Jump to content

Recommended Posts

dogpoet    497

wouldn't you need to feel extremly safe with a dominatrix, to allow her to, you know, dominate you? i never had the opportunity to try that stuff out, but to me it seems, that the whole bdsm thing is highly demanding of a lot of trust and safety. no?

Absolutely. There's this catchphrase "safe, sane and consensual" all over the BDSM scene. The S&M lot are very careful to stress that what they're into isn't abuse, but a lot of the fantasies that underpin the roleplaying are deeply unpleasant and would be massively abusive if ever enacted for real. (This is one of the big issues with those stupid "Fifty Shades..." books, though the fact that EL James has a prose style like she was dropped on her head as a baby and creates less convincing characters than M Night Shyulaman attracts a lot of dismissals from pervs as well. The spectacle of somebody who seems to think John Norman had the last word on gender relationships complaining that James is writing a how to book on gaslighting and abusive relationships is pretty funny, if I'm honest.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dogpoet    497

I was a bit unimpressed by El James. Does it show?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Christian    807

Amazingly enough, a lot of females love Fifty Shades of Grey. My girlfriend makes fun of all these women where she works who read Fifty Shades, and rave about how sexy and exciting it was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dogpoet    497

I suppose if you've never read any pornography by anybody with a prose style and a clue about constructing a narrative or characterisation, it probably looks a bit better. She appears to be filling a role as the Dan Brown of smut at the moment, so it shouldn't really come as a surprise that she's outselling Pauline Reage and Anais Nin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Christian    807

Yep. Very true. I think those sort of women also really enjoy the "bodice-ripper" crap.

I worked in an used book store for a while, at one point in my life, and those were the biggest trade-ins at the store. Women would bring in huge shopping bags filled with that idiocy for the store to take as credit, then they'd leave the store with the shopping bags filled with more of that idiocy. I think the used book market would collapse if it wasn't for bodice-rippers, Stephen King, Dean Koontz, and Anne Rice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dogpoet    497

Very true. I don't know if you spend much time in used bookshops or charity shops since you changed jobs, but I've seen a lot of EL James' pseudosmut in those over the last three years or so. It'd be nice to think the donors had tried to read it, thought: "Kinell, what is this shite?" and taken it straight in there...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Christian    807

Nah. They probably just read it and immediately took it to the store to pick up the latest Danielle Steele book.

Yep. I spend a lot of time in used book stores, and I've figured out that different types of readers act differently with their books. Readers who tend to read New York Times Best Seller books tend to trade in their books after they read them. Readers who read books that are considered more cerebral or avant-garde tend to hoard their books. There are certain authors that I have rarely ever come across in a random used book store, I've had to order them off the internet. It's true that far less readers read those authors than, say, King, but it's also true that the people who read those types of books tend to save them.

Certain classics are exempt from the criteria however, as schools often make students read the books, and the students want to get rid of the books. So, you might find One Flew Over the Cuckoo Nest pop up at used book stores more often due to the fact that many schools assign the novel. Otherwise, Kesey's most famous book would probably be harder to find.

I fall very much in to the hoarder catergory. Unless I'm reading a book and dislike it, I hold on to my copy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wouldn't you need to feel extremly safe with a dominatrix, to allow her to, you know, dominate you? i never had the opportunity to try that stuff out, but to me it seems, that the whole bdsm thing is highly demanding of a lot of trust and safety. no?

Absolutely. There's this catchphrase "safe, sane and consensual" all over the BDSM scene. The S&M lot are very careful to stress that what they're into isn't abuse, but a lot of the fantasies that underpin the roleplaying are deeply unpleasant and would be massively abusive if ever enacted for real. (This is one of the big issues with those stupid "Fifty Shades..." books, though the fact that EL James has a prose style like she was dropped on her head as a baby and creates less convincing characters than M Night Shyulaman attracts a lot of dismissals from pervs as well. The spectacle of somebody who seems to think John Norman had the last word on gender relationships complaining that James is writing a how to book on gaslighting and abusive relationships is pretty funny, if I'm honest.)

in that book,that was an outright abusive relationship ,couldn't finish it .and in real life,alot of people would've seriously called the police on that asshole.That and plus the fact that she didn't seem to be into the kink all the time was off putting and yes,yes the writing sty;e was terrible.

and ugh,bodice rippers...i have an aunt who reads that kinda stuff.

 

truth,i throw no shade at erotica,in fact ,good smut is a plus.i also throw no shade at bdsm . but fifty shades was wtf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah. They probably just read it and immediately took it to the store to pick up the latest Danielle Steele book.

Yep. I spend a lot of time in used book stores, and I've figured out that different types of readers act differently with their books. Readers who tend to read New York Times Best Seller books tend to trade in their books after they read them. Readers who read books that are considered more cerebral or avant-garde tend to hoard their books. There are certain authors that I have rarely ever come across in a random used book store, I've had to order them off the internet. It's true that far less readers read those authors than, say, King, but it's also true that the people who read those types of books tend to save them.

Certain classics are exempt from the criteria however, as schools often make students read the books, and the students want to get rid of the books. So, you might find One Flew Over the Cuckoo Nest pop up at used book stores more often due to the fact that many schools assign the novel. Otherwise, Kesey's most famous book would probably be harder to find.

I fall very much in to the hoarder catergory. Unless I'm reading a book and dislike it, I hold on to my copy.

 

i usually read ebooks nowadays because I am so very broke.however,there are some books that I would most definitely collect and some books i treat like gold and you can't get me to part with them (any and all books by toni morrison). certain books like 'a clockwork orange' and the great gatsby---they made us read gatsby in school,I would hold onto...but you need to actually re-read the story to really ,really get it.the films are nothing like it.same with breakfast at tiffany's,another read between the lines book.also any and all books by toni morison are like that.also,certain comics.trynna collect all the sailormoon manga because it's a classic.same with revolutionary girl utena

 

i have,however brought books i regretted.

 

i tend to think alot of the writers from yesteryear have a certain flair to their writing that seems lost now.

 

though I'm gonna be honest--I was on them anita blake novels up until obsidian butterflies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't 50 Shades just a reworked lawyer-friendly version of the author's Twilight fanfiction? That would go to explain the quality of writing and the appeal to certain demographics...

 

I, in general, try to keep most of the books that I own. I still think I have even my old childhood Goosebumps lying or scattered around throughout the place.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dogpoet    497

in that book,that was an outright abusive relationship ,couldn't finish it .and in real life,alot of people would've seriously called the police on that asshole.That and plus the fact that she didn't seem to be into the kink all the time was off putting and yes,yes the writing sty;e was terrible.

and ugh,bodice rippers...i have an aunt who reads that kinda stuff.

Very true, but it isn't like the Gor books aren't devoted to describing deeply unhealthy and abusive relationships as the way female sexuality is supposed to work as well, and there are people in the bdsm community who treat that drivel the way Libertarians treat Atlas Shrugged. I find the spectacle of people who have no problem with abuse from misogynistic asshats in fiction that involves giant birds complaining about EL James a bit strange, frankly. It isn't like Whatsisface Grey is any more of a manipulative asshat than Tarl Cabot, after all.

 

Isn't 50 Shades just a reworked lawyer-friendly version of the author's Twilight fanfiction? That would go to explain the quality of writing and the appeal to certain demographics...

To a large extent. The fact that somebody's based the ground floor of their opus around trying to write porn about the relationship between a whining narcissist and a celibate vampire is yet another problem in that bucket of shit.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seventhcircle    598

have you ever considered writing book reviews for a living dog (or is that what you actually do?), because i think i would actually enjoy reading this kind of savage rant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dogpoet    497

I did spend a while writing comics reviews, as a matter of fact. That magazine ceased to exist a while ago, though.

:laugh:

As for book reviews, given that I'm a failed writer myself, anything I do in that area might seem questionable. It's not something I want to get into until I've completely given up all hope of ever publishing any more fiction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seventhcircle    598

well thats the full stereotype. failed athletes become referees, failed cooks become restaurant critics and failed authors write vicious reviews. it's just the natural order of things :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dogpoet    497

Sadly, the sort of savage rant (I like that) I usually default to as a critic is rather out of fashion, these days. The only place that still seems to be publishing really vicious hatchet jobs on the regular is Private Eye. Interzone used to, but since it changed editors that seems to have stopped completely. At the same time, strangely, the quality and volume of the review content has taken a nosedive. Funny, that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did spend a while writing comics reviews, as a matter of fact. That magazine ceased to exist a while ago, though.

.

 

I use to review DC comics as a guest blogger until one of the othe rbloggers went and deleted my review and didn't tell me and no one discussed anything--I rage quitted and regretted it.

Sadly, the sort of savage rant (I like that) I usually default to as a critic is rather out of fashion, these days. The only place that still seems to be publishing really vicious hatchet jobs on the regular is Private Eye. Interzone used to, but since it changed editors that seems to have stopped completely. At the same time, strangely, the quality and volume of the review content has taken a nosedive. Funny, that.

 

and YES, reviews are basically jerk circles half the time.I was a vicious reviewer so maybe that's why I got the boot.

 

I am contemplating doing reviews again,idk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seventhcircle    598

i think as a reviewer you need to have a pretty high bar. if i want to read a summary i go to wikipedia. i want to hear why the smut i wanna watch is not worth watching, the smut i wanna read is not wort reading. also it makes positive reviews much more valuable. and negative is always more entertaining. i mean we are not in elementary school anymore. if somthing sucks balls and lets be honest here, most stuff out there does, then someone should be allowed to say that and payed for, if that is entertaining to read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Christian    807

I've always found it's easier to point out the negatives than to describe the positives. Something has to be really damn good to get me motivated to delve in to why I loved it, otherwise I feel the urge to just say, "This was really good! I think you should read it!". On the other hand, when I dislike something, I feel a real need to vent my frustrations and point out why and where the author failed. It seems to stimulate creativity to be negative, at least for me.

A lot of time reviews are used for blurbs about a book. The publisher, obviously, isn't looking for someone to say that the book was awful, so if you write a more positive spin on the book, it's more likely that the publisher will use your review. So, even if a reviewer disliked a book, they temper their negative emotions and write, "While the writing could have been much more descriptive and characterization seemed to be skipped, the author has such a compelling grasp of action scenes, that a big budget movie fan will feel like they're on the edge of their movie seat."

Publishers read it and decide to cut and paste, so that the blurb on the book cover says, "A big budget movie fan will feel like they're on the edge of their movie seat!" says the Washington Post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always found it's easier to point out the negatives than to describe the positives. Something has to be really damn good to get me motivated to delve in to why I loved it, otherwise I feel the urge to just say, "This was really good! I think you should read it!". On the other hand, when I dislike something, I feel a real need to vent my frustrations and point out why and where the author failed. It seems to stimulate creativity to be negative, at least for me.

A lot of time reviews are used for blurbs about a book. The publisher, obviously, isn't looking for someone to say that the book was awful, so if you write a more positive spin on the book, it's more likely that the publisher will use your review. So, even if a reviewer disliked a book, they temper their negative emotions and write, "While the writing could have been much more descriptive and characterization seemed to be skipped, the author has such a compelling grasp of action scenes, that a big budget movie fan will feel like they're on the edge of their movie seat."

Publishers read it and decide to cut and paste, so that the blurb on the book cover says, "A big budget movie fan will feel like they're on the edge of their movie seat!" says the Washington Post.

 

hmm...i kinda do the same thing.i do get that now,bnut--some stuff is truly terrible and i feel like i am doing viewers a service...but that simply isn't how the business works

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dogpoet    497

Nope. Particularly at the small press/ indie end of things, reviewers are terrified of upsetting editors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Christian    807

I think you mean the perennially awesome Animal Man.

 

Unless you mean from the opposite end, the guy in blue is Phantom Stranger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×