Erotic Horror

[sr71plt]

Just curious, as I always am about everyone's preferences when it concerns horror (not an attack, valid discussion). If you read a story that had good pacing and all that but had let's say paranormal or otherworldly elements in them, does that particular element flip the switch for you? As in no more reading and back click?

Just trying to get a feel for different tastes in horror. You said you prefer I'm guessing human monsters. What sort of story gives you chills? Like not just creeps you out, but in your personal experience what sort of human monster or other type of natural fear really strikes a chord with you?

I'm not into horror at all. Don't read it or watch it in any form if I know it's coming up. I enjoy the Alfred Hitchcock take or the "Twilight Zone" variety. Have never read anything by Stephen King other than his book on writing, either. So I guess I have extremely limited grounds for responding.

I've written some, for variety sake. It all comes out of my imaginings, though, not from studying the genre.

 

[SecondCircle]

I see. While I'm here I might pose the same question to the other posters on the topic. What is it that scares you? What sort of story do you think would give you the chills? Doesn't matter what it is, supernatural, paranormal, other worldly, old evil eye down the street, clowns, dolls, spiders... though a lot of my writing in the EH is a bit out there, I'd like to get a feel for what the other writers find horrific, that I might incorporate them into future projects if possible.

Of course, the general rule is to write what scares you, I'm interested to see what comes up.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I see. While I'm here I might pose the same question to the other posters on the topic. What is it that scares you? What sort of story do you think would give you the chills? Doesn't matter what it is, supernatural, paranormal, other worldly, old evil eye down the street, clowns, dolls, spiders... though a lot of my writing in the EH is a bit out there, I'd like to get a feel for what the other writers find horrific, that I might incorporate them into future projects if possible.

Of course, the general rule is to write what scares you, I'm interested to see what comes up.

Horror is always premature death.

 

[SecondCircle]

Horror is always premature death.

To an extent, it is, because that's where fear and survival come in for any living thing. Some may not admit it, but death is the most frightening concept to any creature, because we are geared to survive, to be. To not exist is something we cannot fathom.

But when you start to split the hairs, there is a level that we reach where fear becomes so much more complex. Death as the central cause, yes. Pain and suffering, yes. But the psychology of what comes before is the real catch. People are freaked by different , and the effect it has over you is powerful.

 

[sr71plt]

I don't think death is required for horror. Mortal fear--for you or someone else--probably, but it doesn't have to go to the extent of actual death. That's probably why I won't bother watching/reading what seems to be put out as that now--because those making it also think death--and lots of gruesome--death as being required. (I do get a good scare out of some of what I will see, but not what is commercially being offered as horror)

So, SecondCircle, read my "Snaked" posted here (not GM--http://www.literotica.com/s/snaked) and tell me if you think it qualifies was Erotic Horror, and why not, if not. It doesn't include death.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

To an extent, it is, because that's where fear and survival come in for any living thing. Some may not admit it, but death is the most frightening concept to any creature, because we are geared to survive, to be. To not exist is something we cannot fathom.

But when you start to split the hairs, there is a level that we reach where fear becomes so much more complex. Death as the central cause, yes. Pain and suffering, yes. But the psychology of what comes before is the real catch. People are freaked by different , and the effect it has over you is powerful.

Premature death is what I mean. It need not be gruesome, just unexpected.

 

[lovecraft68]

Yes, internet etiquette and paranoia. I seem to share similar opinions with another poster/posters, therefore, I must be one of those individuals.

For a forum that is supposed to be filled with creative people, the extremely limited method of thinking practiced by a few is appalling.

But, yes, I am an alt, hence the silly name. I will not post under my author name to avoid the retribution mentioned here often. I also have my "main identity" in the GB. Another reason to write under a different tag.

A few people here who crossover forums might know it. but most of you have no idea who I am, which is no big deal, I am simply "Me"

I am amused by how the GB has such a bad rap here when the threads here degenerate into just as much nastiness. Also seems funny that more than half the threads here seem to belong in the GB. In fact many identical threads have been running there for years.

And as to bad behavior? I took a peek at Mr P's posts and see him talking about 2 posters who have not posted here in weeks, yet he still talks about him. Good thing there are no assholes here, though, like in the GB.

And I find it amusing Mr. P carries around some quote from a poster he doesn't like in his signature.

That tells me he owns you.

As does the fact you seem to be looking for me, and I am sure any other newbie here you don't like, to be him.

The real lark, is the "scouries" situation. Talk about a guy laughing his ass off.

He owns all of you.

Where the irony comes in, is the biggest cheater on this site is right there among you and has all but called it out and all the super sleuths here are still blaming some idiot who writes god-awful incest stories.

And here I thought Mr. P was a super secret agent.

Ha-ha-ha.

You happy now?

At least develop your own schtick

 

[sr71plt]

Don't even make the effort, LC. It didn't work; just go on to the next game.

 

[NEMouse]

Ha-ha-ha.

You happy now?

At least develop your own schtick

Whatever.

You can go back to banging your sister now.

Why don't you put that in your sig?

Maybe your shitty incest stories will get some more readers.

Know who I am yet?

 

[slyc_willie]

Uh . . . wow.

 

[SecondCircle]

I don't think death is required for horror. Mortal fear--for you or someone else--probably, but it doesn't have to go to the extent of actual death. That's probably why I won't bother watching/reading what seems to be put out as that now--because those making it also think death--and lots of gruesome--death as being required. (I do get a good scare out of some of what I will see, but not what is commercially being offered as horror)

So, SecondCircle, read my "Snaked" posted here (not GM--http://www.literotica.com/s/snaked) and tell me if you think it qualifies was Erotic Horror, and why not, if not. It doesn't include death.

I read snaked long before I came to the forums. I've mentioned so before. I liked the story in general. Gave it four stars if that matters. I especially liked the way all of your descriptions and references were snakelike and fed the central theme. It kept the mood and suspense going. Not too much on the character development side, but it was a short story so that doesn't really matter that much.

While I would have given it a 4.7 if that was possible, it didn't do much to scare. Just my opinion. It evoked a sense of dread somewhat, but not exactly what you would call horror or fear. It was a lot better than most of the stuff out there, and I think if you wrote more horror, it would whip and spin into something frightening.

That said, it qualifies, and I don't think it would have belonged in another category. Oh, and it was pretty original. Can't say there's anything like it at least not on Lit.

My opinion, unbiased.

 

[sr71plt]

And no one died. Thanks.

(It was eventually rejected for bestiality, but ultimately posted without any changes.)

 

[SecondCircle]

No one is implying that someone "has to die" or suffer mortal injury for horror to be horror. We were merely stating that most natural fear comes from the base fear of death or pain. I would agree that most horror has degenerated into a lot of the gore crap we see today. And I think horror is more than the grotesque and death. Its the feelings of fear that twist the mind into submission, that gnaw on the ends of our sanity until we can't bear to take anymore, until we wish for that sunny day on the beach again.

I'm trying to do this here, not saying I'll be successful, but I'm giving it a shot.

 

[sr71plt]

No one is implying that someone "has to die" or suffer mortal injury for horror to be horror. We were merely stating that most natural fear comes from the base fear of death or pain. I would agree that most horror has degenerated into a lot of the gore crap we see today. And I think horror is more than the grotesque and death. Its the feelings of fear that twist the mind into submission, that gnaw on the ends of our sanity until we can't bear to take anymore, until we wish for that sunny day on the beach again.

I'm trying to do this here, not saying I'll be successful, but I'm giving it a shot.

JBJ made such a claim--twice--on this thread. That was me who said mortal fear; JBJ twice said premature death was required.

 

[slyc_willie]

No one is implying that someone "has to die" or suffer mortal injury for horror to be horror. We were merely stating that most natural fear comes from the base fear of death or pain. I would agree that most horror has degenerated into a lot of the gore crap we see today. And I think horror is more than the grotesque and death. Its the feelings of fear that twist the mind into submission, that gnaw on the ends of our sanity until we can't bear to take anymore, until we wish for that sunny day on the beach again.

I'm trying to do this here, not saying I'll be successful, but I'm giving it a shot.

Which is why I think a lot of good horror writers "fade to black" as opposed to actually describing an horrific death scene, or as a means of making the reader think someone has died. The reader's imagination can evoke so much more mental trauma than anything we as writers can pen.

That said, I also feel that gory details early on in a story can create even more powerful reactions from a reader when a scene fades away, later in the story, with the implication that something is about to befall a character. I'm using that technique in my current tale. I've gone into detail concerning the atrocities committed to initial victims, but as the story progresses, give less and less detail.

 

[manyeyedhydra]

Which is why I think a lot of good horror writers "fade to black" as opposed to actually describing an horrific death scene, or as a means of making the reader think someone has died. The reader's imagination can evoke so much more mental trauma than anything we as writers can pen.

I'm not so sure that's as true anymore. The challenge is to let them think of something bad, then pull away the screen and show the reader something they hadn't thought of. Most of Clive Barker's early work is him putting his imagination up against the reader's and winning.

Unfortunately, while horror movies have got gorier and less subtle, modern short fiction (small press, etc) has become too over-reliant on a cheap "fade-to-black" trick. An easy way to make a story memorable is by failing to wrap up certain plot points. The reader remembers it because the brain sees it as an unsolved puzzle and keeps turning it over in the mind afterwards. It's a very cheap con trick, but it's effective, especially amongst other writers and literary students, as they get to debate endlessly about meanings that don't exist afterwards. Lovecraft (the real one) left some things vague, but there was always a story and someone in peril. I find most modern weird fiction to be soulless in comparison - all craft and style to disguise the fact there's nothing at the heart. Which is probably why no one reads it anymore apart from other writers and literary students.

A simple comparison is with erotica. Would a writer get away with a fade-to-black on the bedroom scene? Obviously not. There has to be some juicy stuff left in.

 

[slyc_willie]

I'm not so sure that's as true anymore. The challenge is to let them think of something bad, then pull away the screen and show the reader something they hadn't thought of. Most of Clive Barker's early work is him putting his imagination up against the reader's and winning.

Unfortunately, while horror movies have got gorier and less subtle, modern short fiction (small press, etc) has become too over-reliant on a cheap "fade-to-black" trick. An easy way to make a story memorable is by failing to wrap up certain plot points. The reader remembers it because the brain sees it as an unsolved puzzle and keeps turning it over in the mind afterwards. It's a very cheap con trick, but it's effective, especially amongst other writers and literary students, as they get to debate endlessly about meanings that don't exist afterwards. Lovecraft (the real one) left some things vague, but there was always a story and someone in peril. I find most modern weird fiction to be soulless in comparison - all craft and style to disguise the fact there's nothing at the heart. Which is probably why no one reads it anymore apart from other writers and literary students.

A simple comparison is with erotica. Would a writer get away with a fade-to-black on the bedroom scene? Obviously not. There has to be some juicy stuff left in.

And that's why I included the second part of my post. You can cross over between gory detail and leaving it to the imagination of the reader, once you've established what the bad guy (or guys, or gal, whichever) can and is going to do to the victim.

 

[manyeyedhydra]

And that's why I included the second part of my post. You can cross over between gory detail and leaving it to the imagination of the reader, once you've established what the bad guy (or guys, or gal, whichever) can and is going to do to the victim.

Whoops, got carried away at ranting about a pet peeve rather than what you said.

I think the second part is probably right. Once the readers have seen it once there's no need to repeat it over and over.

 

[slyc_willie]

Whoops, got carried away at ranting about a pet peeve rather than what you said.

I think the second part is probably right. Once the readers have seen it once there's no need to repeat it over and over.

I kind of see the same thing with erotic scenes. If my characters are doing the same thing I've already described, I see no reason to go into detail again. I always try to make each erotic scene unique, just as I try to individualize each horror scene.