Romance turns sex into art.

[wildsweetone]

Without it, it's just a messy, sweaty business.

[/quote]

 

[oggbashan]

"Bed" as the Italian proverb succintly puts it, "is the poor man's opera."

Aldous Huxley - Heaven and Hell

 

[MathGirl]

Without it, it's just a messy, sweaty business.

I've never had one without the other, and I don't think I'd ever want to try. I know I'm naive, and I intend to stay that way.
Blush,
MG

 

[Quasimodem]

Without it, it's just a messy, sweaty business.

And just what - pant! pant! - the heck is it - drip. drip. - WITH IT, I'd like to ask?

Soon as I can catch my breath!

 

[pop_54]

Without it, it's just a messy, sweaty business.

[/QUOTE]

Can be a sweaty messy art form if done right though dear

 

[Guest]

I'm with MG and Pops; give me messy in bed, leave art on the walls. Perdita

(unless it's Art, then he can get on the bed.)

 

[wildsweetone]

And just what - pant! pant! - the heck is it - drip. drip. - WITH IT, I'd like to ask?

Soon as I can catch my breath!

I knew it was possible for man to type whilst going without romance.


This little thread's quote came from a character in a book I'm presently reading. It gave me food for thought.

It's like the difference between porn and erotica.

 

[pop_54]

wow

There's a difference??

 

[pop_54]

Mmmmm

I'm with MG and Pops; give me messy in bed, leave art on the walls. Perdita

(unless it's Art, then he can get on the bed.)

Hello darling, fancy a bit of artwork, hehe!! I'll show you my brush strokes.

 

[MathGirl]

Re: Re: Romance turns sex into art.

It's like the difference between porn and erotica.

Dear WSO,
I prefer not to split hairs about the stuff I write. I refer to it as "smut."
MG

 

[Guest]

Re: Mmmmm

Hello darling, fancy a bit of artwork, hehe!! I'll show you my brush strokes.

Yes, slow and broad strokes, please.

Darling Purr

 

[wildsweetone]

Re: Re: Re: Romance turns sex into art.

Dear WSO,
I prefer not to split hairs about the stuff I write. I refer to it as "smut."
MG

I'm not really trying to split hairs...

I'm more wondering if it's possible for me to write a story that is intentionally a jack off piece (which by my definition contains little apart from great sex), along with a good measure of intentionally added 'romance'.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

[Romance turns sex into art.] Without it, it's just a messy, sweaty business.

[/QUOTE]

How so? You mean if I just put candles on either side of my VCR and play the 101 strings in the background, then a fuck film becomes art?

It's a great little statement that really doesn't mean anything at all, isn't it? None of us knows what it really means, but none of us will admit it either. It sounds like it should be true, so that's good enough.

I've had sex without romance (unless drinking beer in a bowling alley was romantic), and I don't know if the sex qualified as art, but it was pretty damned good.

I say it's spinach and I say the hell with it.

There's one at every party, and I'm it at this one.


---dr.M.

 

[Quint]

I agree most completely with the good Doctor. If romance were all that elevated sex to art, then all "artistic" stories would be in the Romance category.

I've written bad lovemaking (in a kingdom far away) and I've written much higher quality fucking. Quote n/a.

 

[wildsweetone]

Re: Re: Romance turns sex into art.

Not that I dare get in the way when the good dr. is back in town but, as I said a few postings up, the quote came directly from a book I'm currently reading. It was said by one character to another during the course of a conversation (obviously).

Originally posted by dr_mabeuse

How so? You mean if I just put candles on either side of my VCR and play the 101 strings in the background, then a fuck film becomes art?

If that's what romance is to you, then sure. Why not? You've got the general gist of the idea though. Sex by itself is just sex. When you add something to it i.e. your examples of candles, then it becomes romantic. Make sense?

It's a great little statement that really doesn't mean anything at all, isn't it? None of us knows what it really means, but none of us will admit it either. It sounds like it should be true, so that's good enough.

It actually does mean something as in my above explanation, however some people find difficulty in seeing the meaning, so it seems.

I've had sex without romance (unless drinking beer in a bowling alley was romantic), and I don't know if the sex qualified as art, but it was pretty damned good.

Only you and/or your partner (if you had one) would know if it qualified as art. That it was 'pretty damned good' means perhaps it was a little more than just 'sex without romance'.

I say it's spinach and I say the hell with it.

Then you'll eat your greens and know full well that though the taste is foul it's doing you some good.

There's one at every party, and I'm it at this one.

I think somebody must have put something in your spinach lately dr. Are you okay?

 

[Guest]

I'll take romance, the Bronx and...

Greetings, Sweets. I've been thinking about your query and the comments here, and finally feel I might respond more seriously than I did above. Please excuse my dallying with Pops (it's a flaw in my nature, rooted in my libido I'd say, however adolescent it may appear).

My issue would be with the use of 'romance' in your quote. It's taken out of context as I have no idea what book you're reading or the author; but Romance can cover much ground including some rather well defined terms to do with art, literaure and other cultural and historical times.

I should mention that I long ago gave up the idea of sex as sacred; that concept was imbedded into my and many others' training as religiously/sociologically molded citizens of our time(s). I do not say sex cannot approach something like the sacred, but it is not inherently so, even when love is involved.

Given that, I do believe sex can be much more than 'business' w/o romance. Within the writing of it, the author can focus on so much more than the sex act(s), e.g., any emotional, however unromantic, needs and desires of the characters. Romantic love need not enter the scene(s) to be romantic.

I daresay Mab.'s comments are fatuous, at least simplistic. I know he's more intelligent than the above ill proves. However, I cannot agree with your response to him either, that sex w/o romance is just sex. Apart from love and/or romance, sex is a great means of intercourse for us humans. Sans love/romance there is much we can express and relieve with our bodies through sexual play, or work if you will (I do not mean real sex-work).

Re. erotica, porn, smut, what have you: I think erotica can be artistic, even art - but not what the norm is that might be readily defined as porn or smut. Erotica can be pornographic or smutty, but not vice-versa, imo. Getting away from writing for a moment, there are very fine films (from early to contemporary) that have artistic and erotic moments that cannot be classifed as porn or smut, nor even romantic. Off hand I would cite erotic bits of Beckett and Joyce that are commonly judged to be art but arguably 'romantic'. It is so with much great art.

I hope we can discuss this further. I won't go on at present and hope my thoughts can elict more responses (silly or serious, clique-ish or not). I will try to keep up and respond further if I think I can express myself correctly, or at least sincerely.

great reagards, Wild one,

Perdita

 

[wildsweetone]

Hiya Perdita,
I didn’t mind that you and pops ‘played’ on the thread, it didn’t go on and on for hours – that’s when it bugs me. Thanks for being aware though. Me, and the good dr. I think, appreciate it. As for the clique thing going on elsewhere, I think it’s just floated above my head now. I’m not sure who’s trying to impress who or what, but frankly I have better things to do with my time than worry (unless I truly have hurt someone, god forbid).

You’re right I see, in that ‘romance’ can cover as much ground as ‘art’ can cover and that it depends on the context.

I saw this comment from the book. It lit an intriguing spark within me, and thanks to your latest posting, I’ve just figured out why.

I too over the last few years have discovered there is little that’s sacred about the sexual act itself. Sex is after all, just sex. It was used initially as a joyful bringing together of two people, then as a means to reproduce and now, well, it’s just sex. When it gets to the point of being ‘just sex’ then it becomes that raw messy, sweaty business the character commented upon.

I think there has to be more to the act for it to take on deeper meaning in itself. Romance added to the equation of sex can lighten up a relationship that has heard the death bell tolling.

The point I was making then was, sex is simply sex. We use it for the release of bodily fluids, we use it for the release of stress, love, anger etc. It is simply an act of a male inserting his penis into a woman’s vagina (or all the variations thereof) and one or the other, or even neither, having an orgasm before rolling over and going to sleep.

Basic eh?

When we add that one of the parties winks at the other, then an element of fun comes in to play. When we add a tear, a great emotional upheaval takes place, one of sadness, or overwhelming joy etc. When we add in other things to the basic sex act, then the sex act becomes so much more than mere sex.

Sex is the cake. The extras are the icing, or the 'romance' if you will.

A jack off story is one that contains basic sex.

A piece of written art is one that contains more than basic sex. It is where the characters become alive, where they live and breath in the same realm as the author.

Am I making any sense yet?

 

[Gabriel_Lee]

Romance, Sex, Art

These are essentially very different things and exist in very different ways. They don't easily relate to each other at all, but as human beings, we emotionally link romance and sex, believe that romance can elevate sex in some way and transform it. Hey Presto! Art!

Sex + Romance = Art ?

I don't think so, not inevitably, anyway. It makes no sense to try to define one in terms of the other two.

The description of sex is not sex. Developing the characters of the people involved may make a better story, but not necessarily. Romance is not an essential component. Romance and Art both exist in very subjective ways, which means that everyone has different viewpoints anyway and romance described is different from romance experienced.

There is no reason to suppose that concentrating purely upon the sex and ignoring the personalities and characters involved cannot produce a written work of prose that could qualify as art. The fact that the subject matter may be basic sex, does not mean to say that it cannot be dealt with in an artistic way.

And who said art is not a messy sweaty business? Or are you just judging the finished product?

I don't think of art as something which has proper boundaries, although sometimes maybe it should.

GL

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Ah, WSO, don't take me too seriously. It's not the sentiment toat bothers me--whatever it means--it's the fact that this is one of those statements that just sounds so true that who could possibly be so heartless as to argue with it or doubt it for a second?

Romance is the girft love makes to ourselves.

Love is life seeking of life.

Life is love seeking love.

Romance is love seeking life.

Romance is the gift our hearts give to love.

Art is the romance of love.

Love is the romance of art

Romance is the art of love.

I could churn this stuff out all day, or you could probably write a quick program to generate aphorisms like this by putting random words together. I don't know what they mean, or if they mean anything at all, but they sound good. It wasn't really the aphorism I was objecting to, and I wasn't really even objecting. It was the unthinking acceptance of a statement that can mean almost anything because it's so totally ambiguous.

I think I know what most of us think it means. It means that affection, grace, and emotions beyond mere desire are what give the act of copulation transcendent meaning to us. That's a flat and knobby way of saying it, but at least in this form we can think about whether it seems true or not.

I've been hanging on the poetry board a lot where you see a lot of sentiments like this. They may be true, they may be false, but usually they're just indecipherable.

I just wanted to play Devil's advocate, since he seems to be paying my tuition these days.


---dr.M.

 

[Gabriel_Lee]

In addition to what I said before, I'll agree with Dr.M above on this one.

GL

 

[Guest]

Bravi, bravi! Now this is a fine discussion. I haven't time this moment to respond to Sweets, Gabe and Mab., but I will, and thoughtfully.

For the moment, Mab., good one re. your tuition.

Perdita

 

[redrider4u]

I suggest..........

All of this is pure opinion. Where romance ends, and sex begins, is specific to each of us.

A fast, furious spontaneous fuck over a downed tree....sex only?
Or, is there an element of romance in the interlude in the forest?

An interesting thread here.

 

[wildsweetone]

Re: I suggest..........

All of this is pure opinion. Where romance ends, and sex begins, is specific to each of us.

A fast, furious spontaneous fuck over a downed tree....sex only?
Or, is there an element of romance in the interlude in the forest?

An interesting thread here.

You're right in that it's a very personal perspective we each have on romance and sex.

And personally, a fast furious spontaneous fuck over a downed tree wouldn't be 'sex only' for me. well, i could do it that way too i reckon and without batting an eyelid.

If it hits a personal 'pleasure spot' then it must include some form of romance, right?

 

[BardsLady]

Romance and Sex

Well, I'm going to toss my hat into the ring, figuratively speaking.

I agree with the fact that everyone has a different perspective of sex and romance.

I'm still a new person when it comes to writing stories. I don't have too much experience with it. But, after looking at the stories that I like, I find that as long as there is a true story/plotline to the fiction, anything can be taken into context of romance and sex.


I could take the idea of a really fast and furious fuck over a fallen tree log and turn it into something romantic before and after the fact. Other people would just call it a hot and heavy sex-at-first-sight scene. Heh, either or can be really enjoyable.

Uh Oh.. Thanks guys, you just got my Muse kicked into gear again. Gotta run and start in on the third installment of a series I'm working on. See ya!

BardsLady

 

[wildsweetone]

Hiya Bardslady and Welcome to Litland if you haven't already been welcomed. Thanks for joining the thread and I'm glad your muse kicked in again

I could take the idea of a really fast and furious fuck over a fallen tree log and turn it into something romantic before and after the fact. Other people would just call it a hot and heavy sex-at-first-sight scene. Heh, either or can be really enjoyable.

But, would the 'sex-at-first-sight' scene contain any form of romance?

I've been hanging on the poetry board a lot where you see a lot of sentiments like this. They may be true, they may be false, but usually they're just indecipherable.

dr.M: I disagree with you. They're not indecipherable at all. The difficulty comes from being too widely open for different perspectives - I think).



here's some examples...

a)
"Get over that log!" he ordered, then proceeded to fuck her as she'd never been fucked before.

b)
"Get over that log." As he whispered in her ear, she felt his warm breath caress her lobe and a shiver of anticipation trilled through her spine.

c)
"Get over that log," he looked across the path at her, then winked.

Are any of those 'sex at first sight' scenes?