"When we encounter a sex scene in literature, the vast majority of us will not be able to relate to it and will therefore feel as if we are reading about the fetishes of the author rather than those of their characters." (Libes) I know this is rhetoric based on the 60% of 200 readers from her survey, but I think even if this were true it shouldn't necessarily change an author's mind about what to write. Art is a place for self-exploration and expression, and to prescribe diminishing sexual content to 'improve' said writing would be silly: like telling someone to write less verbose/alienating because people think it's pretentious; or telling someone to write less violence because people think the author is a psycho. Context is key, and different stories require different elements.
Also, great essay! I agree with your take on using personal sensation to guide your writing, and "the erotic and the macabre are twin curiosities at the heart of being human." was pure fire.
Last week, I commented on an article by David about the ethnic cleansing happening in the Russian Federation something along the lines of "writing is telling another that you have the same unwanted tenants who live rent-free in your mind." and thus even though I may not enjoy that somebody wrote about [X] subject in manner [Y], it's not up to me to tell them how to write. Also, your point of "Art is a place for self-exploration and expression" made me think of Georges Bataille who wrote some pretty gruesome stuff, but also made significant contributions to philosophy, anthropology, sociology and the history of art. Who can say we could've had the later without the former? Maybe he needed to write said gruesome stuff to explore his own psyche, and this contributed to his overall intellectual work. Again, Ellis, thank you for reading and commenting! I am glad you enjoyed and it was an intellectual delight to engage with your thoughts.
I am indeed struggling financially, but it's a complex and cascading problem having to do with the move earlier this year, and the feast/famine You're up/you're down nature of editing and writing services. (Substack raised around 12k for our move, which I will never be able to pay back, the whole move cost closer to 25,000. We were not in the best spot to bein with. So, commes ci commes sa. But yesterday my psychiatrist did spring an in person appt on me and double his price, so I was in fact, in financial crisis. But it also got me a new editorial client!)
I am sorry to hear that, but it’s good that the community has your back. I could try to connect with a Romanian psychiatrist which would be much cheaper, but I am not sure how that would work.
I read the Liza Libes article and was mildly irritated that I’d done so. Everyone can have their own opinion and write about it as they wish. I enjoy most styles of writing because I’m curious. I’ve written sex scenes into some of my work. I’ve written poetry that’s sensual and also what some might think sexy. Others might hate it, or feel repulsed. It’s up to them.
By the way, your vampyre love, adoration story was sublime. It took me to the old streets of Krakow and Prague - since I’ve not been to Romania.
I think it’s up to the reader to feel how they feel and for the writer how they want to write. At the end of the day we write what we can, but read what we want. That’s Borges, not me. I remember reading “Snuff” by Chuck Palahniuk as an edgy teenager and being mildly entertained but not at all repulsed. But some details from “Beloved” made me uncomfortable in a good way. Liza can say what she wants but sex scenes have been around since the Ancient Greeks.
And I am glad to hear that Lira took you to Krakow or Prague. The Bucharest of that world is not the Bucharest I live in. It’s much more closer to Timişoara :))
I'll have to read your piece and tell you what I think. I think both ladies wrote interesting articles, while both clearly avoiding drawing a hard line anything, which would make for a far more interesting debate.
I argue that, while stories do often call for depictions of sex, they'd never have to be more graphic than the Lawrence excerpt Liza and Tolley both cited. Anything more graphic would detract and distract from the scene. I have yet to see anyone make a compelling argument for gushing fluids and quivering members; the reasoning on the pro-erotica side gets about as lucid as "I write what I want, lol." Curious to hear if you believe there's a hard line anywhere and if so, at what point.
Thank you very much for replying and sharing your article. As I mentioned in the above, this wasn’t something that I followed, just a rabbit hole I went down on my lunch break. Didn’t intend to ignore you. I will read your article and edit mine to include a reference.
To be clear, both ladies wrote interesting articles, but the debate itself failed.
Without reading your articles, I cannot make a general prescription of how graphic a sex scene would be. I only believe that each sentence should advance plot and/or deepen the theme. Anything else is self-indulgent on the part of the writer. From reading George Sanders’ “A swim in the pond…”, I understand that there is a current taboo in the MFA circuit against writing death scenes or taking the POV of someone dying. Clearly, this shouldn’t be the case because Leo Tolstoy did it quite masterfully. With sex scenes, I agree with you when it comes to my own work, but if somebody needs to deepen theme or advance plot through something more graphic, whom am I to police their work? We’ve reached a point (thankfully) where both sex and violence (even blasphemy) fail to make an impression on the reader anymore. So if an author wants to grab our attention, they won’t be able to rely on needless edge. The TLDR is simply asking “what does sex in your writing signify? What are the metaphysics behind your kinks?” :)))
No need to give me a shout unless you really feel it's justified; I was joking about not being mentioned (Liza and Tolley have much larger followings and they're spearheading this debate).
Also, impressive you read all these and wrote and published an article all on lunch!
Thanks for elaborating. I think you're hitting the whole point of my article exactly; anything that goes in a story should serve to develop plot, character, or theme; anything else can go. Since gratuitous graphic details don't do any of the three, they have no business in a story. I struggle to think of an example, even one where the plot revolves around someone's sex life, where bodily fluids and penises and vaginas need to be called out by name. I think it's the same with gory violence; unless it really advances any of those three things, why do we need to know a guy's intestines were ripped out all over the floor?
Oh, and that was actually my brother who wrote the Gnosticism article!
“You are not making art better, you’re just making pornography worse.”
I think with me it’s probably a language thing as well: in Romanian we use the same word for “titillate” as we do for “excite” (a excita), so probably that’s why I explored the nuance. Would want to say but I am tired and going to bed now.
Btw, great article, thank you again for sharing. I will restack with my note before going to bed. It really does make mine obsolete—actually the whole debate.
What a literary family! It shouldn't surprise you, as I am the third man in my lineage to write-unfortunately, both my great-grandfather and his father never published their creative writing. You can blame it on the soviets. Or the lack of Substack. Now, I feel stupid for editing my comment. Stupider even than when I realized I made a mistake and said to myself "he might be his brother or cousin" :)) I enjoyed that article.
I agree with you in principle, but there are two aspects one must keep in mind, ie (I) YMM-what is graphic and gratuitous for some might not be for others. Think Cormac McCarthy—he even admitted that the graphic violence in his work was a conscious decision. If he were to write it nowadays, he wouldn't have gone for it, because the media is already oversaturated with it. By contrast, the last thing that actually shocked when it came to sex and violence was a scene in Jean Genet's "Our Lady of the Flowers" when he mentions-not describes, just mentions-how he and his lover picked fleas and ticks off each other’s bodies. (II) It all boils down to execution: again, I must resort to McCarthy's use of violence. Blood Meridian's most gruesome scenes are some of its most poetic, in my humble opinion. On the other hand, if you put something by Palahniuk next to it, it seems needlessly edgy.
True, what would have been considered over the top even 30 years ago is tame or average by today's standards. But we're at the zenith now; there isn't a way to get more graphic than has already been put to paper in the last few decades. And yes, Blood Meridian does hit different. The beautiful prosidy contrasts with the violencein those very passages. However, a graphic sex scene is different than a graphically violent one; the former can at times gain something from extra description, while the latter can only lose, any of the metaphysical meanings you allude to obscured by heaving breasts and throbbing phalluses. These explicit smutty details aren't there to advance the story. They are present to titillate. Great art doesn't titillate. Great art can be sensual and suggestive, but it's not something you masturbate to. I appreciate the nuance your article took with this issue compared to some of the comments on some of the other pieces that seemed to suggest pornography can be art too.
I have a novel I wrote that I've been hesitant to do anything with. This debate is convincing me to serialize it. I've had good advice that it would need to conform to my broader offering, and I think I can nudge it more in that direction.
I am really curious to see the Thaddeus-take on erotic fiction. I am sure that, regardless of its final form, it will be masterfully crafted and broaden our horizons.
"When we encounter a sex scene in literature, the vast majority of us will not be able to relate to it and will therefore feel as if we are reading about the fetishes of the author rather than those of their characters." (Libes) I know this is rhetoric based on the 60% of 200 readers from her survey, but I think even if this were true it shouldn't necessarily change an author's mind about what to write. Art is a place for self-exploration and expression, and to prescribe diminishing sexual content to 'improve' said writing would be silly: like telling someone to write less verbose/alienating because people think it's pretentious; or telling someone to write less violence because people think the author is a psycho. Context is key, and different stories require different elements.
Also, great essay! I agree with your take on using personal sensation to guide your writing, and "the erotic and the macabre are twin curiosities at the heart of being human." was pure fire.
Last week, I commented on an article by David about the ethnic cleansing happening in the Russian Federation something along the lines of "writing is telling another that you have the same unwanted tenants who live rent-free in your mind." and thus even though I may not enjoy that somebody wrote about [X] subject in manner [Y], it's not up to me to tell them how to write. Also, your point of "Art is a place for self-exploration and expression" made me think of Georges Bataille who wrote some pretty gruesome stuff, but also made significant contributions to philosophy, anthropology, sociology and the history of art. Who can say we could've had the later without the former? Maybe he needed to write said gruesome stuff to explore his own psyche, and this contributed to his overall intellectual work. Again, Ellis, thank you for reading and commenting! I am glad you enjoyed and it was an intellectual delight to engage with your thoughts.
I am indeed struggling financially, but it's a complex and cascading problem having to do with the move earlier this year, and the feast/famine You're up/you're down nature of editing and writing services. (Substack raised around 12k for our move, which I will never be able to pay back, the whole move cost closer to 25,000. We were not in the best spot to bein with. So, commes ci commes sa. But yesterday my psychiatrist did spring an in person appt on me and double his price, so I was in fact, in financial crisis. But it also got me a new editorial client!)
I am sorry to hear that, but it’s good that the community has your back. I could try to connect with a Romanian psychiatrist which would be much cheaper, but I am not sure how that would work.
I read the Liza Libes article and was mildly irritated that I’d done so. Everyone can have their own opinion and write about it as they wish. I enjoy most styles of writing because I’m curious. I’ve written sex scenes into some of my work. I’ve written poetry that’s sensual and also what some might think sexy. Others might hate it, or feel repulsed. It’s up to them.
By the way, your vampyre love, adoration story was sublime. It took me to the old streets of Krakow and Prague - since I’ve not been to Romania.
I think it’s up to the reader to feel how they feel and for the writer how they want to write. At the end of the day we write what we can, but read what we want. That’s Borges, not me. I remember reading “Snuff” by Chuck Palahniuk as an edgy teenager and being mildly entertained but not at all repulsed. But some details from “Beloved” made me uncomfortable in a good way. Liza can say what she wants but sex scenes have been around since the Ancient Greeks.
And I am glad to hear that Lira took you to Krakow or Prague. The Bucharest of that world is not the Bucharest I live in. It’s much more closer to Timişoara :))
I’ve just looked at photos of Timişoara. It looks fabulous.
Rude that no one's mentioned my own contribution to the discourse! https://paulimgrund.substack.com/p/sex-in-literature-bad?r=1tl7mn
I'll have to read your piece and tell you what I think. I think both ladies wrote interesting articles, while both clearly avoiding drawing a hard line anything, which would make for a far more interesting debate.
I argue that, while stories do often call for depictions of sex, they'd never have to be more graphic than the Lawrence excerpt Liza and Tolley both cited. Anything more graphic would detract and distract from the scene. I have yet to see anyone make a compelling argument for gushing fluids and quivering members; the reasoning on the pro-erotica side gets about as lucid as "I write what I want, lol." Curious to hear if you believe there's a hard line anywhere and if so, at what point.
Thank you very much for replying and sharing your article. As I mentioned in the above, this wasn’t something that I followed, just a rabbit hole I went down on my lunch break. Didn’t intend to ignore you. I will read your article and edit mine to include a reference.
To be clear, both ladies wrote interesting articles, but the debate itself failed.
Without reading your articles, I cannot make a general prescription of how graphic a sex scene would be. I only believe that each sentence should advance plot and/or deepen the theme. Anything else is self-indulgent on the part of the writer. From reading George Sanders’ “A swim in the pond…”, I understand that there is a current taboo in the MFA circuit against writing death scenes or taking the POV of someone dying. Clearly, this shouldn’t be the case because Leo Tolstoy did it quite masterfully. With sex scenes, I agree with you when it comes to my own work, but if somebody needs to deepen theme or advance plot through something more graphic, whom am I to police their work? We’ve reached a point (thankfully) where both sex and violence (even blasphemy) fail to make an impression on the reader anymore. So if an author wants to grab our attention, they won’t be able to rely on needless edge. The TLDR is simply asking “what does sex in your writing signify? What are the metaphysics behind your kinks?” :)))
No need to give me a shout unless you really feel it's justified; I was joking about not being mentioned (Liza and Tolley have much larger followings and they're spearheading this debate).
Also, impressive you read all these and wrote and published an article all on lunch!
Thanks for elaborating. I think you're hitting the whole point of my article exactly; anything that goes in a story should serve to develop plot, character, or theme; anything else can go. Since gratuitous graphic details don't do any of the three, they have no business in a story. I struggle to think of an example, even one where the plot revolves around someone's sex life, where bodily fluids and penises and vaginas need to be called out by name. I think it's the same with gory violence; unless it really advances any of those three things, why do we need to know a guy's intestines were ripped out all over the floor?
Oh, and that was actually my brother who wrote the Gnosticism article!
“You are not making art better, you’re just making pornography worse.”
I think with me it’s probably a language thing as well: in Romanian we use the same word for “titillate” as we do for “excite” (a excita), so probably that’s why I explored the nuance. Would want to say but I am tired and going to bed now.
Btw, great article, thank you again for sharing. I will restack with my note before going to bed. It really does make mine obsolete—actually the whole debate.
What a literary family! It shouldn't surprise you, as I am the third man in my lineage to write-unfortunately, both my great-grandfather and his father never published their creative writing. You can blame it on the soviets. Or the lack of Substack. Now, I feel stupid for editing my comment. Stupider even than when I realized I made a mistake and said to myself "he might be his brother or cousin" :)) I enjoyed that article.
I agree with you in principle, but there are two aspects one must keep in mind, ie (I) YMM-what is graphic and gratuitous for some might not be for others. Think Cormac McCarthy—he even admitted that the graphic violence in his work was a conscious decision. If he were to write it nowadays, he wouldn't have gone for it, because the media is already oversaturated with it. By contrast, the last thing that actually shocked when it came to sex and violence was a scene in Jean Genet's "Our Lady of the Flowers" when he mentions-not describes, just mentions-how he and his lover picked fleas and ticks off each other’s bodies. (II) It all boils down to execution: again, I must resort to McCarthy's use of violence. Blood Meridian's most gruesome scenes are some of its most poetic, in my humble opinion. On the other hand, if you put something by Palahniuk next to it, it seems needlessly edgy.
True, what would have been considered over the top even 30 years ago is tame or average by today's standards. But we're at the zenith now; there isn't a way to get more graphic than has already been put to paper in the last few decades. And yes, Blood Meridian does hit different. The beautiful prosidy contrasts with the violencein those very passages. However, a graphic sex scene is different than a graphically violent one; the former can at times gain something from extra description, while the latter can only lose, any of the metaphysical meanings you allude to obscured by heaving breasts and throbbing phalluses. These explicit smutty details aren't there to advance the story. They are present to titillate. Great art doesn't titillate. Great art can be sensual and suggestive, but it's not something you masturbate to. I appreciate the nuance your article took with this issue compared to some of the comments on some of the other pieces that seemed to suggest pornography can be art too.
I have a novel I wrote that I've been hesitant to do anything with. This debate is convincing me to serialize it. I've had good advice that it would need to conform to my broader offering, and I think I can nudge it more in that direction.
I am really curious to see the Thaddeus-take on erotic fiction. I am sure that, regardless of its final form, it will be masterfully crafted and broaden our horizons.
If you think of it as erotic, you're setting yourself up for disappointment. 😆