What do you think?

[RichardWark]

I know I'll get a reply in a few days, but, in the interim, what do you think?

I just submitted the first part of a multipart story in Non-erotic. It's been pre writing itself in my mind for years and it finally just spilled out onto my computer about two weeks ago, when I was putting finishing touches on an erotic-erotic story. I am actually surprised it came out so easily.

But I am beginning to grow concerned. My main characters are children, one black, the other white, experiencing some of the chaos of Chicago in the 60s, from, obviously, a child's point of view. Even though it is completely non-sexual, and is being sent to Non-Erotic, is it in danger of rejection on the basis of its young characters?

My NE story "The Rope," in which the main characters are group of 12 and 13 year old boys, again completely non sexual, made it through and performed reasonably well, but I am wondering if it didn't just slip through the cracks.

I'm hoping it sails through because this is one I am particularly happy with.

Richard Wark
Wark2002


https://www.literotica.com/stories/memberpage.php?uid=5430653&page=submissions

 

[SamScribble]

... My main characters are children, one black, the other white, experiencing some of the chaos of Chicago in the 60s, from, obviously, a child's point of view. Even though it is completely non-sexual, and is being sent to Non-Erotic, is it in danger of rejection on the basis of its young characters?

https://www.literotica.com/stories/memberpage.php?uid=5430653&page=submissions

Ya pays ya money and ya takes ya chances. But, if it's 100 percent straight, it could well go through.

Good luck

 

[KeithD]

Let us know if it does (or doesn't).

 

[Zeb_Carter]

It will. My latest in Sci-Fi starts out with a 14 year old girl in a not to distant dystopian America fighting the Chinese, it made it through. There is no sex, not even a hint, it's just about adventure and growing up and family.

Just in case... Chicom Invasion

Just as an aside I started these way back in 2018. Just put the polish on them lately. It seemed appropriate.

 

[gunhilltrain]

I guess if it doesn't go through, there must be sites that specialize in non-erotic fiction? I thought Wattpad might be one of them, but I just briefly looked at it again and that doesn't seem like one of them. It can be confusing because literature in print has almost no restrictions but online it's a different situation.

 

[MillieDynamite]

I guess if it doesn't go through, there must be sites that specialize in non-erotic fiction? I thought Wattpad might be one of them, but I just briefly looked at it again and that doesn't seem like one of them. It can be confusing because literature in print has almost no restrictions but online it's a different situation.

Mainstream fiction can cover anything as long as it isn't graphic or presented only for titillation. NO actual sex is described in Lolita, it is implied, but not covered in graphic detail. And yet, we couldn't publish it here if Vladimir Nabokov submitted it himself. Which would be a really neat trick since he died in 1977!

 

[rescatooor]

Mainstream fiction can cover anything as long as it isn't graphic or presented only for titillation. NO actual sex is described in Lolita, it is implied, but not covered in graphic detail. And yet, we couldn't publish it here if Vladimir Nabokov submitted it himself. Which would be a really neat trick since he died in 1977!

While the scenes aren't given much description, I'd say that are definitely more than just implied. It's flatly stated that they're doing it, and she isn't into it. Besides, isn't there a whole scene about the two of them playfully "wrestling" on a sofa early on that isn't all that different to the "sitting on mom's lap" stories found here? Aside from the obvious.

 

[Comshaw]

What do you think?(snip)

Do I have to? Think that is. It makes my head hurt.


Comshaw

 

[MillieDynamite]

While the scenes aren't given much description, I'd say that are definitely more than just implied. It's flatly stated that they're doing it, and she isn't into it. Besides, isn't there a whole scene about the two of them playfully "wrestling" on a sofa early on that isn't all that different to the "sitting on mom's lap" stories found here? Aside from the obvious.

Yes, that is all true, but there weren't graphic depiction of fucking. I didn't mean the sex was just implied but it wasn't presented as insert item A into slot B. Lolita was seductive and liked his attention, but she didn't like the control he had over her, or the actual fucking.

I don't remember if this was in both the book and movie or just one or the other. After her mothers death, when Herbert picked her up from boarding school, she's sitting next him the car and say something to the effect, "I guess you don't love me after all. I've been with you five minutes and you haven't even kissed me."

 

[rescatooor]

Yes, that is all true, but there weren't graphic depiction of fucking. I didn't mean the sex was just implied but it wasn't presented as insert item A into slot B. Lolita was seductive and liked his attention, but she didn't like the control he had over her, or the actual fucking.

I don't remember if this was in both the book and movie or just one or the other. After her mothers death, when Herbert picked her up from boarding school, she's sitting next him the car and say something to the effect, "I guess you don't love me after all. I've been with you five minutes and you haven't even kissed me."

I don't know about films since I have only read the book. And that a while ago. It's possible she may have said as much. But it's essentially a book about grooming with an unreliable narrator, as evidenced by the ending of it where it's revealed how Lo's life has been ruined through his actions. So I would take any clues of Lo seducing Humbert Humbert with a grain of salt.

 

[MillieDynamite]

I don't know about films since I have only read the book. And that a while ago. It's possible she may have said as much. But it's essentially a book about grooming with an unreliable narrator, as evidenced by the ending of it where it's revealed how Lo's life has been ruined through his actions. So I would take any clues of Lo seducing Humbert Humbert with a grain of salt.

Here's an interesting article on the real life story that inspired the book.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florence_Sally_Horner

A young girl can say things that to an adult are sexy without her intending them to be sexy. Men, especially men drawn to young girls, like to think it's the girls fault. And all first person narration is from an unreliable narrator, in fiction, non-fiction, or the real world, we are shaped by what happens to us, how we want to be perceived, or our own self-doubts.

To a pedophile or hebephilia the way a young girl dresses can provocative when no one else thinks it is. They are wired differently, which doesn't excuse their predilections. We all have our little crosses to bear, and don't think yearnings are excused because you don't know where they come from. this might blow a hole in some of my own tendencies, but the abuse of children, for any reason, deserves to be punished.

I love first person stories, they are intensely intimate. Still, we have to realize our inner-self always has a say in what we reveal to others.

EDIT: so the first link was from a banned site, the seconded link I posted was a book based off the story behind Lolita, so a work of fiction, the third one is the Wikipedia article about the true life girl the story of Lolita was based on. Damn!

Here is a better article on the book about Sally Horner and her real life story. https://www.cbc.ca/radio/sunday/the...In 1948, an 11-year,chance to tell it herself.

 

[rescatooor]

Here's an interesting article on the real life story that inspired the book.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florence_Sally_Horner

A young girl can say things that to an adult are sexy without her intending them to be sexy. Men, especially men drawn to young girls, like to think it's the girls fault. And all first person narration is from an unreliable narrator, in fiction, non-fiction, or the real world, we are shaped by what happens to us, how we want to be perceived, or our own self-doubts.

To a pedophile or hebephilia the way a young girl dresses can provocative when no one else thinks it is. They are wired differently, which doesn't excuse their predilections. We all have our little crosses to bear, and don't think yearnings are excused because you don't know where they come from. this might blow a hole in some of my own tendencies, but the abuse of children, for any reason, deserves to be punished.

I love first person stories, they are intensely intimate. Still, we have to realize our inner-self always has a say in what we reveal to others.

EDIT: so the first link was from a banned site, the seconded link I posted was a book based off the story behind Lolita, so a work of fiction, the third one is the Wikipedia article about the true life girl the story of Lolita was based on. Damn!

Here is a better article on the book about Sally Horner and her real life story. https://www.cbc.ca/radio/sunday/the...In 1948, an 11-year,chance to tell it herself.

If you don't want to speak of unreliable and reliable narrators, that's fine. We can speak of good-faith narrators instead and I don't know about you but I definitely wouldn't call Humbert Humbert one.

You need to make a distinction between what is seduction and what is someone considering something sexy. Seduction implies intent. What happens in the novel is Humbert tries to frame children of her age and seductresses, her being the worst of all, and him as the victim. Humbert Humbert sexualizes Lo and Nabokov very clearly tries to tell the reader that sexualization of this young character is extremely wrong, hence why he wanted his book covers include no depictions of Lo. I have not read on Kubrick's adaptation of his work but I can imagine it wasn't all smooth sailing.

As for Horner, I really consider it to be its own story. Nabokov's Lolita is ultimately not even about a teenage girl but of Humbert Humbert.

 

[gunhilltrain]

Mainstream fiction can cover anything as long as it isn't graphic or presented only for titillation. NO actual sex is described in Lolita, it is implied, but not covered in graphic detail. And yet, we couldn't publish it here if Vladimir Nabokov submitted it himself. Which would be a really neat trick since he died in 1977!

There was an Italian female author - now I can't remember her name or find her online - who published a book about kids in modern Milan, and it had some very graphic scenes among its underage characters. I got it right out of the Mid-Manhattan library, so it wasn't exactly a secret publication.

This book was very different from Lolita. Maybe I can find it on Amazon or the New York Library site.

 

[MillieDynamite]

If you don't want to speak of unreliable and reliable narrators, that's fine. We can speak of good-faith narrators instead and I don't know about you but I definitely wouldn't call Humbert Humbert one.

You need to make a distinction between what is seduction and what is someone considering something sexy. Seduction implies intent. What happens in the novel is Humbert tries to frame children of her age and seductresses, her being the worst of all, and him as the victim. Humbert Humbert sexualizes Lo and Nabokov very clearly tries to tell the reader that sexualization of this young character is extremely wrong, hence why he wanted his book covers include no depictions of Lo. I have not read on Kubrick's adaptation of his work but I can imagine it wasn't all smooth sailing.

As for Horner, I really consider it to be its own story. Nabokov's Lolita is ultimately not even about a teenage girl but of Humbert Humbert.

I'm not making myself clear here. I said what is seductive to an adult is innocent curiosity to a child. That was what I was saying. Of course, Humbert is unreliable as a narrator. All pedophiles and hebephiles believe it's the child's fault. Yes, the book is about a flawed man who never took responsibility for his own actions in his hole life. His failed marriage was the ex-wife's fault, his constant loss of jobs, the death of Lolita's mother, all these things were other peoples fault in his mind.

Lolita had three names, and only one was her real name. Dolores was her real name. Lola was a pet name, as was Lolita, given to her by her mother, who was in all likelihood jealous of her own daughter's looks.

The book is beautiful and beautifully fucked up, about a fucked up man, who fucked up a kid. At least Dolores escaped and lived somewhat a normal life (even if she was still fucked up in the head which she had to be) while the girl from the real life story never had time to recover from her ordeal. Nationally the press vilified her as the seductress.

 

[MillieDynamite]

There was an Italian female author - now I can't remember her name or find her online - who published a book about kids in modern Milan, and it had some very graphic scenes among its underage characters. I got it right out of the Mid-Manhattan library, so it wasn't exactly a secret publication.

This book was very different from Lolita. Maybe I can find it on Amazon or the New York Library site.

I think a lot of squeamishness over more taboo subjects in books have caused massive constrictions in stories involving taboo subjects. The Credit and Debit card restriction on what type of stuff you can use them to purchase is part of the cause. The effect has been less taboo in mainstream writing.

 

[rescatooor]

There was an Italian female author - now I can't remember her name or find her online - who published a book about kids in modern Milan, and it had some very graphic scenes among its underage characters. I got it right out of the Mid-Manhattan library, so it wasn't exactly a secret publication.

This book was very different from Lolita. Maybe I can find it on Amazon or the New York Library site.

Could it be a book by Elena Ferrante? Of the modern Italian female authors she is the only one who comes to mind who might be regularly translated into English. She is really en vogue right now.

Lots of books with wild themes. In school, 7th grade maybe, we read a book that mostly revolved around a gay man and his lovers. Then he finds a troll baby. Some fantastic bestiality ensues. It won the National Book Award.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Of course, Lolita dies in childbirth so her happiness was short lived.

Sparknotes does say she is a seductive, flirtatious.

"Although the name Lolita has become synonymous with underage sexpot, Nabokov’s Lolita is simply a stubborn child. She is neither very beautiful nor particularly charming, and Humbert often remarks on her skinny arms, freckles, vulgar language, and unladylike behavior. Lolita attracts the depraved Humbert not because she is precocious or beautiful, but because she is a nymphet, Humbert’s ideal combination of childishness and the first blushes of womanhood. To non-pedophiles, Lolita would be a rather ordinary twelve-year-old girl. Her ordinariness is a constant source of frustration for Humbert, and she consistently thwarts his attempts to educate her and make her more sophisticated. She adores popular culture, enjoys mingling freely with other people, and, like most prepubescent girls, has a tendency toward the dramatic. However, when she shouts and rebels against Humbert, she exhibits more than the frustration of an ordinary adolescent: she clearly feels trapped by her arrangement with Humbert, but she is powerless to extricate herself."

But Herbert Humbert isn't a pedophile, he is not interested in prepubescents girls. Rather he is a has hebephilia and is interested in girls from 11 to 13 in the first blush of pubescents. This illness, sickness, rot inside goes back a long way. He married his first wife (17 a the time of marriage) as an attempt to thwart his desire for younger girls.

Of course, it didn't work. Sick fucks being what they are, and he fucked up that relationship. He got fried from jobs because of his unhealthy interest his students.

 

[gunhilltrain]

Could it be a book by Elena Ferrante? Of the modern Italian female authors she is the only one who comes to mind who might be regularly translated into English. She is really en vogue right now.

Lots of books with wild themes. In school, 7th grade maybe, we read a book that mostly revolved around a gay man and his lovers. Then he finds a troll baby. Some fantastic bestiality ensues. It won the National Book Award.

I don't see anything she wrote that seems to be it. Also, the book is set in Milan, I think, not Naples which is where Ferrante seems to set her novels. The way I remember it, the author was in her twenties when she wrote it and the book was published around 2010.

 

[SimonDoom]

I don't know about films since I have only read the book. And that a while ago. It's possible she may have said as much. But it's essentially a book about grooming with an unreliable narrator, as evidenced by the ending of it where it's revealed how Lo's life has been ruined through his actions. So I would take any clues of Lo seducing Humbert Humbert with a grain of salt.

I think we're meant to be skeptical of Humbert's narration. He's projecting his sickness on Lolita by presenting her as a seductress. There are plenty of clues that she isn't one at all.

Nabokov was a playful and elusive author. He once described his characters as his "galley slaves." In his later novel Pale Fire, everything is a fantasy. Not only is the narrator unreliable, we don't even know who the narrator IS at first. So it wouldn't surprise me if Nabokov's intent was never to make the reality/fantasy line very clear in Lolita.

 

[Bramblethorn]

But I am beginning to grow concerned. My main characters are children, one black, the other white, experiencing some of the chaos of Chicago in the 60s, from, obviously, a child's point of view. Even though it is completely non-sexual, and is being sent to Non-Erotic, is it in danger of rejection on the basis of its young characters?

There are plenty of stories here which feature children, or which start in a main character's childhood before following them through to adulthood. These can get accidentally rejected on a skim read, but if the minors genuinely aren't sexualised and if that's made clear to the moderator (e.g. in a story note), Lit seems to allow it through.

(Noting that "sexualised" includes masturbation, voyeurism, and fantasising.)

 

[rescatooor]

There are plenty of stories here which feature children, or which start in a main character's childhood before following them through to adulthood. These can get accidentally rejected on a skim read, but if the minors genuinely aren't sexualised and if that's made clear to the moderator (e.g. in a story note), Lit seems to allow it through.

(Noting that "sexualised" includes masturbation, voyeurism, and fantasising.)

I think the safest bet on Lit is generally just keep all sex scenes at least 100 m away from underaged characters. I'd say every underaged character should probably have a function in the narrative in order for their presence to be excusable. Can't just insert a random scene of kids having a farting contest in the middle of the story.

With that said, I believe there are perfectly fine ways of describing development of sexuality and all that jazz in fiction, only I understand that defining it and drawing that line into sand as to what is allowed and what isn't would be needlessly complicated for something like Lit. I've personally thought Arundhati Roy and Salman Rushdie have both done this well in mainstream fiction.