The O! So Hard! Job of Research Reading...

[Guest]

Reading with one Hand

This is a multi-part question, so before you stomp on me in those spiky high heels, please read the whole thing (I mean, why waste a good stomping? )

I've come to writing erotica from a more traditional writing background -- that of literary fiction, with long sideroads into genre fiction. So, I take a fairly scholastic approach. I do research reading. If you've suffered for your English degree or sat through seminars on writing, you have heard the dictum before.

This doesn't mean I one day said "Hey, I'll write erotica!" and started that way. Oh no, I was reading it long before I tried my hand at writing it. But there are books I read for pleasure, and books I read to figure out what works, what doesn't, and to get background information to inform my writing. I write because I read, so to speak.

Some writers tell me they refuse to read much, because 1) they might lift an idea 2) they want to keep their "original voice" 3) they don't want to be influenced 4) they want their work to be "fresh". I understand the concern about lifting an idea or a style from another author (although I'll say right here I think it is a fallacious idea). I've also heard writers say they can't read when they are writing, and they are writing all the time, so they hardly ever read. Yet other writers are more like me, and MUST consume the writing of others -- not to regurgitate it or create carbon copies, but just to feed the subconsious. (Movies, poetry, pictures, painting, and tons of other things do this, but reading is a special, intense, direct-to-the-underbrain pathway for me).

I don't say this makes me a better writer, or even a GOOD writer, but it does bring up an interesting point I've argued with some writers and would-be writers over the years -- what's your take, your stance, and your opinion about reading work similar to what you write, or reading at all?

I read, and I have a collection of favorite books that do double duty -- they are a pleasure to read, and I find them excellent for research. What about the rest of you? If you ARE a reader, what books do you specifically love for both the story/writing and because you want to write JUST LIKE THAT, or at least almost like that? Here's my short list of my very, very favorites (Most are anthologies, some are novels or collections)

Flesh and the Word - John Preston
Black Feathers - Cecelia Tan
A Taste of Midnight - Cecelia Tan
Color of Pain, Shade of Pleasure - Cecelia Tan
Best Bisexual Erotica I & II - Bill Brent, Carol Queen
Pomosexuals - Carol Queen, Lawrence Shimmel
Macho Sluts - Pat Califia
The Marketplace Series (The Marketplace, The Slave, The Trainer, The Academy, The Reunion) - Laura Antoniou
The Best American Erotica 2000- 2005 - Susie Bright (have to get the 2001 edition -- it's supposed to have an EXCELLENT Batman/Robin story!)

Tell me about the stuff in your library. Tell me about stuff I need to read and tell me WHY!

 

[3113]

Some writers tell me they refuse to read much, because 1) they might lift an idea 2) they want to keep their "original voice" 3) they don't want to be influenced 4) they want their work to be "fresh".

Let's see:
1) Bullshit
2) Bullshit
3) Bullshit
4) Bullshit

Sorry, I couldn't help myself. Writers who say this often sound, to me like they're making excuses for being too lazy to read. I mean, isn't this kind of like an artist who never goes into an art gallery, never looks at the paintings of ANYONE else. Then gets out paints, starts dribbling them over the canvass and says: "Look! It's fresh and original!"

And everyone staring at it says..."Jackson Pollack already did that and did it ten times better."

Now I'm not saying that these excuses have no merit at all. (1) We can't read EVERYTHING that's ever been published, or see every work of art painted--so we still might do something similar to someone else. So reading doesn't guarantee "freshness" in writing any more than not-reading does. (2) The most common thing for any artist to want to do is "write JUST LIKE THAT!" And it's all too easy for a writer/artist to become a poor-man's copy of what they love.

Which is an important problem. The last thing you want is some critic saying, "So-and-so is just a second-rate Stephen King." Ouch! But that doesn't mean you can't read and admire Stephen King as a master of horror, as someone to study if that is your genre. And in this respect, the more you read the better. You're less likely to become a carbon copy of another writer if you read more than one writer. So read Poe and Shirley Jackson. This keeps you focused on your ultimate goal: to distinguish yourself, not just be a writer who is always described as being "like Stephen King."

And, I'll add, it's a good idea to read BAD horror, failures, as well as good horror (successes). Dave Chappelle said that he learned to be a comic not just by watching all the good and established comedians--but also watching open-mike night and seeing the people who failed and flopped. The jokes that didn't work.

In the end, what I think distinguishes writers is not just how they end up writing, but what they write about. It's not just Stephen King's style that captured attention, but what HE brought to horror. He specialized in the small, American town. That's what he brought from his own life, his own particular perspective. That's where something gets it's freshness--and reading/not-reading isn't going to affect that.

But it is a truism that the more a person reads, the better they can write, if for no other reason than reading teaches vocabulary and how the language works and can be manipulated. I know of very few great writers who were also illiterate. Almost all stories of great writers begin, "As a child, he was a voracious reader, reading everything he could get his hands on...."

 

[Recidiva]

I can't imagine being a good writer if you don't read. Mostly because from reading you can get an sense of tone and voice and what it's like to listen to them, what you like and don't like. Some authors write to teach. Some authors write to tell a story. Some authors write to have fun.

I usually can't stand the preachy writers and would rather deep fry the pages and make confetti out of them than read them. Brain poison. Textbooks are fine for that stuff, but clunkily using fiction as a vector for your bright idea is excruciating to read through.

My favorite authors that taught me to have fun:

Robert Heinlein
Terry Pratchett
Tom and Sharon Curtis

I like the guys that had fun writing what they wrote and consider that their audience is who they are writing for, not themselves. They made it fun.

 

[neonlyte]

I confess to not reading much erotica these days, but there are several authors here whose works I read for pleasure of their craft as much as the story they tell.

Jeanette Winterson I regard as almost the perfect writer - 'Written on the Body' is a superb example of eroticism.

The recently departed John Fowles was an early influence in setting my prefered reading genre - I believe 'The Magus' to be his best work, though the film of the book overshadows the prose.

Iain Banks - cutting edge contemporary fiction, read 'Dead Air'

Iain M Banks (same guy different genre) - writes compelling believable science fiction conjuring imaginary worlds and peoples with the ease of Prachett

C P Snow - an oldy long gone - if you're in your fifties Snow explains why the world is like it is, largely political based novels post WWII

Paulo Coelho - '11 Minutes' a must read for anyone who doubts the ability for a writer to cross gender.

 

[BlackShanglan]

I agree with 3113 that high-flown excuses for not reading - not wishing to sully one's inherent voice and talent - generally sound lazy to me. They also sound arrogant. They appear to me to be declarations that one's inherent talent is so remarkable that one has nothing to learn from anyone. This appears to me to be, for the vast majority of humanity, highly unlikely in any field, and it is particularly unlikely in writing. Because language itself derives meaning from the general practice of language and because stories derive meaning from the general practice of stories, a writer who does not read is rejecting not merely the finesse and creativity of his trade, but the very language in which it communicates itself. He may as well set about forgetting his grammar and his spelling as well, on the grounds that they sully the purity of his linguistic expression - an argument that one does indeed hear made from time to time, and in just as laughable a pretense at reason or enlightenment.

I don't personally read any one person for style, however. There are many authors whose style I admire immensely, but I don't wish to copy any of them. I love their styles, but they are their own. For me, the goal of reading the work of fine craftsmen is not so much to lift their style as to figure out what constitutes it and how they use the tools of the trade to create it. The more authors' work I read and the more different styles I encounter, the more I learn about what tools exist and what methods of use have been developed. I learn more about the remarkable abilities of language, whether in word choices, in syntax, in rhythm, in pattern, in antithesis, in tension, in structure, in symbol. Everything I learn is part of someone's style; eventually, I hope to turn all of those skills to creating my own.

Lists of authors? Well, damned near everyone I can lay my hands on. If I had to pick few ... hmmm.

John Stuart Mill for argument, logic, and lucidity.
Oscar Wilde for beauty, passion, and richness.
Virginia Wolfe for humor and brilliance of voice/structure interface.
Jane Austen for perfection of the voiced third person POV.
Seamus Heaney for concrete naturalism and symbol.
Charles Algernon Swinburne for genius in poetic form.
Joseph Heller for humor.
Alexander Pope for style and critical insight.
Jonathan Swift for concision, satiric bite, and narrative voice.
William Butler Yeats for construction, leanness, and symbolic power.
The Tain Bo Cuailgne for simplicity and force.
Robert Browning for narrative voice.

Shanglan

 

[Guest]

Some writers tell me they refuse to read much, because 1) they might lift an idea 2) they want to keep their "original voice" 3) they don't want to be influenced 4) they want their work to be "fresh". I understand the concern about lifting an idea or a style from another author (although I'll say right here I think it is a fallacious idea). I've also heard writers say they can't read when they are writing, and they are writing all the time, so they hardly ever read. Yet other writers are more like me, and MUST consume the writing of others -- not to regurgitate it or create carbon copies, but just to feed the subconsious. (Movies, poetry, pictures, painting, and tons of other things do this, but reading is a special, intense, direct-to-the-underbrain pathway for me).

I don't say this makes me a better writer, or even a GOOD writer, but it does bring up an interesting point I've argued with some writers and would-be writers over the years -- what's your take, your stance, and your opinion about reading work similar to what you write, or reading at all?

I read, and I have a collection of favorite books that do double duty -- they are a pleasure to read, and I find them excellent for research. What about the rest of you? If you ARE a reader, what books do you specifically love for both the story/writing and because you want to write JUST LIKE THAT, or at least almost like that? Here's my short list of my very, very favorites (Most are anthologies, some are novels or collections)

Flesh and the Word - John Preston
Black Feathers - Cecelia Tan
A Taste of Midnight - Cecelia Tan
Color of Pain, Shade of Pleasure - Cecelia Tan
Best Bisexual Erotica I & II - Bill Brent, Carol Queen
Pomosexuals - Carol Queen, Lawrence Shimmel
Macho Sluts - Pat Califia
The Marketplace Series (The Marketplace, The Slave, The Trainer, The Academy, The Reunion) - Laura Antoniou
The Best American Erotica 2000- 2005 - Susie Bright (have to get the 2001 edition -- it's supposed to have an EXCELLENT Batman/Robin story!)

Tell me about the stuff in your library. Tell me about stuff I need to read and tell me WHY!

*sighs* Wrong question, lol, both to ask and for me to answer, as I get passionate over my writing and reading. I read as obsessively and compulsively as I write.

I have a few standards I always come back to: Laurell K Hamillton, Poppy Z Brite, Caitlin R Kiernan (don't ask me why they all use their middle initials) and poetry in massive doses. I also obsessively read my French dictionary, especially if I have writer's block. For some reason it helps.

Currently, however, I'm reading a lot of livejournal fanfiction stories, which I've mentioned before. The ones I am reading are "In Joy and Sorrow," "Strawberry Flavour," "Yesterday's Tomorrow," "Fate of the Forlorn," and a story on witchfics by Riley, which I've read before and always return to "Pawn to Queen."

I don't worry about lifting an idea. I've used the same basic idea as other people (haven't we all... what's that cliche about "nothing new under the sun?") but I do it the way I see, not as they see it. What I do, more than anything else, is use music. Whatever I'm writing has a soundtrack, at least to me. My WMP playlists reflect that. "Falling" has a five-cd soundtrack, lol. "A Love Story in A Minor Key?" Try fifteen.

I play the music that makes me sad, or happy, or angry, or calm, as I write. So as for research reading... no, not really, unless I'm researching facts to make it more plausible and realistic. I do research singing, and listening. I do research walking, and thinking, and riding. Some of my best ideas come to me on horseback. I love my writing, it restricts me and liberates me all at once. I like putting it out there to see what comes back. I like people who flame it, and I like people who compliment it. In general... I like people. And writing is all about people, now isn't it?

 

[ChilledVodkaIV]

I read a book once. But I didn't like it.

 

[Guest]

I read a book once. But I didn't like it.

Sweets. the Kill this thread is over there... *points* I know the same person started both pots a-boiling, but this one is for stirring, not up-ending on the fire.

 

[Guest]

Sweets. the Kill this thread is over there... *points* I know the same person started both pots a-boiling, but this one is for stirring, not up-ending on the fire.

Ah, Chill probably has not perfected the art of holding the book open with one hand while the other hand is...occupied. That would turn anyone against literature.

 

[Guest]

Ah, Chill probably has not perfected the art of holding the book open with one hand while the other hand is...occupied. That would turn anyone against literature.

*blinks* Wow... heheheh. Yeah, I knew there was a reason I picked your cleavage.

 

[artisticbiguy]

I must admit that I have not done much reading of "non-online" fiction for a while (HUSH MAL!). I do not, however, have any "high minded excuses" for this. I do think that reading, especially in your genre of interest, from various successful and talented authors, is the only way to grow.

I am a massage therapist, and I LOVE to get work done on me by other massage therapists. Unless that therapist is working in a modality totally dissimilar from mine (tuina, some indian styles, rolfing, etc.), I will be fairly familiar with what he or she is doing. What I love is that I get to feel different uses for the same techniques. There are times I go "oh yeah, I forgot about XYZ", because my own normal routine does not include said muscle group or stroke for said muscle group. I do not feel I am "copying" the therapist if I choose to make use of a technique I find works. The more therapists I work with, the more unique my style becomes because the good stuff stays and I like to think the techniques that don't work are left behind.

I think writing is the same way. If we read lots and lots of other's works, we will have a larger resource of techniques and styles to choose from. We all know there are "no new ideas", as there are only "so many plots". However, how we present said ideas and plots, how we link them together with our voice, our vision, our flare... that is what makes each writer's work original and new.

*punting the soap box*

boy, for a writer who doesn't know shit, I sure have a lot to say!

 

[Guest]

I must admit that I have not done much reading of "non-online" fiction for a while (HUSH MAL!)...

*punting the soap box*

boy, for a writer who doesn't know shit, I sure have a lot to say!

I'll get you reading yet!

 

[Stella_Omega]

Nice topic, Mal!

I read all the time, all the time, all the time. Like you, it's a direct to the brain interface for me. And my family is the same- except for the boy, who would rather be read to, and has incredible retainment for what he hears.
We have atrocious reading habits here. We read and re-read, the same books four, five times apiece, and we go back to those books again in three or four years time. We seem to make little distinction between genres, or what is age-appropriate. I'm as likely to be reading Francis Hodges Burnette, or E.B.White, as I am Pat Califia- I admit I haven't let my daughter read those, but she recently tore through most of William Burrough's books. (She loved his style and got bored with his repetition)

I have a solid wall of books in my house, piles on the floor, books drifted against the bedside tables, books laying open and face down, destroying their spines. We have collectables- Don Marquise, Eleanor Farjeon, random incanubula- in a glass cabinet. We have paperbacks that are held together with rubber bands. We don't go to the library- we lose library books and have to pay for them.

My sexual reading isn't about subtlety, but is is about style;
Anne Rice's "Sleeping Beauty" for sheer over-the-top-ness
Pat Califia for fem-lib-sep dykes, Bill Burroughs for wimmin-hating fags- (has anyone else noticed that they sit side-by-side on the bookstore erotica shelf? I always got a kick out of that)
I have a box of xxxx magazines and 'Zines packed away somewhere- whilst I have teenagers in the house. There were some good one-timewriters in some of those. I think they are all here nowadays!

For non-erotica- in no particular order- Tom Robbins, Gore Vidal, Jo Clayton, Roland Barthes, Italo Calvino, Elanor Farjeon, E.B. White, Raold Dahl, Ursula K. LeGuinne, Terry Pratchett, Neal Gaiman, Neil Stephenson, Michael Moorcock, Maurice Sendak, Norman Mailor, John Updyke, Margaret Allingham, Agatha Christie...

For poetic style- Ray Bradbury, Kurt Vonnegut, Richard Brautigan (remember him?) Carl Sandburg, Vladimir Nabokov, Collette,

William Morris and E.R. Eddison taught me how to crack a joke in dialect.

Robertson Davies wrote impossibly ponderous trilogies that could vary dramatically from book to book- something I am faced with.
Dorothy Sayers taught me to describe physical activities without sacrificing grammer. (murders, in her case)
Elmer Leonard- well, what can you say? it's ALL about dialogue!

 

[3113]

she recently tore through most of William Burrough's books. (She loved his style and got bored with his repetition)

Well, you need to be on opiates for the repetition to not get boring. I don't suppose you'd let her have that experience though. *Sigh* Moms are so tough these days.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Well, you need to be on opiates for the repetition to not get boring. I don't suppose you'd let her have that experience though. *Sigh* Moms are so tough these days.

She wasn't impressed with Keroac- She's gobbling up Hunter Thompson, right now. This is her introduction to the Veitnam era...

 

[rgraham666]

Gonna add my two cents here.

I love reading. I go through at least a couple of hundred pages of something everyday. Reading a lot less fiction than I used to, though.

And I'll agree with the other who say that people who don't read because they wish to be 'unsullied' and 'fresh' are arrogant and lazy. What the people that don't read really want is to be unsullied by thought. But if you don't think, you can't right.

Remember that very occasional poster cataleptick. Case in point.

Favourite writers.

Harlan Ellison, Ray Bradbury for style.

William Gibson, Neal Stephenson, Alan Moore for creativity.

John Ralston Saul for dry wit and the sheer heresy of his ideas.

 

[Guest]

 

[Guest]

Wow. I'm making lists here, folks

I didn't list my other reading. Like several of you, books overrun my house. I actually have a library, although all the books aren't there. I have books in my living room and in my office, in the kitchen, in my family room. We've got a pretty wide spread, between ABG and me (he may not read them, but he looks at the pictures! He loves graphic novels and comics, thus...) I have a dayplanner I take everywhere, not because of the calendar and to-do lists, or even because it's also my wallet, but because I keep book lists in it -- what I own, what I'm looking for, what I plan to read, etc. I used to keep it separate but eventually combined everything into one to save space.

As for not being a proper reader -- what's that? I reread favorites the way I visit old friends -- eagerly and whenever I can. I'm on chapter 17 of Pride and Prejudice (again) for nighttime reading. I collect children's books, not for value, but either because I read them as a child or wished I had, and so will read them now.

Favorite authors: Jane Austen (and her natural heir, Georgette Heyer), Octavia E. Butler, Stephen Brust, David Brin, Barry, HUgart, RoJim Butcher, Tom Clancy, Hal Clement, Storm Constantine, Samuel Delaney, Robin McKinley, Ursula LeGuin, Charlaine Harris, Robert Heinlein, Anne McCaffrey, Andre Norton, Jasper Fforde, China Meiville, Banana Yoshimoto, Arthur Conan Doyle (can you say "Sherlock Holes Fan?) and Laurie R. King, John Irving, Louisa May Alcott....there are more, of course.

(I used to love Laurel Hamilton, but she and I broke up...artistic differences, although I hear she's changed...)

 

[impressive]

(I used to love Laurel Hamilton, but she and I broke up...artistic differences, although I hear she's changed...)

Her latest got some NASTY reviews.

Glad to see you mention McCaffrey. She weaves a wonderful story.

I, too, have books everywhere ... but my attention span is quite limited these days. Since I started writing, it's much more difficult to get lost in a story. I'll get jarred out of it by things I never noticed before (head hopping, passive voice, etc.). *shrug*

The books I return to are those with broad socio-political themes: LotR, Dune, McCaffrey's Pern series, Heinlein's stuff, Asimov's Foundation/robot stuff, King's The Stand, Anthony's Geodyssey series, etc.

 

[Guest]

 

[wishfulthinking]

From a writer's perspective, I find that reading gets my creative juices going [not down there, up here]. I figured I've found my voice, so any influence nowadays would be of the fine tuning kind [much needed ].

What got me started writing erotica was again reading - I found that I couldn't find the erotic stories I wanted, so I tried to write them. My very first erotic book influenced me heavily. I can't deny it. It is present in my writing - but not the words or the style or plot or whatever, but the feel. I love that certain 'feel' to it, and I subconsciously try to re-create it in every story of mine. My second erotic story was Anne Rice's beauty - also a strong influence. They told me what I liked - escapism. I don't want reality.

What I write is polar to what I read - I write about submissive females. I have a very dominant job, and I love books where women know what they want and get it.

Eg.'s include
Laurel Hamilton's anita blake - for sexiness and hardness
Janet Evanovich's stephanie plum - for humour and approaching things a different way than what's expected
KAtie Macalister's ashlin gray - quirky
Kim Harrison's witch character - smart

 

[Guest]

Imp, how do you get past Heinlein's sexism? I have a very hard time reading his stuff because of that.

I didn't get passed it either. I really stopped reading him when I turned 16-17. But he was very influential on me, I've read a lot (many more than once) and I still revisit them from time to time for the good parts.

I always wanted to be Lazarus Long, not one of the women who was always trying to trip him up and beat him to the ground. Most of THEM I wanted to slap around for being such wusses.

 

[Recidiva]

Imp, how do you get past Heinlein's sexism? I have a very hard time reading his stuff because of that.

I'm a Heinlein fan and I'm female. I don't find him to be sexist in the sense that he rides one gender for its failings. He pretty much rides everybody for their failings.

 

[Guest]

Her latest got some NASTY reviews.

Glad to see you mention McCaffrey. She weaves a wonderful story.

I, too, have books everywhere ... but my attention span is quite limited these days. Since I started writing, it's much more difficult to get lost in a story. I'll get jarred out of it by things I never noticed before (head hopping, passive voice, etc.). *shrug*

The books I return to are those with broad socio-political themes: LotR, Dune, McCaffrey's Pern series, Heinlein's stuff, Asimov's Foundation/robot stuff, King's The Stand, Anthony's Geodyssey series, etc.

I was with Anita until about book 8. I even forgave the early signs of "seriesitis", like how she defeated THE MOST POWERFUL VAMPIRE IN THE WORLD in -- what, book 2? -- and then had to find something even BIGGER to defeat in the next book. I liked the sex before it got repetitious. If sex is going to be repetitious, I'd better be personally involved.

Here's a thought, based on what you said.

How many of you have gotten more picky about your reading as you've read more? I think that is a reason I'm so picky about my own work and the work of others I read. I have a hard time being generous to anything presented as "finished work" if it isn't...well...FINISHED. Fire tested, polished to a gleaming edge, buffed and smoothed and solidly built. I think I've read some very good writing over the years, and every good book I read (and I have read some less than good books, heaven help me, out of sheet bloodymindedness) raises my standard that little bit more. Sometimes books I once loved fall from favor because my tastes have evolved or even (I'll say it) my standards got higher.

Anyone else think that?

 

[wishfulthinking]

[threadjack]

(I used to love Laurel Hamilton, but she and I broke up...artistic differences, although I hear she's changed...)

I've stopped reading the anita blake series. I think I've seen her latest in the bookstores called Micah, but really, a less interesting character I've ever read. He doesn't think, does exactly what she wants, when she wants, and has a big dick. and 2 triuverates or whatever. Please. She needs to de- complicate it, and get back to what it was all about - the undead. But I don't think she has it in her to do it. So yeah, me and Laurell are on a break too.

[/threadjack]