because slaves were chattel like cows and sheep and horses. The legal basis of the Emancipation was Lincoln's assertion that slaves were property, and captured property of rebels was forfeited by the owners so that the Federal government, as the new owner, was free to emancipate slaves....or sell them.

But it gets dicier.

During the war many captured slaves were transported to American nations where slavery was legal, and sold to planters. Many of these planters were New England Yankees who served as American consuls, too.

 

[Cruel2BKind]

I think you're right. I'd also keep in mind the "Eregon" fiasco. Hugely popular book--and a series. The movie came across as ridiculous, bombing so badly that not only wasn't the rest of the series made into movies, but the books themselves pretty much vanished from the shelves.

At a guess, by the time the movie comes out "50 Shades" will either be dead (everyone will have moved onto the next big thing) or be killed by the movie.

Now I want to read inheritance again. The third and fourth novels were so good that it soothed a lot of the butthurt that I still had from the movie.

Ummmm, not sure I get the question. Are you saying there's a "herd" against it as well?

If that's what you're asking I will say that number#1 I would think the "against" seems to be a minority.

Also I for MY own reasons will not read it. If everyone said it sucked, but something there somehow appealed to me I would buy it.

If there are people who are against it and cannot give a vailed reason other than "Well they are against it," then yes, you;re right that's a heard as well.

To your other point, I don;t think James intended to hit the BDSM audience, but that is what its become associated with and that's too bad because its a very poor representation of.

I don;t want to say dangerous because that's too strong of a word, but if this book is inspiring curiosity it is certainly misleading. Personally I would not write about something I was that clueless on.

Just cuz it's a smaller herd doesn't mean that it isn't a herd.

 

[oggbashan]

I was on holiday last week staying in a rural cottage.

We went into three supermarkets and two stationery stores for basics such as milk and to buy postcards to send to the grandchildren.

In all five stores we couldn't miss the discounted displays of 50 Shades. We had to walk past them to get to the items we wanted. The marketing was almost more prominent than any other item in the stores.

That sort of product placement costs big bucks.

 

[EmeraldKitten]

I want to read it because I'm a lemming.

Everyone, simply everyone! has been reading it. It's so hot, it's so naughty... husbands and boyfriends everywhere are getting fucked while their women are pretending they're him.

I think it's funny that it's erotica gone mainstream... and people don't know what to do about it.
My real life people don't know about my smut writing...and they have no idea I've probably read better.

I want to read it because I'm curious. I want to see what the fuss is about. But neither do I want to actually buy the books.

A woman I know is the mother of three, a Catholic, a prude, and did I mention she has a stick up her ass? She posted on FB the other day that she was next on the list to borrow it from the library. Really? Our tiny town even got that book in? And Miss Tight Ass is gonna read it? I was shocked, lol. I think that was the final straw that made me want to read it.

 

[Mirisa]

I want to read it because I'm a lemming.

Everyone, simply everyone! has been reading it. It's so hot, it's so naughty... husbands and boyfriends everywhere are getting fucked while their women are pretending they're him.

I think it's funny that it's erotica gone mainstream... and people don't know what to do about it.
My real life people don't know about my smut writing...and they have no idea I've probably read better.

I want to read it because I'm curious. I want to see what the fuss is about. But neither do I want to actually buy the books.

A woman I know is the mother of three, a Catholic, a prude, and did I mention she has a stick up her ass? She posted on FB the other day that she was next on the list to borrow it from the library. Really? Our tiny town even got that book in? And Miss Tight Ass is gonna read it? I was shocked, lol. I think that was the final straw that made me want to read it.

I think my favorite part of the whole thing is how all these holier than thou prude women are reading the book and coming back for more!

 

[SydneyBlake]

Who said they don't teach about slavery in Texas? You must be listening to the same Newspaper Somewhere In California that told Santorum they don't teach American history in California universities.

 

[Mont1950]

Hmmmm..Just musing.

I want to read it because I'm a lemming.

Everyone, simply everyone! has been reading it. It's so hot, it's so naughty... husbands and boyfriends everywhere are getting fucked while their women are pretending they're him.

God I hope I am one of the lucky husbands. My wife is reading it now......



I think it's funny that it's erotica gone mainstream... and people don't know what to do about it.
My real life people don't know about my smut writing...and they have no idea I've probably read better.


Same here.....

I want to read it because I'm curious. I want to see what the fuss is about. But neither do I want to actually buy the books.


I really don't but my sense is the marketing wash will push good erotica writers into some kind of cult status.


A woman I know is the mother of three, a Catholic, a prude, and did I mention she has a stick up her ass? She posted on FB the other day that she was next on the list to borrow it from the library. Really? Our tiny town even got that book in? And Miss Tight Ass is gonna read it? I was shocked, lol. I think that was the final straw that made me want to read it.

I can see that.

Mont.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Good thread. It amazes me how easily people have been sold this book, but probably not that unusual given the authors background in media, and her contacts who have helped promote the hell out of it...and as you say, the Lemming factor of human nature. Sadly, it is a proven fact people are more likely to follow others, trends etc., than use the brain they were born with, engage the spine they also were born with, and speak up.

Even those who reluctantly admit the books are badly written and have very little worthwhile content, fall back into defending the books when someone bigger and louder begins to challenge their viewpoint....sad. There was an interesting special on it last week in the UK "Sex Story: 50 Shades of Grey" which actually presented a more open and honest view of the book from the haters to the 'oh, I never realised there was so much I didn't know about sex' group...and also had views from doctors, publishers, celebrities etc., to balance the picture. They also mentioned other books of a similar content which were likely better. Seems it is becoming the must have for celebrities from other interviews I have seen.

Catalina

 

[sun_sea_sky]

Yeah okay, I'll bite the fucking bullet and start a Shades thread.
Now here is the link to the page, please read at least the first couple of reviews.

http://www.amazon.com/Fifty-Shades-...=1342359067&sr=1-1&keywords=50+shades+of+gray

Thanks for posting this. I just read the first three or four reviews and they brought tears of mirth to my eyes.

Perhaps the book (books?) -- which I have not read -- have served a useful purpose. To bring us the reviews.

The reviewer Ebeth822 makes an interesting point. Maybe the people who give the book rave reviews haven't read good erotica before. Perhaps they should visit this site.

 

[sun_sea_sky]

Further to my post above, reading the positive reviews is quite funny too. Example:

i love this book...already i am in chapter 3....i am speechless its a must have for any woman to read.

Right.

 

[lovecraft68]

Further to my post above, reading the positive reviews is quite funny too. Example:



Right.

Plant!

 

[R. Richard]

Humans are a herd. I personally like some of the side effects of the herd mentality. They are amusing.

Here's one.

Go to your local grocery store, enter the store through the most often-used entrance.

Odds are, the store is set up so that you move throughout it in a counterclockwise fashion.

In sweden, they tested this by setting up cones and walls inside a store and attempting to force people to go clockwise. The herd resisted, and continued to move counterclockwise, even if it disturbed the flow of shoppers.

Face it, you are a counterclockwise goat.

What were we talking about?

You pushed one of my hot buttons. Back in school I was forced to participate in athletics, since it was as the only way that I could get passing grades in some classes. I ran track. When you run on a track, you run counter-clockwise. One day, some idiot told several of us, "I'm going to run clockwise, if I run track." I got in the idiot's face and told it, "If I find you running clockwise on a track, I'll do great bodily harm to you. Running clockwise on a track could cause a very bad collision, even a fatal collision. I'm trying to stop you from possibly damaging others and, in partuicular, from damaging me!"
The idiot immediately turned and went whining to the faculty, since I was regarded as a dangerous hoodlum.
I then pointed out to the faculty that the idiot was threatening to do something that was dangerous to the idiot and others who were forced to share school facilities. Those to blame for the idiot were, mainly, the school faculty.
Of course, I was ignored, by the faculty, but not by the idiot, who knew that I would do great bodily harm to it, if I could get a legal excuse.
Running counter-clockwise is not just for goats anymore.

 

[honeybeez]

50 Shades is a fantasy! It’s of no more real-life value than Snow White, or Sleeping Beauty, or any of the other fairy tales that inhabit this world! It’s a lovely fantasy. Not the most well-written of all fairy tales, but it strikes a cord. I mean, really, who among us wouldn’t like a lovely billionaire with a beefy cock and limitless sex drive to make us the sole center of his universe and spending (both figuratively and euphemistically)? The fact that he’s a wounded bad boy who wants to spank your ass and then kiss it better only adds to the appeal.

And why is there such controversy over the character’s BDSM or D/s choices? So what if it doesn’t subscribe to someone’s perceived idea of the industry “norm”? Why does this piss people off? Where did all these “purist” and “one-wayer’s” come from? Each relationship should embody the elements of the lifestyle that work for that relationship. I like to have my ass spanked, my hair pulled, and happily submit in the bedroom. You try to cane me or tell me what to wear and I’ll come out swinging. It’s an exchange of power. How much, or how little, of that power is exchanged is up for negotiation.

We’ve all likely read better erotica (and some of us have written it), but this author was lucky enough to have the perfect storm of product, attention, and readership. Don’t we all dream of that? Instead of trashing the story (which is a premise that is getting insanely ripped off), why don’t we get off our high horses and celebrate the fact she was lucky enough to score one? And say kudos to the fact that she’s opened doors to main-stream and lifestyle erotica that might have taken much, much longer to open without 50 Shades.

JMHO

 

[lovecraft68]

50 Shades is a fantasy! It’s of no more real-life value than Snow White, or Sleeping Beauty, or any of the other fairy tales that inhabit this world! It’s a lovely fantasy. Not the most well-written of all fairy tales, but it strikes a cord. I mean, really, who among us wouldn’t like a lovely billionaire with a beefy cock and limitless sex drive to make us the sole center of his universe and spending (both figuratively and euphemistically)? The fact that he’s a wounded bad boy who wants to spank your ass and then kiss it better only adds to the appeal.

And why is there such controversy over the character’s BDSM or D/s choices? So what if it doesn’t subscribe to someone’s perceived idea of the industry “norm”? Why does this piss people off? Where did all these “purist” and “one-wayer’s” come from? Each relationship should embody the elements of the lifestyle that work for that relationship. I like to have my ass spanked, my hair pulled, and happily submit in the bedroom. You try to cane me or tell me what to wear and I’ll come out swinging. It’s an exchange of power. How much, or how little, of that power is exchanged is up for negotiation.

We’ve all likely read better erotica (and some of us have written it), but this author was lucky enough to have the perfect storm of product, attention, and readership. Don’t we all dream of that? Instead of trashing the story (which is a premise that is getting insanely ripped off), why don’t we get off our high horses and celebrate the fact she was lucky enough to score one? And say kudos to the fact that she’s opened doors to main-stream and lifestyle erotica that might have taken much, much longer to open without 50 Shades.

JMHO

BDSM's issue is that Gray is not a dom he is an abusive asshole.

This is not a d/s relationship, but an abusive marriage

They are also upset James equates Gray's being mentally unbalanced with BDSM -they are touchy about that-

Gray is not a dom, he is an arrogant petulant spoiled child.

Ana is a simpering bag of bones that women should be pissed off reading about. She sets women's rights back 50 years.

Yes its fantasy, but we're at apoint with this train wreck that its being touted as so good people are seeing it as more.

Read it and if you have daughter or niece would you want them acting like this girl? Would you want Gray as someone for her to be with? If you care only about money sure.

It's also annoying the book only blew up because James works in the television industry and planted her own success.