# Pulp



## Toonces (Apr 19, 2010)

I don't see very much discussion of pulp on this forum, and when I do, it tends to be singling it out as the cause for why _real_ writers and _real_ literary works don't get the attention they deserve on FA. Sometimes I'd like to post a thread discussing some particular point about writing pulp but I'm unsure if I'd run afoul of a standard on the forum that privileges more _serious_ literature.

Do the posters here not write very much of it? Read very much of it? Like or dislike it?


----------



## Browder (Apr 19, 2010)

I enjoy it and write it on occasion, but admittedly not very well. Anyone who says it's not an artform should try actually putting pen to paper.

I guess it gets bad publicity because so much of it is actually _bad_, and people feel ashamed of getting off to bad literature.


----------



## Scarborough (Apr 19, 2010)

Eh. I'm ambivalent. It depends on the writing, not the content.

e.g., I read your "Chubs in the Library Pulp #17" and enjoyed the first few paragraphs. I also read a bit of Glee's stuff and find that generally okay.

At the same time, there are a lot of stories I skip over. E.g., "Public Dickriding Pulp #40," I skipped over.

*shrug* If it catches my interest, it catches my interest. If not, it doesn't.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 19, 2010)

Browder said:


> I enjoy it and write it on occasion, but admittedly not very well. Anyone who says it's not an artform should try actually putting pen to paper.
> 
> I guess it gets bad publicity because so much of it is actually _bad_, and people feel ashamed of getting off to bad literature.



The fact that so much of it is bad doesn't make it any different than all the other forms of personal expression out there.


----------



## Browder (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> The fact that so much of it is bad doesn't make it any different than all the other forms of personal expression out there.



I never said it didn't. I just said that's why it's seen as such.

Also to adress your original topic, this forum is populated by users who are under the age of 18 who joined the fandom for the non sexual aspect (or so they say). Current forum etiquette is to shy away from subjects like this.


----------



## panzergulo (Apr 20, 2010)

Define "pulp".

I have said I produce pulp, but that is because I write fast, proofread fast, and submit fast, being not too concerned about the quality of the product. Most of my submitted stories are first or second drafts. This way, if I want, I can push considerable amount of material into FA in a relatively short period of time. But if it is pulp by your definition, that I do not know.

I read one writer who I read and whose material I would define as pulp. There's again the same qualities: It's written fast and there's lot of it, and the quality of formatting and grammatical correctness aren't the main point. Doesn't take away from the story, though. I do not mind one or two errors per thousand words, and in the case of this writer (or, more correctly, a pair of writers) the storyline is rather engaging and the characters interesting. So I would say I enjoy it too.

Still, I would be interested about your definition of "pulp". We might not be talking about the same thing at all.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Apr 20, 2010)

The dictionary definition for 'pulp' is: 


> A magazine or book printed on cheap paper (as newsprint) and often dealing with sensational material; also  : sensational or tabloid writing â€”often used attributively <pulp fiction>


So, like, National Enquirer material, or maybe those penny novels they used to print back in the late 1800s.  But I don't know if that's what's meant here or not either.


----------



## panzergulo (Apr 20, 2010)

M. Le Renard said:


> The dictionary definition for 'pulp' is:
> 
> 
> > A magazine or book printed on cheap paper (as newsprint) and often dealing with sensational material; also : sensational or tabloid writing â€”often used attributively <pulp fiction>
> ...



Hmm...



			
				Wikipedia said:
			
		

> *Pulp magazines* (or *pulp fiction*; often referred to as "the pulps") were inexpensive fiction magazines. They were published from 1896 through the 1950s. The typical pulp magazine was seven inches wide by ten inches high, a half an inch thick, and 128 pages long. Pulps were printed on cheap paper with ragged, untrimmed edges.



Also, everything printed in paperback (and often on cheap paper) is sometimes referred as "pulp". You know, the kind of series where they publish a new novel once per month or so. _Kioskikirjallisuus_, we would say in Finnish. That is, "kiosk literature". You can often buy these from kiosks, where they are stacked on these metallic turning stands... like postcards. Cheap, and definitely fast... although, nowadays they might print anything in paperback. Because it's cheaper. And people want to carry books with them and paperbacks are lighter.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Apr 20, 2010)

I'm actually thinking that in this instance it's used to refer to 'porn'. o.o


----------



## M. LeRenard (Apr 20, 2010)

Well, one would think if that's the case, that Toonces wouldn't want to disguise what he's writing by calling it some closet term with a more positive connotation, since he obviously feels that what he writes is worthwhile and is very proud of it.  So that's why I wonder.
I don't know.  I haven't read anything in his gallery.  Things with titles like "Spontaneous Locker Room Hookup Pulp" don't exactly spur my interest.  Sure sounds like porn from the title, but I haven't read it, so maybe it's not.


----------



## Browder (Apr 20, 2010)

It is.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Apr 20, 2010)

M. Le Renard said:


> Well, one would think if that's the case, that Toonces wouldn't want to disguise what he's writing by calling it some closet term with a more positive connotation, since he obviously feels that what he writes is worthwhile and is very proud of it. So that's why I wonder.
> I don't know. I haven't read anything in his gallery. Things with titles like "Spontaneous Locker Room Hookup Pulp" don't exactly spur my interest. Sure sounds like porn from the title, but I haven't read it, so maybe it's not.


 
No, they're all porn.  Very... Bluntly... Titled porn.  I think he's using 'pulp' to say 'Generic porn for furries'.  If not, his title scheme boggles me.


----------



## foozzzball (Apr 20, 2010)

I find using pulp to refer to porn as vaguely hilarious.

Pulps were lurid, sure, but their glory-days were an era when obscenity included a flash of ankle. If you've read any Conan stories you'll know what I mean - it's kind of cute - but what pulps were also known for, and why they're still adored, is their tight plot-driven narrative.

Maltese Falcon? Pulp novel. Lovecraft? Pulp writer. Hell - Sherlock Holmes was, technically, very early pulp.

I'm sorry, Toonces - you seem to have driven the definition of pulp off a cliff. (Toonces, look out!)


----------



## Toonces (Apr 20, 2010)

I'm using the term "pulp" to mean "literary furry erotica," yes. Pulp novels, which had their heyday in the mid-20th century when mass production of paperbacks made it possible to produce niche material cheaply, generally dealt with subversive subjects like drugs, crime, and sex. One of my favorite novels of all time, William S. Burrough's _Junky_ was originally published as a pulp novel. Burroughs would go on to publish the last book to be banned as obscene in the United States, _Naked Lunch_.

I'm not misapplying the term, since many pulp novels were explicitly pornographic, but I am applying it narrowly. I'm not trying to disguise anything, I'm just trying to popularize the term among the community in a bid to give furry erotica, and its writers, more of an identity.


----------



## GraemeLion (Apr 20, 2010)

Oh, see, I don't see "literary furry erotica" anywhere on FA, to be honest.  I see porn, and not porn.  And that's not bad, but I think that very little of it tends to be literary in quality.   We all have things that titilate us.

When I see the word pulp, though, I imagine those dime store novels that I found in my grandfather's garage that got him through world war II, about Dick Daring and other such named characters fighting Nazis, Aliens, Evil Scientists, or any combination of the three.  

Nowadays, I see pulp as more or less the "popcorn fiction" that springs out of the big names five or six times a year.   The older , cheaper novels have given way to the mass produced, cheaper novels 

But I certainly don't see pulp as purely literary furry erotica.  In fact, while Toonces has implied that there were many pulp novels that were explicitly pornographic, there were many MORE that weren't.


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 20, 2010)

Like foozzz and some of the others, I don't really get "pulp" being used in this connotation. Certainly, sexual works could be considered pulp, but using it as if the term is interchangeable with "porn" or "erotica" seems kind of odd to me. *shrug* Nothing wrong with using the term that way, but the responses here show it might be confusing to people to co-opt a term that's already recognized as defining a certain type of fiction.

To answer the original question, though, I have written sexually explicit stories; they're in my gallery with everything else. I consider them erotica, and I call them erotica. To me, that term (besides being the accepted term in publishing for sexually explicit fiction) implies something that goes beyond "tab A into slot B" of pornography (which to me is meant purely for sexual titillation and not for appealing to any other sensibilities). Erotica also appeals to the senses, to the development of characters and a relationship in some way, and perhaps involves a certain aspect of romance as well.

That said, I understand that I don't have control over what other people call my work. So if someone wants to say I write porn, I might not like it, but I also recognize that "porn" has become a casual word (especially in the furry fandom) used to mean anything sexually explicit, so their connotations of the word might well be different from mine. In other words, I don't automatically take it as an insult. 

So I have written it (furry and non), would like to think I've written it well, do recognize literary erotica as a legitimate genre, and have no objection to it existing in the fandom. That said, I do get tired of what I feel is the disproportionate amount of attention it gets when compared with other types of writing, and I think the fandom has something of a sophomoric obsession with sex in general. And it wasn't until I kind of got tired of writing erotica (my writing tends to move in cycles) and started writing far more general-audience furry fiction, that I truly began to sympathize with how hypersexed the furry subculture seems to be, and how writers who don't write anything explicit find themselves having to work harder for the same number of views and opportunities.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 20, 2010)

Again using the term "pulp" is a purely editorial decision on my part. I think the term is more elegant than "porn" and less serious than "erotica," which I think more accurately reflects the kind of material I produce in this fandom. And as writers everyone here ought to know that terms are flexible and subject to fluctuations in meaning based on use.


----------



## Atrak (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> Again using the term "pulp" is a purely editorial decision on my part. I think the term is more elegant than "porn" and less serious than "erotica," which I think more accurately reflects the kind of material I produce in this fandom. And as writers everyone here ought to know that terms are flexible and subject to fluctuations in meaning based on use.



It's also misleading.

Either way, I don't write porn.

My stories sometimes have a sex scene or so, but nothing like porn.

@Browder: Writing *can *be an art.

But it isn't always.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 20, 2010)

It doesn't seem as if my readers have been too mislead by my use of it. When I say "pulp" they all know what I mean. =P


----------



## AshleyAshes (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> It doesn't seem as if my readers have been too mislead by my use of it. When I say "pulp" they all know what I mean. =P


 
I think that might be more attributed to the red border around the thumbnail of your submissions.


----------



## GraemeLion (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> Again using the term "pulp" is a purely editorial decision on my part. I think the term is more elegant than "porn" and less serious than "erotica," which I think more accurately reflects the kind of material I produce in this fandom. And as writers everyone here ought to know that terms are flexible and subject to fluctuations in meaning based on use.



Well, you're more than welcome to call your work whatever you desire, it is your prerogative    I have my own stuff to write and it really doesn't concern me greatly.

Just when this reader reads it, he sees porn, not pulp   There's nothing wrong with porn.


----------



## Xipoid (Apr 20, 2010)

I don't write porn or erotica; however, I am told my work has a very pulpy feel to it. I'm very undecided how I feel about that.


----------



## panzergulo (Apr 20, 2010)

*Re: PORN*

*writes in his small black book* "When Toonces talks about 'pulp', he means porn, smut, yiff or any combination of these..."

Now that we have established common terminology, that is, "pulp" means pulp fiction of the 1900s, cheap paperback novels, popcorn fiction, kiosk literature, however you want to describe cheap, fast written series, and, when Toonces uses the term, he means "porn"... I figure we are talking about porn, then.

I don't read porn. I read some erotica, though. Most often I get this annoying feeling while reading sex scenes, like I'd be reading somebody's personal fantasies. So, I don't really enjoy them as such. And I don't really read anything adult in nature if it has no plot. So yeah, I don't read porn. I need plot and real characters to enjoy a story. I have many times found myself laughing when trying to read porn.



			
				Your typical yiff writer said:
			
		

> Hi!
> 
> Hi!
> 
> ...



Yup, that doesn't really satisfy me. Plus, the porn cliches make me laugh.

I write some adult stories, but I don't really know if they qualify as erotica or porn. I don't describe sex between poorly established characters, most often the participants in my sex scenes are in a real relationship, I rarely write adult stories without a plot, I really enjoy trying to describe real feelings, love, companionship and stuff like that... so, they could qualify as erotica. Then again, I have some stories which have more sex scenes than plot, the sex scenes are fairly graphical... I have even some works that are mainly about sex, but they are always part of a longer storyline or series... so, in somebody's opinion, they could qualify as porn.

One could say that I write my own porn. I find my own adult stories much more satisfying than most that I can find in FA. Sorry, men and women, but your porn just makes me feel awkward, or makes me feel empty, or makes me laugh. So, I write my own.

I don't know if I would like to be known as a porn writer... although, I fear it's too late already. Some dozen of my most popular stories are all adult in nature... and it makes me kinda sad. How did I say it before?

It makes me sad my general rated prose is less popular than my erotica.
It makes me sad my erotica is less popular than my porn.
It makes me sad my porn is less popular than any material from fetish smut writers.

I'm a pretty sad little creature... But yeah, when talking about PORN... no, I don't really read it, because it makes me feel awkward or it makes me laugh and in the end I feel unsatisfied or empty... and I'm not sure if I write it. Maybe some reader of mine could say if my adult stories are porn or erotica.



Also, just an opinion of mine... please, when talking about things, use their real names. Porn is porn, pulp is pulp, they are two different things. It doesn't matter here now, because we now know what we are talking about, but it makes you look stupid or might get you to awkward situation if you talk about "pulp" when talking about porn... also, there's nothing to be ashamed of, Toonces... in this lot, you can feel free to say "I'm a porn writer" and I assume most won't care about it. Sure, you get "serious" writers telling how it makes them sad that general prose gets less views than adult prose, but hey, that's the way people work.

Pulp is pulp. You make paper out of pulp.
Pulp fiction is pulp fiction. You buy one piece when you need entertainment for a bus or a train trip.
Porn is porn. Tab A goes to slot B and so on...

And I would like to compare my writings to pulp fiction without being mistaken to write porn... just saying, before you make it a well established term.


----------



## jinxtigr (Apr 20, 2010)

I immediately thought 'E.E. Doc Smith'- pulp space opera! That's what I thought the thread was going to be about, that and 'Black Mask' type magazines.

I do see a correlation between Toonces' approach and 'crank the stuff out' pulp fiction- there is a real distinction between a pulp writer and an 'I have never written a word, and I won't until the story is PERFECT' writer. I'm with Toonces there- I make my daily wordcount, and when I don't I'm upset with myself.

I have a hard time calling what I do 'porn' no matter how explicit it gets, though, because half the time I'm being subversive- the point might be to make the reader uncomfortable, or establish something that isn't 'mmm, that's good pr0nz'. Very often it's more important that characters are changed by their experience. I could say if you can drop the characters like a one night stand and never think of them again, it was porn, and if they stay with you and take up your thoughts, it's something else- which is what I shoot for, whether I hit it or not.

I just call mine 'NC-17', and if I had to use Toonces' categories and pick a side, I'd call it pulp simply because I feel I have to make the word count. To me, that's more of a defining quality of pulp than whether it's got dick in it


----------



## reian (Apr 20, 2010)

I don't find pulp to read as porn or erotica at all....Pulp, I feel, has a much bigger meaning and idea behind it.

Like, pulp to me is something that has not only erotic content, but is absolutely over the top in everything.  I feel as though an author uses pulp to do something much more than convey a sex scene, but make the whole story sexy and gritty to the read.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 20, 2010)

Thanks, FA's Writer's Bloc Forum, for reminding me why I hate FA'S Writer's Bloc Forum.


----------



## panzergulo (Apr 20, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



TooncesFA said:


> Thanks, FA's Writer's Bloc Forum, for reminding me why I hate FA'S Writer's Bloc Forum.



You are welcome.


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 20, 2010)

I just realized there were a couple questions/topics in the OP that I didn't address, so I thought I'd take a second to go into those (even if, now that I see the above post, this thread might be about done anyway).

As far as reading 'pulp'/porn/erotica, I really don't read much of it in the fandom or on FA. This isn't so much a quality issue, as it is just not finding much that's written to my taste. I admit, though, that I'm very, very picky in terms of what I like and don't like in erotica. I'm not interested in m/m, which is most of what's written in the fandom, and even in m/f erotica I can get very turned off very quickly by the way things are phrased -- for example, silly slang for sexual organs, characters whose orgasms are always rendered as phonetic dialogue, female characters who are anatomically unrealistic in terms of sexual response, general purple prose, and so on. I'm not reading all that much erotica these days even outside the fandom, but if I were, I'd probably be looking to published anthologies from Circlet Press and places like that, or the annual 'best-of's that have a good track record. 

So, like panzergulo, I pretty much write what I want to read, and leave it at that.

As far as starting threads here in the forum relevant to writing adult stories, I wouldn't have an issue with it as long as it was kept within the PG-13 boundaries, which would limit how much you could quote of a story and so on. But to be honest, Toonces, when I skimmed your latest submission on how to write pulp, 99% of it read to me just like advice for writing anything, sexually explicit or not. To me, the mechanics of a sex scene aren't all that different from those of, say, a fight scene, or really any scene where you have to blend intense action and emotion. The main advantage I can see to what you're doing there would be getting the writers to think of those stories as being just like any other kind of fiction, instead of as something where the standards are set so low that you can dash off whatever you want and nobody cares as long as it's hot.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 20, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



panzergulo said:


> *writes in his small black book* "When Toonces talks about 'pulp', he means porn, smut, yiff or any combination of these..."
> 
> Now that we have established common terminology, that is, "pulp" means pulp fiction of the 1900s, cheap paperback novels, popcorn fiction, kiosk literature, however you want to describe cheap, fast written series, and, when Toonces uses the term, he means "porn"... I figure we are talking about porn, then.



woot



> I don't read porn. I read some erotica, though. Most often I get this annoying feeling while reading sex scenes, like I'd be reading somebody's personal fantasies. So, I don't really enjoy them as such. And I don't really read anything adult in nature if it has no plot. So yeah, I don't read porn. I need plot and real characters to enjoy a story. I have many times found myself laughing when trying to read porn.
> 
> Yup, that doesn't really satisfy me. Plus, the porn cliches make me laugh.



Many people do write their personal fantasies into pulp, and it works for some people, thought personally I've always found it more helpful to write _for_ someone. It tends to produce a much more vivid, considered, and complete representation of sexuality since you're writing it from without yourself, rather than within, and you don't take certain things for granted. I also find it funny that you laugh when trying to read pulp, because I try myself to put laugh lines into my stories. I think sex is itself a little ridiculous, and so any pulp that takes itself too seriously will end up strained or awkward.




> I write some adult stories, but I don't really know if they qualify as erotica or porn. I don't describe sex between poorly established characters, most often the participants in my sex scenes are in a real relationship, I rarely write adult stories without a plot, I really enjoy trying to describe real feelings, love, companionship and stuff like that... so, they could qualify as erotica. Then again, I have some stories which have more sex scenes than plot, the sex scenes are fairly graphical... I have even some works that are mainly about sex, but they are always part of a longer storyline or series... so, in somebody's opinion, they could qualify as porn.



Why do you think that "love, companionship and stuff like that" push something from the realm of pulp to erotica? As a person who's always considered the distinction irrelevant, I don't see any reason to privilege "love" or "companionship" over any other sexual expression. Any form of sexual expression can be just as intriguing as any other if written properly, and to me relying upon sexuality that represents "love" is like relying upon a plot that leads to a happy ending. It posits an ideal that will ring hollow with many readers.



> One could say that I write my own porn. I find my own adult stories much more satisfying than most that I can find in FA. Sorry, men and women, but your porn just makes me feel awkward, or makes me feel empty, or makes me laugh. So, I write my own.



You wouldn't be the only.



> I don't know if I would like to be known as a porn writer... although, I fear it's too late already. Some dozen of my most popular stories are all adult in nature... and it makes me kinda sad. How did I say it before?
> 
> It makes me sad my general rated prose is less popular than my erotica.
> It makes me sad my erotica is less popular than my porn.
> It makes me sad my porn is less popular than any material from fetish smut writers.



I've never seen anything wrong with being known for writing pulp. At least I'm known for writing it well. In other contexts I'm more known for other material I've produced, and that's fine, too. A writer can wear many hats, after all.



> I'm a pretty sad little creature... But yeah, when talking about PORN... no, I don't really read it, because it makes me feel awkward or it makes me laugh and in the end I feel unsatisfied or empty... and I'm not sure if I write it. Maybe some reader of mine could say if my adult stories are porn or erotica.



Don't worry about the distinction between porn and erotica, doing so can only cramp your ability to express yourself.



> Also, just an opinion of mine... please, when talking about things, use their real names. Porn is porn, pulp is pulp, they are two different things. It doesn't matter here now, because we now know what we are talking about, but it makes you look stupid or might get you to awkward situation if you talk about "pulp" when talking about porn... also, there's nothing to be ashamed of, Toonces... in this lot, you can feel free to say "I'm a porn writer" and I assume most won't care about it. Sure, you get "serious" writers telling how it makes them sad that general prose gets less views than adult prose, but hey, that's the way people work.
> 
> Pulp is pulp. You make paper out of pulp.
> Pulp fiction is pulp fiction. You buy one piece when you need entertainment for a bus or a train trip.
> ...



Words are most intriguing when bent in peculiar ways.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 20, 2010)

Poetigress said:


> The main advantage I can see to what you're doing there would be getting the writers to think of those stories as being just like any other kind of fiction, instead of as something where the standards are set so low that you can dash off whatever you want and nobody cares as long as it's hot.



That's the general idea. My main purpose as a pulp writer, at the moment, is to get people to set a higher standard for pulp. I think the main problem with the consistently low quality of pulp is the idea that, because pulp has a specific utility, it must be written in a way so as to maximize that utility, like how an instruction manual is written in clear and direct language to make sure that it is useful to the person reading it.

If I were to have it my way, people would understand that what happens in bed can be just as dramatic, engaging, and compelling as what happens in a battlefield. It seems strange to me that, despite the fact that sexual expression is such a crucial part of so many people's lives, it wouldn't be handled as sincerely as any of the other points of personal conflict people face.


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> My main purpose as a pulp writer, at the moment, is to get people to set a higher standard for pulp.



And yet the very term you've created for it carries the automatic connotation of low-quality sensationalist fiction, which seems a little contradictory to me.


----------



## reian (Apr 20, 2010)

Poetigress said:


> And yet the very term you've created for it carries the automatic connotation of low-quality sensationalist fiction, which seems a little contradictory to me.



And seconded.



			
				TooncesFA said:
			
		

> Thanks, FA's Writer's Bloc Forum, for reminding me why I hate FA'S Writer's Bloc Forum.



And if you hate us so much...why keep posting things? *confused*


----------



## Toonces (Apr 20, 2010)

It's purposefully self-effacing. I use the term "pulp" for the same reason I inject humor into the stories, which is that I think sex is kind of an inherently ridiculous act, and any proper representation of it ought to be appropriately unserious. But that's just my interpretation of it, and to give sexual expression the benefit of a personal interpretation is really all I'm asking for.

Sexualized writing, by whatever name, needs to be seen as more than a tool for achieving a desired response. Reducing sexualized writing to a work meant only to bring a reader to orgasm is as conducive to stale, unimaginative writing as reducing poetry to a work meant only to move a reader to sadness, or reducing prose to a work meant to efficiently relay information.


----------



## Browder (Apr 20, 2010)

Toonces raises an an interesting point though about our societal priorities. Why _can't_ porn be taken seriously as an artform and valid genre within it's own right? Art is about some kind of expression to provoke the imagination or emotions so why not the physical senses? I think we've got this underlying notion that 'sex is dirty' and won't acknowledge that what makes is few good below the belt can't possibly be any kind of masterpiece, or even virtuous achievement.

On the topic of names (i.e. porn versus pulp): whatever. Its his writing so he can call it whatever he wants. However if what he's trying to do is raise the genres status, than _I_ personally would call it porn. None of you are the author so the point is moot.


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 20, 2010)

Browder said:


> Why _can't_ porn be taken seriously as an artform and valid genre within it's own right?



It is. At least, outside the fandom it is.

(Edited to add: And if we're talking about inside the fandom, this might be a good time to take a step back and realize that, for the most part, _no_ furry writing is truly taken seriously as an art form within the confines of the fandom.)


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 20, 2010)

*boggles at using "pulp" to mean "literate furry erotica"*  I'm most familiar with pulps in the historical sense, where they were usually science fiction or paranormal, not anything sexual.  I think of the distinguishing characteristic of a pulp story as being that it has no literary pretensions, doesn't attempt to communicate anything profound, it's an emotional rollercoaster ride but nothing more.  I can see that applying to porn, but not "literate erotica", furry or otherwise.


----------



## Browder (Apr 20, 2010)

Poetigress said:


> It is. At least, outside the fandom it is.
> 
> (Edited to add: And if we're talking about inside the fandom, this might be a good time to take a step back and realize that, for the most part, _no_ furry writing is truly taken seriously as an art form within the confines of the fandom.)



That's not true. I consider _every_ story to be some form of art. It's just that some art is worse than others.:grin:


----------



## Toonces (Apr 20, 2010)

Browder said:


> Toonces raises an an interesting point though about our societal priorities. Why _can't_ porn be taken seriously as an artform and valid genre within it's own right? Art is about some kind of expression to provoke the imagination or emotions so why not the physical senses? I think we've got this underlying notion that 'sex is dirty' and won't acknowledge that what makes is few good below the belt can't possibly be any kind of masterpiece, or even virtuous achievement.
> 
> On the topic of names (i.e. porn versus pulp): whatever. Its his writing so he can call it whatever he wants. However if what he's trying to do is raise the genres status, than _I_ personally would call it porn. None of you are the author so the point is moot.



Call your art whatever you want to call your art. I only reacted negatively because some people were not affording me the same consideration.



Poetigress said:


> It is. At least, outside the fandom it is.



Porn is almost universally considered an object with specific utility and rarely a site for actual artistic expression, since artistic expression necessitates obfuscation and troubling of expectations, two things creators and consumers of porn deliberately eschew.


----------



## reian (Apr 20, 2010)

I take sex quite seriously.  It can be funny, but for the most part I'm awful at even realizing a sex joke is a sex joke or double entendres or what not.

_When_ I do write porn, it is typically a very serious thing for me.  It is honestly what I feel the characters would do and feel.  It isn't about providing a service for any particular person, although it is nice when people enjoy it.  I often get my porn stories proof read more by people so that I can make sure it doesn't sound silly or funny...*shrug*


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> Porn is almost universally considered an object with specific utility and rarely a site for actual artistic expression, since artistic expression necessitates obfuscation and troubling of expectations, two things creators and consumers of porn deliberately eschew.



I'm not talking about what's typically defined as pornography, though. I'm talking about what the publishers call erotica. Erotica, essentially meaning sexually explicit fiction with some sort of story and character development (not necessarily romantic, with varying levels of heat and varying types of language), is considered a legitimate genre. Whether it gets equal respect when compared to other types of writing is still a question, but then plenty of genres (sf/f, etc) still don't get the respect that pure literary fiction gets, so the issue of respect kind of becomes a moot point when you step back far enough.


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> artistic expression necessitates obfuscation and troubling of expectations


This interests me.  Can you explain why artistic expression requires obfuscation?  You might be right, I've just never heard that statement made before, as far as I can recall.


----------



## GraemeLion (Apr 20, 2010)

In the end, Toonces, it doesn't matter whether you call your stuff pulp or not.

Readers know it's porn.  

I guess the frustration that other writers have with this connotation is that pulp means something different to them, and they don't get why you're obfuscating.   You're not fooling your readers with the distinction.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 20, 2010)

Poetigress said:


> I'm not talking about what's typically defined as pornography, though. I'm talking about what the publishers call erotica. Erotica, essentially meaning sexually explicit fiction with some sort of story and character development (not necessarily romantic, with varying levels of heat and varying types of language), is considered a legitimate genre. Whether it gets equal respect when compared to other types of writing is still a question, but then plenty of genres (sf/f, etc) still don't get the respect that pure literary fiction gets, so the issue of respect kind of becomes a moot point when you step back far enough.



I'm not talking about respect from the standpoint of its reception, I'm talking about respect from the standpoint of its conception. The problem with sexualized writing is that the _writers_ don't respect it as a mode of expression. It has nothing to do with genre, as I personally find the distinction between _erotica_ and _porn_ to be immaterial. In fact, the distinction reflects the very lack of respect that writers have for sexualized writing, as if the act of sex doesn't constitute a story, and the persons partaking in it don't qualify as characters, and that this perceived lack of either is an expression not of their shortcomings as writers but the shortcomings of the genre itself.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 20, 2010)

GraemeLion said:


> In the end, Toonces, it doesn't matter whether you call your stuff pulp or not.
> 
> Readers know it's porn.
> 
> I guess the frustration that other writers have with this connotation is that pulp means something different to them, and they don't get why you're obfuscating.   You're not fooling your readers with the distinction.



I don't try to control what the story means to the reader. The distinction I make between pulp and porn is a cosmetic one, one that reflects my own consideration for a misunderstood literary tradition, not any significant fundamental change in the material itself. I don't understand why it's become such a point of contention in this discussion.


----------



## Browder (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> I don't try to control what the story means to the reader. The distinction I make between pulp and porn is a cosmetic one, one that reflects my own consideration for a misunderstood literary tradition, not any significant fundamental change in the material itself. *I don't understand why it's become such a point of contention in this discussion.*



Because we're writers and we get persnickety about words. This isn't really always a good thing, as you can see.


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> I don't understand why it's become such a point of contention in this discussion.


Would we be writers if we weren't obsessed with using the right word for every circumstance and clearly communicating our ideas?


----------



## Toonces (Apr 20, 2010)

The fact that you have standards for what writers necessarily "do" reflects a cramped understanding of what constitutes writing and who constitute writers.


----------



## Browder (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> The fact that you have standards for what writers necessarily "do" reflects a cramped understanding of what constitutes writing and who constitute writers.



No. I don't really have standards. I just expect words to mean certain things at any given moment. I'm not against you giving them different connotations either though. Languages are meant to evolve.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 20, 2010)

sunandshadow said:


> This interests me.  Can you explain why artistic expression requires obfuscation?  You might be right, I've just never heard that statement made before, as far as I can recall.



Because compelling writing can arise from illuminating what people want to resist or by shrouding what they desire to see. Conflict creates tension, even if the conflict is that of the reader struggling to understand. As Kafka says, a book must by the ice-ax for the frozen sea of the soul. People have an indefatigable need to _know_, and not allowing them to fulfill that desire can lead to exceptionally engaging writing.


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> I'm not talking about respect from the standpoint of its reception, I'm talking about respect from the standpoint of its conception. The problem with sexualized writing is that the _writers_ don't respect it as a mode of expression. It has nothing to do with genre, as I personally find the distinction between _erotica_ and _porn_ to be immaterial. In fact, the distinction reflects the very lack of respect that writers have for sexualized writing, as if the act of sex doesn't constitute a story, and the persons partaking in it don't qualify as characters, and that this perceived lack of either is an expression not of their shortcomings as writers but the shortcomings of the genre itself.


The act of sex _doesn't_ constitute a story, any more than any other single action would.  A murder is not a story by itself, nor is winning a race, or traveling from point A to point B, or finding the legendary magic foozle of destiny.

I write erotica, and I do feel respect for my genre.  That's why I use the word erotica instead of porn, because the word porn has the connotations of something disposable, with nothing going on beneath the surface.  When I call my work erotica, I am saying "sex as literary art", "sex with meaning", and "my art form that I take seriously".  When I call someone else's work erotica, I'm saying that their work has depth, and they as writers were doing something with artistic merit.  If I call it porn I'm saying their work has no depth, no goal besides a quick buck or a quick orgasm, and they don't deserve to be considered artists because they don't respect their own genre.


----------



## Atrak (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> Thanks, FA's Writer's Bloc Forum, for reminding me why I hate FA'S Writer's Bloc Forum.


 
You think this is bad?

At least we're actually taking you seriously.

Try this somewhere else in the forum.

See what happens.


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> Because compelling writing can arise from illuminating what people want to resist or by shrouding what the desire to see. Conflict creates tension, even if the conflict is that of the reader struggling to understand.


That's not actually the same as saying obfuscation is a necessity for any and every artistic expression.

Personally I tend to be straightforward - I write stories with simple linear chronology, and I always want the reader to understand what is happening and why.  I probably make too little use of obfuscation because I like mysteries but I haven't learned how to present them in a tantalizing way yet.  I like surrealism which is very obfuscated but I don't think I could ever write surrealism - I've tried and utterly failed to make my mind work that way.  On the other hand, as a reader I hate stories where I don't know what's going on and things aren't all explained at the end.  I tend to see that as a cop-out on the writer's part.


----------



## Browder (Apr 20, 2010)

sunandshadow said:


> That's not actually the same as saying obfuscation is a necessity for any and every artistic expression.
> 
> Personally I tend to be straightforward - I write stories with simple linear chronology, and I always want the reader to understand what is happening and why.  I probably make too little use of obfuscation because I like mysteries but I haven't learned how to present them in a tantalizing way yet.  I like surrealism which is very obfuscated but I don't think I could ever write surrealism - I've tried and utterly failed to make my mind work that way.  On the other hand, as a reader *I hate stories where I don't know what's going on and things aren't all explained at the end.  I tend to see that as a cop-out on the writer's part.*



I actually find this to be little narrow-minded, personally.


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> The problem with sexualized writing is that the _writers_ don't respect it as a mode of expression.



Are you talking about within the fandom, or outside of it? Because outside of it, organizations like the Erotica Readers & Writers Association, the mainstream publishers who now include the subgenre of erotic romance, and plenty of other things, wouldn't be able to exist if the people writing the material didn't respect it as a mode of expression.

I think you can make a case for writers in the fandom treating adult writing as a throwaway activity, but that doesn't hold true elsewhere. (And again, as I've found, many writers in the fandom treat their writing as something dashed off purely for fun regardless of what its content is.)


----------



## Toonces (Apr 20, 2010)

sunandshadow said:


> The act of sex _doesn't_ constitute a story, any more than any other single action would.  A murder is not a story by itself, nor is winning a race, or traveling from point A to point B, or finding the legendary magic foozle of destiny.



I disagree pretty fundamentally on this point. There isn't much more to say on the matter here, we just have different understandings of things.



> I write erotica, and I do feel respect for my genre.  That's why I use the word erotica instead of porn, because the word porn has the connotations of something disposable, with nothing going on beneath the surface.  When I call my work erotica, I am saying "sex as literary art", "sex with meaning", and "my art form that I take seriously".  When I call someone else's work erotica, I'm saying that their work has depth, and they as writers were doing something with artistic merit.  If I call it porn I'm saying their work has no depth, no goal besides a quick buck or a quick orgasm, and they don't deserve to be considered artists because they don't respect their own genre.



I feel it is tremendously pretentious to cast yourself as artistic arbiter in this fashion.


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> The fact that you have standards for what writers necessarily "do" reflects a cramped understanding of what constitutes writing and who constitute writers.


Disagree.  I have 'standards' for what every profession does, because that's what I see people doing most of the time.  It's about experentially observed average behavior, not about prescriptivity or rigid stereotypes.  And I'll go the opposite direction and say, anyone who can't tell you what the average member of a profession might think and do on an average day is would be a failure as a writer because being able to model human behavior is an essential skill for writing fiction.


----------



## Browder (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> I feel it is tremendously pretentious to cast yourself as artistic arbiter in this fashion.



I'm not saying I disagree with you, but isn't that what you've been doing all throughout this thread?


----------



## Toonces (Apr 20, 2010)

Poetigress said:


> Are you talking about within the fandom, or outside of it? Because outside of it, organizations like the Erotica Readers & Writers Association, the mainstream publishers who now include the subgenre of erotic romance, and plenty of other things, wouldn't be able to exist if the people writing the material didn't respect it as a mode of expression.
> 
> I think you can make a case for writers in the fandom treating adult writing as a throwaway activity, but that doesn't hold true elsewhere. (And again, as I've found, many writers in the fandom treat their writing as something dashed off purely for fun regardless of what its content is.)



I'm talking about within the fandom because that's where the bulk of my experience is. I can't speak for outside of it.

I'm glad this conversation got to where it is. I'm heading down to the Hirshhorn to check out some modern art on the taxpayer's dime. Peace out everybody.


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> I feel it is tremendously pretentious to cast yourself as artistic arbiter in this fashion.


But you want us to be artists who take our genre seriously, you just said so.  Declaring oneself an artist and taking one's art seriously is inherently egotistic.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 20, 2010)

Browder said:


> I'm not saying I disagree with you, but isn't that what you've been doing all throughout this thread?



Just to clarify this point, I never see any fault in expanding the definition of artistic expression, because it's an act of discovery, not of gatekeeping. I never see any value in limiting it, because it's an act of gatekeeping, not discovery. I think that is the fundamental difference in the positions I and others have taken.


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 20, 2010)

Browder said:


> I'm not saying I disagree with you, but isn't that what you've been doing all throughout this thread?



Beat me to it.

If you're going to call what you write "pulp" instead of "porn" or "erotica," implying that you see these terms as different entities, in connotation if nothing else, why it is then pretentious for someone else to come up with their own distinctions and definitions for those terms?


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 20, 2010)

Browder said:


> I actually find this to be little narrow-minded, personally.


It probably is narrow-minded.  I was talking about my perception as a reader.  As a reader, what I don't like I just don't like, even if academically I have an idea why the writer might have wanted to do it.  And my personal taste as a reader, including my dissatisfaction with open-ended stories, is necessarily going to inform my artistic goals as a writer, because I want to write stuff I'd consider a great read.


----------



## Browder (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> Just to clarify this point, I never see any fault in expanding the definition of artistic expression, because it's an act of discovery, not of gatekeeping. I never see any value in limiting it, because it's an act of gatekeeping, not discovery. I think that is the fundamental difference in the positions I and others have taken.



I agree , but by declaring art 'discovery' or  declaring art anything for that matter is in itself a limiting factor. It's the unfortunate truth that words limit things, and make us all arbiters in the end.



sunandshadow said:


> It probably is narrow-minded.  I was talking about my perception as a reader.  As a reader, what I don't like I just don't like, even if academically I have an idea why the writer might have wanted to do it.  And my personal taste as a reader, including my dissatisfaction with open-ended stories, is necessarily going to inform my artistic goals as a writer, because I want to write stuff I'd consider a great read.



Don't we all?


----------



## Toonces (Apr 20, 2010)

Poetigress said:


> Beat me to it.
> 
> If you're going to call what you write "pulp" instead of "porn" or "erotica," implying that you see these terms as different entities, in connotation if nothing else, why it is then pretentious for someone else to come up with their own distinctions and definitions for those terms?



Okay this is the last clarification I'm making, really.

I write porn. I write erotica. I write fantasies. I write jerk-off rags. I've never denied any interpretation of my work. I prefer to call it "pulp" out of respect for a specific literary tradition.


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> Just to clarify this point, I never see any fault in expanding the definition of artistic expression, because it's an act of discovery, not of gatekeeping. I never see any value in limiting it, because it's an act of gatekeeping, not discovery. I think that is the fundamental difference in the positions I and others have taken.


I see artistic expression as being at least half engineering/craftsmanship.  I believe that any craftsman needs to have a firm understanding of their tools and materials, and definitions are a condensed form of understanding.  A person who can't define a thing doesn't truly know what that thing is, or doesn't have confidence in their ability to express their understanding (fatal for a writer, since communicating understanding is the whole reason for the existence of words, much less making art out of them).


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 20, 2010)

Browder said:


> Don't we all?


One hopes.   Although you do occasionally meet an odd duck who seems to have no personal taste.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Apr 20, 2010)

Porn has the image it does because the grand majority of it tends to not be very thoughtful.  Person A meets person B, some ridiculously contrived events occur to bring them together into bed, and they have elaborately described sex.  The end.  In fact, most people just skip right to the sex, because the sex is the _only_ point of the writing.  It's like porn videos, which are just people you don't know doing things to their bodies.
Obviously that kind of thing has a place in this world.  Obviously if it went away, we'd be missing something important.
But even if you manage to write that kind of thing with some degree of skill, it's just not the type of material to really stick in your mind.  Because it's not meant to be.
It's a legitimate genre, sure.  It requires the same skills every writer should have, if you want to pull it off without just making people crack up and remain flaccid.  But it's still in about the same category as writing that _only_ is meant to describe a fight, or writing that _only_ is meant to describe a building.  These aren't pieces of literature so much as writing exercises.  Bare-bones stuff that most writers do for practice.
That's why there's a distinction made between 'porn' and 'erotic fiction', actually.  Publishers want to know if what you're writing is just mindless junk, or if it has plot and some kind of lasting emotional impact.  That's why people refer to things like, say, the latest Transformers movie as being 'fighting robot porn'.  It's pretty much only about the robots fighting.  There's a plot, but no one cares because it's only there to keep things vaguely more coherent.

I know... I'm badmouthing the hell out of that kind of writing.  Honestly, though, if it's done right, I think that kind of thing is really entertaining stuff.  Yeah, it's not serious literature, but I don't always want to read serious literature.  The fun comes from the badness, to put it bluntly.  It's like watching a movie with, say, Reb Brown in the leading role.  You know it's gonna' be crap, but who cares as long as he keeps killing people, right?  If by the end of the piece, you feel satisfied in some way, mission accomplished.  It shouldn't be compared to more thoughtful literature, because it's something else entirely.  
You don't read something called _Guy Meets Girl in Bathroom and They Screw, Part 2_ for the same reason you read _Atlas Shrugged_, is what I'm saying.  Both of those are probably really good pieces, but for entirely different reasons.


----------



## Atrak (Apr 20, 2010)

OP, do you write your stories like you do your posts?

I find this highly unlikely.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Apr 20, 2010)

When it comes to sexuality in fiction I always liked the Star Trek approach.  We all knew Kirk was a manwhore yet not once did we need to see his penis or some blue or green alien boobs to know it.


----------



## panzergulo (Apr 20, 2010)

*Mash*



TooncesFA said:


> Words are most intriguing when bent in peculiar ways.





			
				Joking Mathematician said:
			
		

> A mathematician was attending as a guest speaker in a Technology and Engineering Conference. When it was his turn to speak, he took his computer, connected it to the projector and explained his notes.
> 
> "Here you can see I have used both supremum and maximum before the equation. This is because my experience has taught me it lessens confusion if I put a 'max' above the 'sup'. The mathematicians are happy because I have the supremum there; It doesn't fight with their axioms. And the engineers are happy because of the maximum; It makes much more sense with their everyday experiences."
> 
> ...



I don't see very much discussion of mash on this forum, and when I do, it tends to be singling it out as the cause for why _real_ writers and _real_ literary works don't get the attention they deserve on FA. Sometimes I'd like to post a thread discussing some particular point about writing mash but I'm unsure if I'd run afoul of a standard on the forum that privileges more _serious_ literature.

Do the posters here not write very much of it? Read very much of it? Like or dislike it?

So, what's your opinion about _mash?_


----------



## reian (Apr 20, 2010)

AshleyAshes said:


> When it comes to sexuality in fiction I always liked the Star Trek approach.  We all knew Kirk was a manwhore yet not once did we need to see his penis or some blue or green alien boobs to know it.



Epic Win right here...I applaud you!


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 20, 2010)

AshleyAshes said:


> When it comes to sexuality in fiction I always liked the Star Trek approach.  We all knew Kirk was a manwhore yet not once did we need to see his penis or some blue or green alien boobs to know it.


One of the reasons people write fanfiction is because they perceive something lacking in the original.  And there is LOTS of Star Trek (and now Avatar) sex fanfiction, because to many people it feels incomplete and bowdlerized to try to fully explore a character or alien race without ever putting them in the context of a sex scene.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Apr 20, 2010)

sunandshadow said:


> One of the reasons people write fanfiction is because they perceive something lacking in the original. And there is LOTS of Star Trek (and now Avatar) sex fanfiction, because to many people it feels incomplete and bowdlerized to try to fully explore a character or alien race without ever putting them in the context of a sex scene.


 
You realize you're giving that credit to the same group of people who also feel that Harry Potter should TOTALLY fall in love with them a new, original character who is totally not a version of the author with awesome magical powers?


----------



## GraemeLion (Apr 20, 2010)

sunandshadow said:


> One of the reasons people write fanfiction is because they perceive something lacking in the original. And there is LOTS of Star Trek (and now Avatar) sex fanfiction, because  to many people it feels incomplete and bowdlerized to try to fully explore a character or alien race without ever putting them in the context of a sex scene. *teenagers are going through puberty and are horny.*



Fixed that for you.

I wrote Trek fanfic.  I know the market well.


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 20, 2010)

AshleyAshes said:


> You realize you're giving that credit to the same group of people who also feel that Harry Potter should TOTALLY fall in love with them a new, original character who is totally not a version of the author with awesome magical powers?


Although Mary Sue main characters are somewhere between comical and annoying, it certainly doesn't account for all the fanfiction out there.  While I wouldn't describe writers of mary sue fanfiction as mature or respectable writers, from a psychological standpoint I do think writing mary sue fiction can be a useful way to explore one's identity and gain more insight into one's motivations, subconscious, fears, etc.

I don't personally write fanfiction - I used to, but I quit because I decided not to waste my time writing stuff I could never publish.  But I used to be part of that community, and I respect it.  Yeah there's an abundance of really awful fanfiction just like there's an abundance of really awful furry fiction and an abundance of really awful sex fiction.  But in all three genres I've also seen some pieces that I felt had major literary merit.


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 20, 2010)

GraemeLion said:


> Fixed that for you.
> 
> I wrote Trek fanfic.  I know the market well.


"teenagers going through puberty and are horny" makes it seem like you expect people to grow out of being horny?  At least half the erotica writers I know are over 25.  Or maybe you meant teenagers who write fanfic hopefully mature to writing original fic?  That happens somewhat, but fanfic is just plain easier that original fic to write, the social rewards are greater, so for a writer who had no desire to get published it would make more sense to write fanfic, regardless of what age they are.


----------



## GraemeLion (Apr 20, 2010)

sunandshadow said:


> "teenagers going through puberty and are horny" makes it seem like you expect people to grow out of being horny?  At least half the erotica writers I know are over 25.  Or maybe you meant teenagers who write fanfic hopefully mature to writing original fic?  That happens somewhat, but fanfic is just plain easier that original fic to write, the social rewards are greater, so for a writer who had no desire to get published it would make more sense to write fanfic, regardless of what age they are.



Some people stay in that puberty phase mentally a lot longer than others.


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 20, 2010)

GraemeLion said:


> Some people stay in that puberty phase mentally a lot longer than others.


Erm... are you actually saying erotica writers are not mentally adult?  I hope not, that would be pretty insulting...


----------



## GraemeLion (Apr 20, 2010)

sunandshadow said:


> Erm... are you actually saying erotica writers are not mentally adult?  I hope not, that would be pretty insulting...



I'd hope not, given I write my fair share of porn.

I'm saying that the statement that people write fanfiction (and in particular, Trek)  in order to explore aspects of characterization that were omitted in the base material is a load of hooie.  Kirk/Spock was written about because people wanted them to be gay, and wanted to imagine what their gay relationships were like in a period of time where that would have been "okay."  

Harry Potter sexfic is written because people (mostly women, from what I've discovered), want Potter.

I wrote Lion King fic involving Scar because.. well, I like British accents <.<  

Yes, some fanfic is not about the sexualization.  But if you put that on a list side by side with those that ARE, you'd find a very short list, and an immensely huge list.  

There have been studies done that show this, anyway.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Apr 20, 2010)

GraemeLion said:


> I'm saying that the statement that people write fanfiction (and in particular, Trek) in order to explore aspects of characterization that were omitted in the base material is a load of hooie.


 
This was pretty much my point.  Fanfiction isn't evidence that the original material is incomplete, it's evidence that a lot of people with bad story ideas based on TV shows they watched own a word processor.


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 20, 2010)

If this is going to turn into a fanfic discussion, can somebody make a new thread for that, so I can completely avoid it? 9_9

Just asking.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 20, 2010)

M. Le Renard said:


> Porn has the image it does because the grand majority of it tends to not be very thoughtful.  Person A meets person B, some ridiculously contrived events occur to bring them together into bed, and they have elaborately described sex.  The end.  In fact, most people just skip right to the sex, because the sex is the _only_ point of the writing.  It's like porn videos, which are just people you don't know doing things to their bodies.
> Obviously that kind of thing has a place in this world.  Obviously if it went away, we'd be missing something important.
> But even if you manage to write that kind of thing with some degree of skill, it's just not the type of material to really stick in your mind.  Because it's not meant to be.
> It's a legitimate genre, sure.  It requires the same skills every writer should have, if you want to pull it off without just making people crack up and remain flaccid.  But it's still in about the same category as writing that _only_ is meant to describe a fight, or writing that _only_ is meant to describe a building.  These aren't pieces of literature so much as writing exercises.  Bare-bones stuff that most writers do for practice.
> ...




Any piece of art is what you make of it. For many, _Atlas Shrugged_ is as masturbatory and self-indulgent as any piece of erotica (I mean, disregarding the amount of rape fantasies within), little more than a superman fantasy that tickles and teases the parts of a person's insecurities, curiosities, and convictions to mimic the warm sense of satisfaction of having Gone Galt. For some, Transformers 2 can be dissected into its component parts to lay bare an image of the various dominant institutions that combined to create it, read not simply as "fighting robot porn" but as a cultural artifact of a dwindling superpower caught in the hold of late capitalism, a marker of a society's ideals and beliefs on war, death, authority, and other serious matters that require a more active and informed reading than simply absorbing the images into the base of the brain stem.

There is no one way to read literature, and there is no one way to write literature. Approaching an art form like pulp with a limited understanding of how it can be read will necessarily have the effect of limiting the ways in which you can write it.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Apr 20, 2010)

TooncesFA said:
			
		

> For some, Transformers 2 can be dissected into its component parts to lay bare an image of the various dominant institutions that combined to create it, read not simply as "fighting robot porn" but as a cultural artifact of a dwindling superpower caught in the hold of late capitalism, a marker of a society's ideals and beliefs on war, death, authority, and other serious matters that require a more active and informed reading than simply absorbing the images into the base of the brain stem.


But at that point, you're not even talking about the film anymore.  You're talking about the history and culture of the people for whom the film was produced.  If you look at that movie as a story, it's just fighting robots.  I'm talking about the story, not the deep sociological underpinnings of the movie making process that all combined together to form the cultural atmosphere in which the team that went on to produce the story was born.  You could analyze this movie so far along that route that you'd end up at the Big Bang.
Besides, do you really think Michael Bay was thinking about America as a 'dwindling superpower caught in the hold of late capitalism' when he decided to put in the shot of two dogs humping?  Twice?
People don't read pulp for that kind of analysis.  They read it because it's fun to read.  If you're trying to make it into something more than that, you're no longer writing pulp, plain and simple.  What you asked about was pulp, and that's my opinion on pulp.  Brainless and fun entertainment.


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 20, 2010)

AshleyAshes said:


> This was pretty much my point.  Fanfiction isn't evidence that the original material is incomplete, it's evidence that a lot of people with bad story ideas based on TV shows they watched own a word processor.





Poetigress said:


> If this is going to turn into a fanfic discussion, can somebody make a new thread for that, so I can completely avoid it? 9_9
> 
> Just asking.


Although I believe there is some noticeable percentage of fanwriters who are motivated by a perceived lack in the original material, I don't think it's an interesting enough point to bother arguing about.  So let's forget the fanfiction angle.  How about if I just say, stories which pretend sex doesn't exist or treat sex as an unavailable/forbidden topic tend to strike me personally as incomplete?


----------



## GraemeLion (Apr 20, 2010)

Fair enough 

I just still don't see this distinction between porn and pulp being necessary.  I've read my aforementioned grandfather's pulp collection.  Not a single sex scene.  Lots of hot sultry men saving busty tawdry amazons, but nothing that really looks anything like the pulp in Toonces' gallery.

Not saying that either is bad, or good, or indifferent.   Just don't see the usage.


----------



## TakeWalker (Apr 21, 2010)

*Re: Mash*

---


----------



## panzergulo (Apr 21, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



TakeWalker said:


> panzergulo said:
> 
> 
> > Sometimes I'd like to post a thread discussing some particular point about writing mash but I'm unsure if I'd run afoul of a standard on the forum that privileges more _serious_ literature.
> ...



It's so early in the morning I'm not sure are you now talking against Toonces or against my parody of his OP. Either way, this post amused me greatly.

For the record, every time I read "pulp" in this thread, I have to read it twice, to figure out if the user of the word is writing about pulp or about "pulp". Just saying, using words that already have rather distinct meaning when talking about literature to mean something else... it confuses me greatly. And seems to confuse many others too.

I have nothing to say about porn, art, Transformers (aren't these the boxes where wires goes in and wires go out and you can _transform_ electricity to different kind of electricity), culture or anything else. I think the discussion has gone too far from Toonces' original questions anyway, which were:

Do you write PORN?
Do you read PORN?
Do you enjoy PORN, whether writing or reading?

My memory might fail me, but it seemed like only me and Poetigress gave proper, explained answers to these questions.

But yeah, the long-winded and (at least superficially) intelligent conversations are the reason I still hang around here; Even if the subject doesn't make me want to comment, I find the whole thread rather interesting nonetheless.

Keep it up, men, women. It has been pleasure exchanging ideas and opinions with you.


----------



## TakeWalker (Apr 21, 2010)

Panzer, I am terribly sorry, my hatred and sleep deprivation clouded my judgment and I thought Toonces wrote that.


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 21, 2010)

Toonces did write most of it; panzergulo just changed the word "pulp" to "mash."


----------



## GraemeLion (Apr 21, 2010)

To make things happy 

Yes, I write porn.
Yes, I read porn.
Yes, I like doing both.  I like reading a little more than writing.  It makes me feel a bit uncomfortable to write it, because I'm not uber experienced at the stuff I'm writing about.

As for whether it bothers me to have my porn be more popular than not, well, it's what this market wants. *shrugs* There are other markets that want other things, and there's no law that says I can't write in multiple markets


----------



## panzergulo (Apr 21, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



TakeWalker said:


> Panzer, I am terribly sorry, my hatred and sleep deprivation clouded my judgment and I thought Toonces wrote that.



He did.



Poetigress said:


> Toonces did write most of it; panzergulo just changed the word "pulp" to "mash."



What she said.

What I find amusing is that you apologize me. If it had been Toonces (like it really was) you wouldn't have apologized, is that what you're saying?

You folks just keep amusing me. I had a long and good laugh after reading the last few posts.


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 21, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



panzergulo said:


> Do you write PORN?
> Do you read PORN?
> Do you enjoy PORN, whether writing or reading?


Hey nice, a form of the question I can actually understand and reply to. 

I write erotica for my own purposes, but I will write porn on request, because I think pleasing another person is a good enough reason to create a story.  Also, I'd love to get into a partnership with a manga artist, but they all want really short stories, and the shorter the form I try to write, the more it turns into porn because it seems like there isn't room for much else.

I prefer to read erotic romance, but if I can't get that I will read porn if it involves one of my fetishy interests and isn't horrific, tragic, or violent.

Erotic romance is harder to write than porn simply because it's more complicated.  So writing porn makes it easier to achieve the satisfaction of having finished something.  But I don't get a warm fuzzy glow when I contemplate the finished piece the way I do if I write erotic romance.  So overall I'd prefer to write erotic romance, but writing porn is rewarding too.  Reading, porn tends to be less enjoyable because it tends to be non-romantic, and reading about sex that's not in the contex of romance doesn't really do anything for me.  I especially don't enjoy accidentally starting to read something which turns out to be horror porn or tragic love story.  On the other hand that happens with erotic romance too, it often goes off in a BDSM direction I'm not really interested in.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Apr 21, 2010)

Hey, man.  I answered the last question, but I talked about pulp fiction, which was what was asked.  I included porn within the definition of pulp fiction, too, since some pulp fiction is pretty much just porn of some kind.  So I'm on topic, Mister Tank Wolverine, thank you very much.
;-)


----------



## Toonces (Apr 21, 2010)

M. Le Renard said:


> But at that point, you're not even talking about the film anymore.



This is simply untrue. Nothing is outside the text, and discussing the film with an eye on how it relates to social institutions is still discussing the film.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 21, 2010)

TakeWalker said:
			
		

> The hell we do.
> 
> We privilege those who aren't hypocrites, egotists, or pretentious snots trying desperately to cling to their excruciatingly loose definitions of established genres.
> 
> ...



Look I don't do this often and I think this has been a great discussion, after the first page at least, but:

u mad?


----------



## M. LeRenard (Apr 21, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> This is simply untrue. Nothing is outside the text, and discussing the film with an eye on how it relates to social institutions is still discussing the film.


Technically true.  Just like how discussing the film with an eye on how it relates to, say, banana pudding is discussing the film.  In other words, nothing is outside the text if you can find a way to jam it in there through analysis.
I'm really curious now, though.  If this is how you see it, why do you write smut?  Most people who read it aren't going to think about it with respect to any greater context than their own genitals.  If you're trying to make a powerful social statement about something, this is a really strange and indirect way of doing that.


----------



## Browder (Apr 21, 2010)

M. Le Renard said:


> Technically true.  Just like how discussing the film with an eye on how it relates to, say, banana pudding is discussing the film.  In other words, nothing is outside the text if you can find a way to jam it in there through analysis.
> I'm really curious now, though.  If this is how you see it, why do you write smut?  Most people who read it aren't going to think about it with respect to any greater context than their own genitals.  If you're trying to make a powerful social statement about something, this is a really strange and indirect way of doing that.



It's not that strange though is it? Sex is a major part of life, one that often gets repressed or ignored. When people have sex they do so for a million different reasons and a million different ways. The entire thing is dripping with metaphor and poetry, and that's pretty beautiful if you stop and think about it.

I may not agree with the manner Toonces is using to express his points, but they're actually pretty valid. It's actually kind of frustrating having someone so correct also be so insufferable.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 21, 2010)

M. Le Renard said:


> Technically true.  Just like how discussing the film with an eye on how it relates to, say, banana pudding is discussing the film.  In other words, nothing is outside the text if you can find a way to jam it in there through analysis.
> I'm really curious now, though.  If this is how you see it, why do you write smut?  Most people who read it aren't going to think about it with respect to any greater context than their own genitals.  If you're trying to make a powerful social statement about something, this is a really strange and indirect way of doing that.



I'm not trying to make a powerful social statement about anything, personally. My familiarity with feminist and queer thought tend to influence how I write characters and construct stories but there's no conscious effort to express anything.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Apr 21, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> I'm not trying to make a powerful social statement about anything, personally. My familiarity with feminist and queer thought tend to influence how I write characters and construct stories but there's no conscious effort to express anything.


So you're just writing to entertain.  Which is what I already argued was the only point of pulp fiction/porn.  Why did we go off on that tangent?



			
				Browder said:
			
		

> It's not that strange though is it? Sex is a major part of life, one that often gets repressed or ignored. When people have sex they do so for a million different reasons and a million different ways. The entire thing is dripping with metaphor and poetry, and that's pretty beautiful if you stop and think about it.


Isn't that where erotica comes in, though?  We're talking about porn.  The only thing porn is dripping with is semen, by definition.  It's so successful because it plays on the _baseness_ of sex.


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 21, 2010)

As they say (though I've heard various versions): Erotica is using a feather; pornography is using the whole chicken. 

It's possible to write stories with explicit sexual content that explore various aspects of sexuality, relationships, emotions, taboos, social commentary, etc. And it's possible to write stories with explicit sexual content that do nothing but provide a mental scene to get the reader (and writer) off.

Both can be enjoyable to read, depending on whether you want an intellectually/emotionally captivating story along with the erotic content, or if you're just looking for a text-based sex toy to get you in the mood. But I consider the first category to be literary erotica and the second to be porn, and while there's certainly bound to be some gray area in between, I don't think it's that outrageous a distinction to make.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 22, 2010)

M. Le Renard said:


> So you're just writing to entertain.  Which is what I already argued was the only point of pulp fiction/porn.  Why did we go off on that tangent?



Not really. I enjoy collaborating with fans to write stories. It's a nice way to make new friends. I like trying to weave ideas from queer and feminist thought into the constructions of the characters, and I like using poetic constructions to make the prose more lively. When I feel adventurous I try to wedge in commentary on social class. I wouldn't say I write to entertain, though. Mostly I'm just trying to catch my readers at their most vulnerable to inculcate marxist-feminist ideology in them. It's propaganda, mostly. For fascism.



Poetigress said:


> As they say (though I've heard various versions): Erotica is using a feather; pornography is using the whole chicken.
> 
> It's possible to write stories with explicit sexual content that explore various aspects of sexuality, relationships, emotions, taboos, social commentary, etc. And it's possible to write stories with explicit sexual content that do nothing but provide a mental scene to get the reader (and writer) off.
> 
> Both can be enjoyable to read, depending on whether you want an intellectually/emotionally captivating story along with the erotic content, or if you're just looking for a text-based sex toy to get you in the mood. But I consider the first category to be literary erotica and the second to be porn, and while there's certainly bound to be some gray area in between, I don't think it's that outrageous a distinction to make.



And who says writers are pedantic!!


----------



## TShaw (Apr 22, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> I'm not trying to make a powerful social statement about anything, personally. My familiarity with feminist and queer thought tend to influence how I write characters and construct stories but there's no conscious effort to express anything.






TooncesFA said:


> I wouldn't say I write to entertain, though. Mostly I'm just trying to catch my readers at their most vulnerable to inculcate marxist-feminist ideology in them. It's propaganda, mostly. For fascism.



So which is it? Either way, nothing you've said in this entire thread makes me want to read anything of yours.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 22, 2010)

Were you genuinely not able to parse the sarcasm in that comment?

My background with feminist and queer thought influence my characters necessarily, but that doesn't mean I'm making a comment about anything. It only influences the way I imagine men and women act, or the significance behind sexuality, so on.


----------



## panzergulo (Apr 22, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



TShaw said:


> So which is it? Either way, nothing you've said in this entire thread makes *me* want to *read* anything of *you*rs.



Emphasis mine...

He doesn't really need you as a reader, Mister Shaw. As a writer of PORN (or "pulp", like he insists), he has hundreds of watchers already, and probably dozens of regular readers, at least when examining his last couple story submissions. While many of us appreciate when a writer who we respect and read in return watches and reads us, Toonces doesn't really need that kind of a boost, he is pretty much as popular as a writer can get in FA... so, I'm quite sure nothing you say will affect how he writes or talks. Just saying...

Toonces _might_ be the embodiment of everything I hate in porn writers, that is, he is awfully popular without real storytelling or artistic skills or merits... but just _might_ because I haven't ever read anything of his... maybe he really has something pure and excellent in his stories and has truly earned his popularity... but I can't know. I don't read him. No offense, Toonces, just playing with ideas. I could've picked any porn writer, but you were there, close and handy.

Anyway, it's useless fighting against windmills. If you disagree with people, it's easier to just leave them at their own, when you clearly can't achieve anything by challenging them.


----------



## Atrak (Apr 22, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



panzergulo said:


> Emphasis mine...
> 
> He doesn't really need you as a reader, Mister Shaw. As a writer of PORN (or "pulp", like he insists), he has hundreds of watchers already, and probably dozens of regular readers, at least when examining his last couple story submissions. While many of us appreciate when a writer who we respect and read in return watches and reads us, Toonces doesn't really need that kind of a boost, he is pretty much as popular as a writer can get in FA... so, I'm quite sure nothing you say will affect how he writes or talks. Just saying...
> 
> ...


 
Except that sometimes you need the fight. If fighting is all you have ever known, you grow attached to conflict. You find that you need something to fight against, even if there is nothing to fight for.

And it can also be a good way to vent or relieve stress.


----------



## panzergulo (Apr 22, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



atrakaj said:


> Except that sometimes you need the fight. If fighting is all you have ever known, you grow attached to conflict. You find that you need something to fight against, even if there is nothing to fight for.
> 
> And it can also be a good way to vent or relieve stress.



Also, it upsets the people around you. Possibly you offend the person you challenge and you might cause life-long scars. Don't we have mentally unstable furries just enough already?

Fighting for a cause when you know you can achieve something is a nice thing, but also very rare, at least in the web, where nobody admits they've lost. Fighting for a cause when you can't be sure you can achieve something might be noble, but also very stupid. Fighting just for the sake of fighting is pointless.

Just annoying people and getting amused by their responses is another thing, of course...

...but yeah, these are only my opinions. You have the freedom to disagree. In the basic sense, there are no wrong opinions. ;Ã¾


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 22, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



panzergulo said:


> Just annoying people and getting amused by their responses is another thing, of course...



Because of course, that can't possibly upset or offend the people around you.


----------



## Atrak (Apr 22, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



panzergulo said:


> Fighting for a cause when you know you can achieve something is a nice thing, but also very rare, at least in the web, where nobody admits they've lost. Fighting for a cause when you can't be sure you can achieve something might be noble, but also very stupid. Fighting just for the sake of fighting is pointless.


 
Terrorists in a nutshell.


----------



## panzergulo (Apr 22, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



Poetigress said:


> Because of course, that can't possibly upset or offend the people around you.



I don't operate with hatred or anger... I operate with schadenfreude... ;Ã¾

Seriously, I try not to offend people with my jesting... some people just have less humor or have different kind of humor than me. MLR has said he has difficulties to tell when I'm joking.

Really, always read my posts a few times. I'm rarely fully serious with anything.

To add: What do you think Toonces thinks about us derailing the thread?

To keep on topic: PORN: I don't read Toonces' porns.


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 22, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



panzergulo said:


> MLR has said he has difficulties to tell when I'm joking.



Actually, I've had the same problems with your posts in the past. But then I just started always assuming you're not being serious, or at least not as serious as you sound, and that seems to work pretty well.


----------



## GraemeLion (Apr 22, 2010)

See, I tend to not concern myself with what other people are writing.  It's not a team sport 

I don't get wrapped around the axle regarding porn anymore.  It's a part of furry.  A significant part if you wish to be a furry writer.  It's just something to accept and move on from.  

It doesn't change writing for me at all   And it shouldn't for anyone else.


----------



## Sovhiel (Apr 22, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



panzergulo said:


> To keep on topic: PORN: I don't read Toonces' porns.


I laughed, and people gave me weird looks. Darn you Panzer!


----------



## panzergulo (Apr 22, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



GraemeLion said:


> See, I tend to not concern myself with what other people are writing.  It's not a team sport
> 
> I don't get wrapped around the axle regarding porn anymore.  It's a part of *human*.  A significant part if you wish to be a furry writer.  It's just something to accept and move on from.
> 
> It doesn't change writing for me at all   And it shouldn't for anyone else.



I fixed that for you.

Accepting it doesn't make me any less sad, though.


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 22, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



panzergulo said:


> Emphasis mine...
> 
> He doesn't really need you as a reader, Mister Shaw. As a writer of PORN (or "pulp", like he insists), he has hundreds of watchers already, and probably dozens of regular readers, at least when examining his last couple story submissions. While many of us appreciate when a writer who we respect and read in return watches and reads us, Toonces doesn't really need that kind of a boost, he is pretty much as popular as a writer can get in FA... so, I'm quite sure nothing you say will affect how he writes or talks. Just saying...
> 
> Toonces _might_ be the embodiment of everything I hate in porn writers, that is, he is awfully popular without real storytelling or artistic skills or merits... but just _might_ because I haven't ever read anything of his... maybe he really has something pure and excellent in his stories and has truly earned his popularity... but I can't know. I don't read him. No offense, Toonces, just playing with ideas. I could've picked any porn writer, but you were there, close and handy.


I read some of Toonces pieces yesterday (because I was curious about the "How To Write Pulp" tutorial he mentioned), so if you're curious  I'll describe them.  They were pretty well written - not a clear glass style but a narrator with a somewhat ironic voice and tendency to use some playfully weird analogies (a chubby fur moves like jello on top of a dryer) and alliteration that occasionally made me boggle then laugh.

Structurally the pieces were minimalist in that they started a few paragraphs before a sex scene (just enough to establish the viewpoint character and what he is looking at) then went through the sex scene with touches of humor, and ended when the sex scene ended.  Thematically they were more or less circular - the main character ended up in the same mental place they were at at the beginning, they weren't changed by the events of the story.  Overall they were like candy, bite-sized and pleasant but to me they didn't feel filling because there wasn't any plot making a thematic point or character struggling with obstacles to pursue a goal or character growth as result of the struggle through plot.

I guess if you want to define pulp as "fiction like pieces of candy" then they really are pulp.


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 22, 2010)

GraemeLion said:


> See, I tend to not concern myself with what other people are writing.  It's not a team sport


Personally I like co-writing and writing as part of a manga or video game team.  My motivational problems with writing stem partly from the fact that it is an unpleasantly lonely activity.  I'm MUCH happier if I can get a few people to say stuff like, "Oh that's an interesting and/or hot idea, I want you to write that so I can read it."


----------



## GraemeLion (Apr 22, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



panzergulo said:


> I fixed that for you.
> 
> Accepting it doesn't make me any less sad, though.



Actually, not really.

Other markets I write in and for don't value porn as highly as this market does.   The NYT best sellers don't have much porn in them, whereas the furry best sellers (if such a thing existed) , likely would.

And why should it be sad?  You choose what you write and who you write for.  If that makes you sad... well, I would suggest you're doing it wrong


----------



## Atrak (Apr 22, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



sunandshadow said:


> I read some of Toonces pieces yesterday (because I was curious about the "How To Write Pulp" tutorial he mentioned), so if you're curious I'll describe them. They were pretty well written - not a clear glass style but a narrator with a somewhat ironic voice and tendency to use some playfully weird analogies (a chubby fur moves like jello on top of a dryer) and alliteration that occasionally made me boggle then laugh.
> 
> Structurally the pieces were minimalist in that they started a few paragraphs before a sex scene (just enough to establish the viewpoint character and what he is looking at) then went through the sex scene with touches of humor, and ended when the sex scene ended. *Thematically they were more or less circular - the main character ended up in the same mental place they were at at the beginning, they weren't changed by the events of the story*. Overall they were like candy, bite-sized and pleasant but to me they felt unfulfilled because there wasn't any plot making a thematic point or character struggling with obstacles to pursue a goal or character growth as result of the struggle through plot.
> 
> I guess if you want to define pulp as "fiction like pieces of candy" then they really are pulp.


 
Ah, static characters.

They usually bore me, unless the story is so short that it doesn't allow for development.


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 22, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



panzergulo said:


> Seriously, I try not to offend people with my jesting... some people just have less humor or have different kind of humor than me. MLR has said he has difficulties to tell when I'm joking.


I thought the parody about 'mash' was hilarious :grin: although I had to think about it for a minute before I realized the play on words with "mash" and "pulp".  I was trying to think how anyone could possibly write fiction about math, but then I remembered reading this:



> *Love and Tensor Algebra*
> from "The Cyberiad" by Stanislaw Lem
> 
> Come, let us hasten to a higher plane
> ...


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 22, 2010)

GraemeLion said:


> And why should it be sad?  You choose what you write and who you write for.  If that makes you sad... well, I would suggest you're doing it wrong



It's sad when the market you do want to write in, and the one best suited to your overall subject matter (e.g., anthropromorphics) isn't as interested in the type of story you're writing as it is in basic porn. 

Yes, there are other markets, and I'm glad of that -- but to my mind, it's not always as simple as writing off one market and choosing to write for another instead. (I also don't think we have quite as much choice in what we write as you're implying, but that's probably another discussion.)


----------



## KyleAwesome (Apr 22, 2010)

I'm a little late here, but I actually read all five pages of this! No clue what the topic is now, but here's something vaguely related.

With regards to the distinction between porn/erotica, I would say a good way to tell is this: If your mature/adult rated story on FA has over 100 views (or 10 comments/favs), then it's porn. Otherwise, it's erotica. I believe a large portion of readers on here will ultimately strip down a story with sex in it until only the sex is left, whether by ignoring the other aspects of the story or simply skipping to the last few pages. The easier it is for them to do this, the more people will follow that writer's work.

When it comes to the term 'pulp', I still think of orange juice. You could say that the sex in an erotica story is the pulp that floats around the orange juice. Some readers will consume both, but many people around here live only for the pulp and pick it out of the glass. Which is why writers who use a higher concentration (approaching 100%) get more attention: there's simply less in the way. In that sense, I guess the term is appropriate.


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 22, 2010)

Poetigress said:


> It's sad when the market you do want to write in, and the one best suited to your overall subject matter (e.g., anthropromorphics) isn't as interested in the type of story you're writing as it is in basic porn.
> 
> Yes, there are other markets, and I'm glad of that -- but to my mind, it's not always as simple as writing off one market and choosing to write for another instead. (I also don't think we have quite as much choice in what we write as you're implying, but that's probably another discussion.)


I agree and disagree with this at the same time.  I agree that it makes me feel sad to know that the vast majority of people will have no interest in any story idea I come up with.  But on the other hand I don't think I've ever been in the core demographic for anything, so in context that makes it absurd to complain about any particular instance of other people having bad taste. [insert ironic tone of voice here]


----------



## GraemeLion (Apr 22, 2010)

Poetigress said:


> It's sad when the market you do want to write in, and the one best suited to your overall subject matter (e.g., anthropromorphics) isn't as interested in the type of story you're writing as it is in basic porn.
> 
> Yes, there are other markets, and I'm glad of that -- but to my mind, it's not always as simple as writing off one market and choosing to write for another instead. (I also don't think we have quite as much choice in what we write as you're implying, but that's probably another discussion.)



Well, we could create a new market within Furry that would address and move things more "mainstream" like the Times Fiction list.  There are many options, but currently, the market isn't situated like that.   So, it's not something unsolvable, but currently it is what it is, you know?  You can grouse over it or keep writing what you like.    I choose the latter.  

As for throwing one market out for another.. there's something to be said for trying to establish a position in a niche market.   Maybe there can be something "non-pulpy" in Furry and that can grow as a market.   But it's going to take concerted effort and planning to create such a thing. 

Now, I know for a fact that many of my readers read outside of Furry.  They don't read porn all the time, and they LIKE what they read in sci-fi, fantasy, etc.  So the desire definitely exists.  What doesn't exist is the marketing.

Maybe we can work on that.


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 22, 2010)

*shrug* Well, at this point, we're back into the "future of furry writing" thread, and I think I already said everything I have to say on it over there.


----------



## TakeWalker (Apr 22, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



sunandshadow said:


> I thought the parody about 'mash' was hilarious :grin: although I had to think about it for a minute before I realized the play on words with "mash" and "pulp".  I was trying to think how anyone could possibly write fiction about math, but then I remembered reading this:



That would be the most amazing thing I've ever read if Euler actually rhymed with ruler. :B

Although, it was translated out of Polish, so maybe I can let that slide.


----------



## Sovhiel (Apr 22, 2010)

KyleAwesome said:


> With regards to the distinction between porn/erotica, I would say a good way to tell is this: If your mature/adult rated story on FA has over 100 views (or 10 comments/favs), then it's porn. Otherwise, it's erotica. I believe a large portion of readers on here will ultimately strip down a story with sex in it until only the sex is left, whether by ignoring the other aspects of the story or simply skipping to the last few pages. The easier it is for them to do this, the more people will follow that writer's work.


So are you using this seemingly arbitrary distinction to say that there really is no difference between porn and erotica, that the quibble over terms is just based on semantics, or are you saying that it's impossible to write a mature story that's popular because of the merits of its creative draw and writing technique?


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 22, 2010)

KyleAwesome said:


> With regards to the distinction between porn/erotica, I would say a good way to tell is this: If your mature/adult rated story on FA has over 100 views (or 10 comments/favs), then it's porn. Otherwise, it's erotica. I believe a large portion of readers on here will ultimately strip down a story with sex in it until only the sex is left, whether by ignoring the other aspects of the story or simply skipping to the last few pages. The easier it is for them to do this, the more people will follow that writer's work.


Umm nope, sorry.  My erotic romance WIP on sofurry has 7,000 views and 56 faves on the first chapter, and that goes up every time I add a new chapter.


----------



## Atrak (Apr 22, 2010)

Sovhiel said:


> So are you using this seemingly arbitrary distinction to say that there really is no difference between porn and erotica, that the quibble over terms is just based on semantics, or are you saying that it's impossible to write a mature story that's popular because of the merits of its creative draw and writing technique?


 
It sounds to me as if he is saying that erotica has some elements of fiction in it other than porn, but that the readers don't care about that.

So the stories with the higher concentration of porn get more views. It's like comparing a wine cooler to vodka. Which is more well known?

I have no experience with porn/erotica writings, so I have no opinion on that.


----------



## Sovhiel (Apr 22, 2010)

atrakaj said:


> It sounds to me as if he is saying that erotica has some elements of fiction in it other than porn, but that the readers don't care about that.
> 
> So the stories with the higher concentration of porn get more views. It's like comparing a wine cooler to vodka. Which is more well known?
> 
> I have no experience with porn/erotica writings, so I have no opinion on that.


Can I hire you as a Writer's Bloc translator, please? :3


----------



## Atrak (Apr 22, 2010)

Sovhiel said:


> Can I hire you as a Writer's Bloc translator, please? :3


 
You can access me through Google Translator.


----------



## GraemeLion (Apr 22, 2010)

I would love a way to track keypresses and "eyes on" for readers.  I'd be curious to know whether or not the people reading erotica are fast-forwarding or not.


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 22, 2010)

KyleAwesome said:


> With regards to the distinction between porn/erotica, I would say a good way to tell is this: If your mature/adult rated story on FA has over 100 views (or 10 comments/favs), then it's porn. Otherwise, it's erotica.



First, views mean nothing when it comes to written submissions. Just because someone viewed the page doesn't mean they read the piece in question, or even the first paragraph of the piece.

Second, what happens when a story has more than 10 comments and faves, and the comments relate to the plot/characters, instead of just being "that was hawt!"-type reactions?

I can understand the temptation to think that everything that's popular is catering to the lowest common denominator, but that's not necessarily true of the visual artists on FA, and I don't think it's always true of the writers, either. (That doesn't mean it's never true, but on the whole, popularity isn't a reliable indicator of much of anything, except possibly good marketing/networking skills.)


----------



## Atrak (Apr 22, 2010)

Poetigress said:


> First, views mean nothing when it comes to written submissions. Just because someone viewed the page doesn't mean they read the piece in question, or even the first paragraph of the piece.
> 
> Second, what happens when a story has more than 10 comments and faves, and the comments relate to the plot/characters, instead of just being "that was hawt!"-type reactions?
> 
> I can understand the temptation to think that everything that's popular is catering to the lowest common denominator, but that's not necessarily true of the visual artists on FA, and I don't think it's always true of the writers, either. (That doesn't mean it's never true, but on the whole, popularity isn't a reliable indicator of much of anything, except possibly good marketing/networking skills.)


 
I believe he was just being cynical.


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 22, 2010)

In this fandom, it's often hard to tell.


----------



## Atrak (Apr 22, 2010)

Poetigress said:


> In this fandom, it's often hard to tell.


 
Either way, he'll hopefully say that he was, thereby acquitting him of the stupidity we are starting to acquaint to him.

I don't know why, but I felt like using acquit in that sentence.


----------



## KyleAwesome (Apr 22, 2010)

Well, I wasn't actually using those numbers as a guide or anything  I was just saying that I think the popularity of a mature piece tends to increase with the concentration of sex scenes compared to everything else in the story, because a lot of readers show up for the sex and little (if anything) else.

You might have thought I was trashing your own work (equating it to porn), but I wasn't! I have read a handful of popular stories on here that I really like. I just don't always comment because I assume the author is tired of hearing about how great a 2 or 3 year old story is.


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 22, 2010)

KyleAwesome said:


> I just don't always comment because I assume the author is tired of hearing about how great a 2 or 3 year old story is.



Don't assume that.  Speaking for myself, I will happily accept praise on the oldest work in my gallery just as much as for something I posted last week. (Of course, things in my gallery are all out of order as far as when they were written vs. when they were posted, anyway. A piece I posted last week was actually written almost two years ago, for example.)

As far as I'm concerned, there's no time limit on reading something and giving feedback to the author. If they don't want to hear about something anymore, they should delete it from their gallery.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 22, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



sunandshadow said:


> I read some of Toonces pieces yesterday (because I was curious about the "How To Write Pulp" tutorial he mentioned), so if you're curious  I'll describe them.  They were pretty well written - not a clear glass style but a narrator with a somewhat ironic voice and tendency to use some playfully weird analogies (a chubby fur moves like jello on top of a dryer) and alliteration that occasionally made me boggle then laugh.
> 
> Structurally the pieces were minimalist in that they started a few paragraphs before a sex scene (just enough to establish the viewpoint character and what he is looking at) then went through the sex scene with touches of humor, and ended when the sex scene ended.  Thematically they were more or less circular - the main character ended up in the same mental place they were at at the beginning, they weren't changed by the events of the story.  Overall they were like candy, bite-sized and pleasant but to me they didn't feel filling because there wasn't any plot making a thematic point or character struggling with obstacles to pursue a goal or character growth as result of the struggle through plot.
> 
> I guess if you want to define pulp as "fiction like pieces of candy" then they really are pulp.



Thanks, I really appreciate that someone in this thread gave my writing a chance, and your analysis seems perfectly fair. I'm glad you were able to see the humor in it. I'm a humorist, by nature, and more than anything my goal with pulp has been to bring humor into it. In this thread when I've been talking about pulp being a little more than pulp, people have thought I meant making some kind of serious, dramatic statement, but usually it means using the story as a vessel for humor. I prefer it. You see a lot of people who try to needlessly shoehorn drama into pulp (with a knife against my throat, this is the definition I would give to "erotica"), but you much less often see people try to handle it with a softly satirical style. Ultimately, my goal with pulp has been two things:

1] To demonstrate the necessarily ridiculous nature of social interaction.

2] To experiment with prose structures such as the alliteration you mentioned in your review. 

I adapt what I learn about these structures to more serious pieces, when I write them, though I usually don't post them on FA. I've found that writing pulp has improved drastically, among other things, my ability to construct a narrative voice, and to represent movement and action more artistically.

I don't consider either of these particularly serious endeavors but I kind of resent the idea that they don't exist at all, and that I write pulp purely out of prurient interests.



panzergulo said:


> Toonces _might_ be the embodiment of everything I hate in porn writers, that is, he is awfully popular without real storytelling or artistic skills or merits... but just _might_ because I haven't ever read anything of his... maybe he really has something pure and excellent in his stories and has truly earned his popularity... but I can't know. I don't read him. No offense, Toonces, just playing with ideas. I could've picked any porn writer, but you were there, close and handy.



Why do you presume I'm without "artistic skills or merits" if you haven't read my work?


----------



## M. LeRenard (Apr 22, 2010)

TooncesFA said:
			
		

> In this thread when I've been talking about pulp being a little more than pulp, people have thought I meant making some kind of serious, dramatic statement, but usually it means using the story as a vessel for humor.


Um... okay.
Why, exactly, didn't you start the thread with _this_, and forgo all that leading-on with that bizarre analysis of Transformers 2, and that vaguely incoherent spiel about obfuscation, and all that other crap you posted that totally danced around and obscured this, your central thesis?  It would have cut the length of this thread by about half while still maintaining the same level of useful content.  Did you just feel like dancing, or what?


> Why do you presume I'm without "artistic skills or merits" if you haven't read my work?


Read the thing you quoted again, because he already addressed that question.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 22, 2010)

M. Le Renard said:


> Um... okay.
> Why, exactly, didn't you start the thread with _this_, and forgo all that leading-on with that bizarre analysis of Transformers 2, and that vaguely incoherent spiel about obfuscation, and all that other crap you posted that totally danced around and obscured this, your central thesis?  It would have cut the length of this thread by about half while still maintaining the same level of useful content.  Did you just feel like dancing, or what?.



People asked questions and I answered them. Overall I don't think the thread has gone too badly, I've been enjoying it.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Apr 23, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> People asked questions and I answered them. Overall I don't think the thread has gone too badly, I've been enjoying it.


Ha ha... then you no longer have any right to complain about our academic dissections of definitions, or anything like that, ever again.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 23, 2010)

Hehe just because I've been enjoying the conversation doesn't mean I can't point out the distinction between "porn" and "erotica" is dumb. It's not "academic," it's pedantic.


----------



## panzergulo (Apr 23, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



M. Le Renard said:


> TooncesFA said:
> 
> 
> > Why do you presume I'm without "artistic skills or merits" if you haven't read my work?
> ...



What Mister L. R. said. Besides, I get all leery on the moment I see somebody who claims to be a writer and has over 500 watchers and has mainly red-bordered stories in their FA gallery. In my opinion, "porn" in itself defies artistic or storytelling merits. It's often repetitive and unimaginative. But it gets the views, because people don't mind reading the same scene about five hundred times, because it turns them on. Sex sells. It doesn't matter how bad the porn is with storytelling meters, if it has enough sex in it, people will read it and they will like it more than general rated writing. I admit that, but it doesn't make me any less sad.

Don't say I can't have such an opinion. I've written some pieces that I classify as "porn", and these have been my experiences when submitting it. One of my worst stories got praised to be my "best story" by one horny furry porn reader. I think I died a little bit inside when I read that comment.

You were just an example. Honestly, your behavior in the Bloc isn't really speaking for you, so I have already assumed you're just one regular furry porn writer.



TooncesFA said:


> panzergulo said:
> 
> 
> > But yeah, unless you aren't a fetish smut writer, you're automatically unpopular on this site anyway.
> ...



Yeah... joking or not, I have labeled you as a furry smut writer already. We don't get too many of those here, so you were close and handy. Nothing more, nothing less. As said, no offense meant. You might be a great storyteller, but your watchers aren't watching you because you tell good stories, they watch you because you write porn. Giving some comedy and twist to porn is a good thing, of course, but it doesn't change the fact: You write porn and you're read because of your porn.



TooncesFA said:


> Hehe just because I've been enjoying the conversation doesn't mean I can't point out the distinction between "porn" and "erotica" is dumb. It's not "academic," it's pedantic.



I somewhat agree, in my opinion most adult stories are impossible to categorize purely into either section, because most adult stories are somewhere between erotica and porn. However, I do like the distinction. I want to think there is "erotica" and there is "porn" and while sharing a lot, they are still two different things. Some of my readers have said my adult stories are "tasteful" and they would classify them as "erotica". Similarly, if an adult story has enough plot and character development and storytelling to satisfy me, I classify it as "erotica". "Porn" is just sex, plain and simple... and if the characters and storytelling are poor enough, I would classify the piece as "porn" anyway, regardless the frail attempts to tell a story.

But yeah, that's only my opinion.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Apr 23, 2010)

TooncesFA said:
			
		

> Hehe just because I've been enjoying the conversation doesn't mean I can't point out the distinction between "porn" and "erotica" is dumb. It's not "academic," it's pedantic.


And we've come full circle on the bullshit-mobile.
The age-old cop-out when you realize you're talking to a brick wall: Let's just agree to disagree.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 23, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



panzergulo said:


> What Mister L. R. said. Besides, I get all leery on the moment I see somebody who claims to be a writer and has over 500 watchers and has mainly red-bordered stories in their FA gallery. In my opinion, "porn" in itself defies artistic or storytelling merits. It's often repetitive and unimaginative. But it gets the views, because people don't mind reading the same scene about five hundred times, because it turns them on. Sex sells. It doesn't matter how bad the porn is with storytelling meters, if it has enough sex in it, people will read it and they will like it more than general rated writing. I admit that, but it doesn't make me any less sad.
> 
> Don't say I can't have such an opinion. I've written some pieces that I classify as "porn", and these have been my experiences when submitting it. One of my worst stories got praised to be my "best story" by one horny furry porn reader. I think I died a little bit inside when I read that comment.
> 
> You were just an example. Honestly, your behavior in the Bloc isn't really speaking for you, so I have already assumed you're just one regular furry porn writer.



I have to disagree fundamentally that "'porn' in itself defies artistic or storytelling merits." It takes a special skill to write pulp that is engaging and effective. It takes a certain amount of artistic skill to perform any kind of personal expression. "Sex sells," on a website geared so much toward sex, yes. I would expect sci-fi writers to be popular on a sci-fi website. I would expect writers of epic poetry to be popular on a site dedicated to epic poems. But in none of these cases would I construe their popularity to reflect a potential lack of talent. 




> Yeah... joking or not, I have labeled you as a furry smut writer already. We don't get too many of those here, so you were close and handy. Nothing more, nothing less. As said, no offense meant. You might be a great storyteller, but your watchers aren't watching you because you tell good stories, they watch you because you write porn. Giving some comedy and twist to porn is a good thing, of course, but it doesn't change the fact: You write porn and you're read because of your porn.



This is simply begging the question. Your conclusion is inherent in your premise and doesn't allow for any possibility that I, or any other pulp writer with a following, hasn't earned that following through a dedication to crafting a unique voice or developing proficiency in a specific skill. You imply that being read because I write pulp somehow minimizes the fact that I've been able to appeal to an audience, which is again supported by this idea that writing pulp is easy. 



> I somewhat agree, in my opinion most adult stories are impossible to categorize purely into either section, because most adult stories are somewhere between erotica and porn. However, I do like the distinction. I want to think there is "erotica" and there is "porn" and while sharing a lot, they are still two different things. Some of my readers have said my adult stories are "tasteful" and they would classify them as "erotica". Similarly, if an adult story has enough plot and character development and storytelling to satisfy me, I classify it as "erotica". "Porn" is just sex, plain and simple... and if the characters and storytelling are poor enough, I would classify the piece as "porn" anyway, regardless the frail attempts to tell a story.
> 
> But yeah, that's only my opinion.



This strikes me as an extension of your earlier statements, where you begged the question by necessarily situating "porn" as "[defying] artistic or storytelling merits." Essentially, to you and others, erotica is sex that's written well and porn is sex that's written badly. The differences in what actual writing techniques ostensibly separate these two things are trivial: if it's considered a marker of good writing, it constructs erotica, and if it is a marker of bad writing, it constructs porn. Erotica embodies the proper markers of respectable literature, and porn does not. My question is: How does this qualify as a real distinction? In no other case have I ever seen a clear distinction in genre hinge upon whether the product was "bad" or "good," and never have I seen people so adamant in policing that distinction.



M. Le Renard said:


> And we've come full circle on the bullshit-mobile.
> The age-old cop-out when you realize you're talking to a brick wall: Let's just agree to disagree.



For the moderator of a writing forum it seems strange that discussing writing would be so painful for you.


----------



## TShaw (Apr 23, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



TooncesFA said:


> Ultimately, my goal with pulp has been two things:
> 
> 1] To demonstrate the necessarily ridiculous nature of social interaction.
> 
> ...



This pretty much cements my impression of you as a writer, and no I donâ€™t need to read your stories for that since there are enough of your ramblings here for that. If I were to guess Iâ€™d say most of the other writers here would confess to nodding off during English class, you however eagerly soaked in everything having chosen writing as a means to show your perceived intellectual superiority. Rather odd for you to choose porn for that outlet though, which is probably why youâ€™re fighting so hard to redefine the widely accepted terms you originally brought up. Good luck with that though...


----------



## Toonces (Apr 23, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



TShaw said:


> This pretty much cements my impression of you as a writer, and no I donâ€™t need to read your stories for that since there are enough of your ramblings here for that. If I were to guess Iâ€™d say most of the other writers here would confess to nodding off during English class, you however eagerly soaked in everything having chosen writing as a means to show your perceived intellectual superiority. Rather odd for you to choose porn for that outlet though, which is probably why youâ€™re fighting so hard to redefine the widely accepted terms you originally brought up. Good luck with that though...



discussing writing in the writing forum... how pretentious of me...


----------



## panzergulo (Apr 23, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



TooncesFA said:


> I have to disagree fundamentally that "'porn' in itself defies artistic or storytelling merits." It takes a special skill to write PORN that is engaging and effective.



No, not really. I've written some. It's repetitive and simple. If you add something to it, it's not porn anymore, but something else.



TooncesFA said:


> It takes a certain amount of artistic skill to perform any kind of personal expression. "Sex sells," on a website geared so much toward sex, yes. I would expect sci-fi writers to be popular on a sci-fi website. I would expect writers of epic poetry to be popular on a site dedicated to epic poems. But in none of these cases would I construe their popularity to reflect a potential lack of talent.



Mind you, FA isn't geared towards anything else but furry art. It's the community itself that has an affinity to sex. FA is open for all material and gives equal opportunities for all material... but in FA community, sex sells, and you don't necessarily need any talent to become popular as a porn writer.



TooncesFA said:


> This is simply begging the question. Your conclusion is inherent in your premise and doesn't allow for any possibility that I, or any other PORN writer with a following, hasn't earned that following through a dedication to crafting a unique voice or developing proficiency in a specific skill. You imply that being read because I write PORN somehow minimizes the fact that I've been able to appeal to an audience, which is again supported by this idea that writing PORN is easy.



It's an opinion, not a fact. Are you saying I can't have opinions? In my experience, I can write how half-assed I ever want, but if it's porn, it'll get views. If I want my general rated writing to get views, it has to be truly excellent to gather more than a few random views.



TooncesFA said:


> This strikes me as an extension of your earlier statements, where you begged the question by necessarily situating "porn" as "[defying] artistic or storytelling merits." Essentially, to you and others, erotica is sex that's written well and porn is sex that's written badly. The differences in what actual writing techniques ostensibly separate these two things are trivial: if it's considered a marker of good writing, it constructs erotica, and if it is a marker of bad writing, it constructs porn. Erotica embodies the proper markers of respectable literature, and porn does not. My question is: How does this qualify as a real distinction? In no other case have I ever seen a clear distinction in genre hinge upon whether the product was "bad" or "good," and never have I seen people so adamant in policing that distinction.



Porn can be truly well written. But I won't like it much if it hasn't story, plot, good characters and such. You can write really magnificent English and make your porn aesthetically satisfying, but it won't satisfy me, because I want to read real stories.



TooncesFA said:


> For the moderator of a writing forum it seems strange that discussing writing would be so painful for you.



You aren't helping either, man. You come here and start forcing your own values, views and, heck, your own meanings to words that already have a meaning. Just quit it, you can't turn us to say: "Porn is great, porn is fun, let's all go and read Toonces' pulps because he's so magnificent!" If you come here with your kind of attitude and your kind of behavior, this is what you gonna get: Hatred, anger, malice and fighting over things that are only opinions. You can have your opinions, I, or anybody else, can't change them, but you should respect the opinions of other people too.

My opinion: There is "porn" and there is "erotica". "Porn" is only about sex, "erotica" is like "porn" with real plot, real characters and real story.
My opinion: "Porn" is easy to write.
My opinion: You can get popular as a "porn" writer regardless your skills as a storyteller because furries are horny little buggers.

Your opinion: There is no "porn" or "erotica", there is only "pulp".
Your opinion: "Pulp" is challenging to write.
Your opinion: Your readers watch you because you're a good storyteller, not because you write "pulp".

I'm not saying your opinions are wrong. I'm just saying you should stop forcing them on us because you won't make us change ours anyway.

Quit challenging me. It's a fight you can't truly win, because I won't admit my defeat. Thus, it's pointless. Just leave the subject and go write some PORN or something.


----------



## Atrak (Apr 23, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



TooncesFA said:


> M. Le Renard said:
> 
> 
> > And we've come full circle on the  bullshit-mobile.
> ...



Traveling for days only to realize that you had traveled in a circle isn't fun for most people.

You assume that because he's the mod of a forum that he must have excess amounts of patience.

Not even infinity is infinite.


----------



## Scarborough (Apr 23, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



TShaw said:


> This pretty much cements my impression of you as a writer, and no I donâ€™t need to read your stories for that since there are enough of your ramblings here for that. *If I were to guess Iâ€™d say most of the other writers here would confess to nodding off during English class, you however eagerly soaked in everything having chosen writing as a means to show your perceived intellectual superiority.* Rather odd for you to choose porn for that outlet though, which is probably why youâ€™re fighting so hard to redefine the widely accepted terms you originally brought up. Good luck with that though...



I'm not sure why this is a _bad_ thing. Anyway, I personally enjoy the "wittier" and more "parodical" parts of Toonces's pieces precisely because they are witty and parodical and have something "intellectual" to say about porn in general.


----------



## GraemeLion (Apr 23, 2010)

Since this topic has come full circle, I think it's run it's course and needs to be given that special lovin' that all topics that have run their course deserve.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 23, 2010)

*Re: PORN*



panzergulo said:


> No, not really. I've written some. It's repetitive and simple. If you add something to it, it's not porn anymore, but something else.



Again, I disagree fundamentally. Good pulp is as difficult to produce as any other kind of writing. Of course, you necessarily define "porn" as "simplistically written," you're begging the question about how involved a piece of pulp can be. 



> Mind you, FA isn't geared towards anything else but furry art. It's the community itself that has an affinity to sex. FA is open for all material and gives equal opportunities for all material... but in FA community, sex sells, and you don't necessarily need any talent to become popular as a porn writer.



You don't necessarily need talent to become popular. Full stop. Of course this phenomenon is going to be especially prevalent among porn artists on a site primarily used for porn. I'm not unaware of this phenomenon. Were I to post pulp on a site like Scribophile, it certainly wouldn't receive the attention of more conservatively composed works. 



> It's an opinion, not a fact. Are you saying I can't have opinions? In my experience, I can write how half-assed I ever want, but if it's porn, it'll get views. If I want my general rated writing to get views, it has to be truly excellent to gather more than a few random views.



In _my_ experience, I have received fewer views and comments, less notoriety, and less cash for my pulp than I have my other writings. I don't know if I can say that my pulp is better than my more traditional works, but I can certainly say it's more challenging. But because of its very limited appeal, it hasn't had near the impact. This, incidentally, is part of why I enjoy writing pulp. Because it's less _important_, in a sense, I feel freer to experiment and learn new things about writing that can be summarily applied to my more popular works. Of course my experiences may not be typical, but it's absurd to presume that a person would write material of interest to a subcommunity of a subcommunity of a subcommunity because they wanted, of all things, _notoriety_.



> Porn can be truly well written. But I won't like it much if it hasn't story, plot, good characters and such. You can write really magnificent English and make your porn aesthetically satisfying, but it won't satisfy me, because I want to read real stories.



But that's a matter of taste, isn't it? Personally I can't get into fantasy, but that's no reflection of the quality of the material, or the work that went into it, or its depth, or its ability to engage a reader, or anything. It's just a matter of the fact that I don't like fantasy.



> You aren't helping either, man. You come here and start forcing your own values, views and, heck, your own meanings to words that already have a meaning. Just quit it, you can't turn us to say: "Porn is great, porn is fun, let's all go and read Toonces' pulps because he's so magnificent!" If you come here with your kind of attitude and your kind of behavior, this is what you gonna get: Hatred, anger, malice and fighting over things that are only opinions. You can have your opinions, I, or anybody else, can't change them, but you should respect the opinions of other people too.



I don't believe I said any of this.



> My opinion: There is "porn" and there is "erotica". "Porn" is only about sex, "erotica" is like "porn" with real plot, real characters and real story.
> My opinion: "Porn" is easy to write.
> My opinion: You can get popular as a "porn" writer regardless your skills as a storyteller because furries are horny little buggers.



I believe I've already addressed all of these.



> Your opinion: There is no "porn" or "erotica", there is only "pulp".
> Your opinion: "Pulp" is challenging to write.
> Your opinion: Your readers watch you because you're a good storyteller, not because you write "pulp".



I don't believe I said the first thing. I do believe I've said the second thing. I'm unsure if I addressed the third thing, but I do believe it to be true.



> I'm not saying your opinions are wrong. I'm just saying you should stop forcing them on us because you won't make us change ours anyway.
> 
> Quit challenging me. It's a fight you can't truly win, because I won't admit my defeat. Thus, it's pointless. Just leave the subject and go write some PORN or something.



I don't believe I've "forced" my opinions on anyone aside from articulating them as well as I could. When I've felt a person to be wholly in the wrong, I've said as much, directly and without malice. At times when I felt a poster had a necessarily different understanding of writing, but one that wasn't rooted in a clearly demonstrable inaccuracy, I've said that this constituted a "fundamental disagreement," which are as common among writers as pens and pencils.

Anything else has simply been my opinion. I also don't think the point of this discussion has been to "win" anything, but rather to have a conversation about a mode of expression that I feel doesn't receive the respect it deserves, at times. I'm sorry that others in this thread have felt the need to disabuse me of my convictions, but overall I really have enjoyed this discussion.


postscript: This has been one of the most active threads in this forum for a month. Regardless the fact that some posters feel a little frustrated, it's undeniable that the conversation has engaged a lot of people. I see no reason why this thread shouldn't continue, so long as posters can manage not to take disagreements about a craft personally.


----------



## GraemeLion (Apr 23, 2010)

If you don't feel it gets the respect it deserves, perhaps you should consider the source?

I have no problem getting respect for what I do, or building an audience, or anything of that nature with my traditional works.  

A friend of mine who writes porn on here like you do, pointed out that your audience is not necessarily your friend.. that they are here for a reason, and the reason is to get off, not to read your writing.    

So in that regard, so long as your audience goals aren't aligned with promotion of your writing format, it never will get any "respect."


----------



## Toonces (Apr 23, 2010)

I have no problems getting respect from my audience. It's getting other writers to take it seriously that proves difficult. =P

And again, since it has come up continually, concerning my use of "pulp":

It's directly synonymous with porn which, because I personally deny the distinction between porn and erotica, is directly synonymous with erotica. I don't use it in any kind of attempt to differentiate my work from porn. It has no specific utility at all. The usage is purely stylistic. Many pulp novels were explicitly pornographic. Many were not. But that matter is irrelevant. I use the term out of a show of respect for a style of writing that I feel is unduly maligned and not given the proper consideration it deserves. I hope that clears things up. Thank you.


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 23, 2010)

I think it's safe to say that at this point, no one participating in this thread who hasn't already been convinced of something, is going to be convinced of it based on anything that will be said from here on out.

Lock. Please.


----------



## KyleAwesome (Apr 23, 2010)

To those asking to lock the thread: What else will we be able to talk about if this is closed? At least we're getting some discussion going in here!

Anyway, my distinction between porn and erotica isn't based on quality. Certainly, the more sex is a central part of the story, the larger the margin for error is. This doesn't mean that all porn is badly written, just that you can afford to make more mistakes. 

I see that Toonces is saying, although I guess it's hard to convince people that 'pulp' is a legitimate literary style because it's saturated with low quality work. However, I took a look at one of his pieces, and I would say it does have a little more than just sex going on. Not a heck of a lot more, but I found it well written and somewhat amusing. 

Ultimately, the only way to prove him wrong would be for everyone to slap together their own gallery full of 1000-2000 word porn stories and see how many viewers you get.


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 23, 2010)

KyleAwesome said:


> At least we're getting some discussion going in here!



The discussion has already happened. What we're in now is essentially an adolescent pissing contest.

I'm sure someone can think of something else worth discussing. Politics or religion, perhaps.


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 23, 2010)

(Incidentally, Kyle, I'm not saying your opinion isn't valid. It's just that you've had the misfortune to come to the party late, when everyone's gotten drunk, the fistfights have started, and there are sirens in the distance.)


----------



## KyleAwesome (Apr 23, 2010)

I must say, this is a pretty restrained fistfight compared to what I'm used to! I can see that Toonces is causing a lot of frustration in here, but a lot of people are asking for it by continuing to respond to him. _Maybe_ he's flame-baiting now, but that's no excuse to actually take it.


----------



## Atrak (Apr 23, 2010)

TooncesFA said:


> I'm gonna be straight with you: I do not care.



That is probably good.

This is the internet after all.



Poetigress said:


> (Incidentally, Kyle, I'm not saying your opinion isn't valid. It's just that you've had the misfortune to come to the party late, when everyone's gotten drunk, the fistfights have started, and there are sirens in the distance.)



Heh.

I'm still waiting for my winnings.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Apr 23, 2010)

TooncesFA said:
			
		

> For the moderator of a writing forum it seems strange that discussing writing would be so painful for you.


It has been very enjoyable.  Just not so much that I'd want to have the discussion again.

I won't lock the thread, yet.  Instead, I'll give people two options:
1.) If you believe it's pointless, stop posting and let the thread die.
2.) Continue posting about how pointless you think it is, and I'll be forced to lock it for derailment.

I give you these choices because I figure the Writer's Bloc patrons are mature enough to figure them out.  Cue the raised eyebrow.


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 23, 2010)

Yeesh - I go to bed and half a page of discussion has happened and been deleted before I return. >.>

Here's my question - Toonces, what is your opinion about plot?  Do you not believe it exists, or not believe it has any value?

Because it seems to me that plot is at the root of this issue of whether porn has value and whether it's different from erotica.  I believe that the "spiritual" value of a piece of writing requires it have all of the following "essential ingredients of literature":

1. Interesting Content (of which sex is one possible type)

2. Character Development (because no one really cares about a story unless they develop sympathy with one or more characters.  Also, people and their lives are the only thing we really have to talk to each other about, the core subject of all literature.)

3. Plot Structure (which creates suspense about conflict and then resolves the conflict and suspense, making the reader feel satisfied that a problem has been solved.  A sexual encounter does not in and of itself constitute a plot structure.)

4. Theme (some kind of philisophical statement about life, something the writer is showing the reader about the way people and the world work).

I define erotica as having at least the first three ingredients here, while porn lacks either 2, 3, or both.


----------



## Tyvara_Panther (Apr 23, 2010)

In an attempt to realign this thread I'll do my best.

No, I don't try to write pulp, nor do I read it often. It's not that I don't like it, or respect it any less. On that note, I can sort of understand Toonces need for a redefinition of his work, because frankly, it isn't like most porn I've read. I can also see why he says he uses it as a form of practice for his other works, though I'm not familiar with those at all. Pulp, as Toonces writes it, is about as bare bones as you can get. Granted, this is based on my limited exposure to it, because I'll be honest, I struggle to read it -- not because it's poorly written, but because it doesn't excite me; it doesn't urge me to read on. Maybe if I was horny, and looking for the intended payoff, that'd be a different story.

There's no denying that a bare bones tale is just as complicated to write as something with more depth. Stripping something of its detail and working with the crux of any given scene has its pros and cons. Anyone who's written word limited flash fiction can understand some of those challenges.

Over the years I've come across Toonces posts and stories, and avoided them. Mostly it's the attitude that turns me off -- it's unbridled arrogance -- deserved or undeserved, it's still an attitude I try to avoid, because I have little desire to entertain those types of personalities. I say this because, nevertheless, your posts on this forum have surprised me -- not that your attitude is any different than what I've seen elsewhere, but at least here amongst regular writers instead of hobbyists, more of the writer has come out than the attitude. I can sort of see your desire to write something as bare bones as your pulp, considering your regards for the sci-fi/fantasy genres. I'll agree with you that much of what is out there is excess nonsense -- to an extent.

When I read I want to travel. I want to see exotic worlds and cultures, taste their food, experience their lives -- their world. That's what always excited me about reading as a child, to get to explore a place I may never see beyond the bindings of a book. Now, I don't need _Dune_ levels of description to achieve that, but I enjoy reading about rich worlds.
Yes, there is a line that many writers (I'm sure I'm among them -- no one's perfect) cross in regards to how much to share and what to leave to the imagination; but I'll read through hundreds of them to find what I want, rather than do away with the depth all together. Which is why I don't read the pulp porn style of story. I love sex, sure, but that isn't the only thing I want to read.

A lot of what I get out of writing is the freedom in creation, in the ability to explore the bounds of my imagination; to share an empathic connection with someone I may never meet -- if only for a moment that I may never be aware of. Finding someone to relate to is a common trend among writers, and since we are all viewing the world from our own vantage point, we each find different modes of searching for that connection.

I think one of the main reasons you won't find a discussion of pulp -- or porn -- on The Bloc, is because most of the writers here left that circle to pursue a different style of writing. The fandom is ripe with sexually based stories, and many of us want to step outside of that distinction when writing. And those of us who do pen a sexual tale every now and then, want to write more than a bare bones sexual encounter. That certainly isn't true for everyone here, but that seems to be the theme.

Overall, I'm not sure how popularizing the word pulp in regards to furry porn would give furry erotica or its writers more of an identity (something you mentioned on the first page). Really, I don't see a purpose beyond your artistic liberties, which are totally fine to have, but to push that onto others escapes me. It sort of reminds me of the movie Never Been Kissed, where the popular, Guy (aptly named) tries to get all his friends to say 'roofus' instead of cool. In the end it's just a word, and most of what's in your gallery is just sex. It's not good or bad, it just is.


----------



## Toonces (Apr 23, 2010)

sunandshadow said:


> Yeesh - I go to bed and half a page of discussion has happened and been deleted before I return. >.>
> 
> Here's my question - Toonces, what is your opinion about plot?  Do you not believe it exists, or not believe it has any value?
> 
> ...



It's not that I necessarily discount any of these things from stories, or try to avoid them, or anything like that. Obviously these are all things that can be employed in the creation of some kind of literary effect. However, I don't think that any of these things are essential for a story, and that at times a particularly potent effect can be achieved by purposefully eschewing one or more of these.

I like to think of the short stories of Franz Kafka sometimes. This is one of my favorite stories of his, "Reflections for Gentlemen-Jockeys"



> When you think it over, winning a race is nothing to sigh for. The fame of being hailed as the best rider in the country is too intoxicating a pleasure when the applause strikes up not to bring a reaction the morning after.
> 
> The envy of your opponents, cunning and fairly influential men, must trouble you in the narrow enclosure you now traverse after the flat racecourse, which soon lay empty before you save for some laggards of the previous round, small figures charging the horizon.
> 
> ...



I don't want to abuse the story with some overeager analysis, but I think you can see that it doesn't much satisfy the markers of a classic "story." Despite this, it has a striking, immediate effect, that I think is enabled by its brevity. You get the sense that if you could highlight the phrase _Don't Bother_ and pull on its ends, this is what it would manifest in. I think there is worth in being able to focus on a simple message and develop it with potency.

Now, if for Kafka the message was something along the lines of _Don't Bother_, for me, I'm often trying to express little ideas about sexuality and life by infusing them with an overpowering potency. One of the themes I like to touch on is that of objectification, which is a powerful force in our culture. I've been influenced tremendously by a gay manifesto, Refugees from Amerika, which has this to say about objectification:



> 2. Objectification:  In this scheme, people are sexual objects, but they are also subjects, and are human beings who appreciate themselves as object and subject.  This use of human bodies as objects is legitimate (not harmful) only when it is reciprocal.  If one person is always object and the other subject, it stifles the human being in both of them.  Objectification must also be open and frank.  By silence we often assume or let the other person assume that sex means commitments: if it does, ok; but if not, say it.  (Of course, itâ€™s not all that simple: our capabilities for manipulation are unfathomed - all we can do is try.)
> 
> Gay liberation people must understand that women have been treated exclusively and dishonestly as sexual objects.  A major part of their liberation is to play down sexual objectification and to develop other aspects of themselves which have been smothered so long.  We respect this.  We also understand that a few liberated women will be appalled or disgusted at the open and prominent place that we put sex in our lives; and while this is a natural response from their experience, they must learn what it means for us.
> 
> For us, sexual objectification is a focus of our quest for freedom.  It is precisely that which we are not supposed to share with each other.  Learning how to be open and good with each other sexually is part of our liberation.  And one obvious distinction: objectification of sex for us is something we choose to do among ourselves, while for women it is imposed by their oppressors.



To me, the most potent way to get across this idea has been to minimize plot to condense the window of representation, carefully construct characters within a conceptually confined space, and elevate style to a privileged position (as many writers are scared to do). Of course, this isn't my goal with every story, and in a few cases I have tried to get across different ideas through other kinds of manipulation, by focusing on developing characters or more finely articulating a plot. But I don't believe that a good story _must_ have all these elements people insist upon.

Really, I think a better standard has always been Kurt Vonnegut's rules for short stories:



> 1. Use the time of a total stranger in such a way that he or she will not feel the time was wasted.
> 2. Give the reader at least one character he or she can root for.
> 
> 3. Every character should want something, even if it is only a glass of water.
> ...


----------



## sunandshadow (Apr 23, 2010)

Well, I do believe that in order to be a great story a piece must have all 4 of the things I listed, and in order to be at least good it must have at least 3 of them.  Since we disagree about that, I'll move on to another point.

I mostly agree with what Vonnegut says there, except for the sadist part, and I don't think it's possibly to know what would make a total stranger feel like their time wasn't wasted.  Suspense can be frustrating or fun, so I'd say Vonnegut's approach works but it's not the only approach that works.

Is that piece by Kafka the whole story?  If so, I wouldn't personally call it a "story".  It's an interesting sketch or vignette, but it doesn't give the satisfaction of a story.

Sexual objectification is interesting to me.  One facet of the subject I find very interesting is the construction of the 'hero' by straight female writers writing romance novels (including m/m romance novels written by women).  Many people associated with the romance genre will tell you that the male love interests aka sex objects in romance novels aren't intended to be realistic portrayals of men.  Aside from their perfect looks and possible fat pocketbooks, noble titles, or supernatural powers, romance heroes do not have the kinds of personalities real men do.  These male characters are female fantasies of the ideal mate, and a woman who goes looking for a man who thinks, acts, and talks like a romance novel hero isn't going to find one.  I don't see this as any different from straight men who are used to seeing actresses and airbrushed magazine models looking for a girlfriend or a wife who looks like that.  I think it's an important self-development activity for people to figure out what their dream guy/girl and ideal relationship would be like.  Yet it's also a problem because real people rarely live up to ideals.


----------



## jinxtigr (Apr 24, 2010)

Vonnegut has a lot of good advice, which you don't have to take all at once- or you can twist some of his stuff around. For instance, his #2 there, having a character you can root for- I like doing third person pretty close to a viewpoint character (rather than purely 'omniescent'). When this is happening, I want the character you can 'root for' to be really malleable.

In fact, in general I've done really perverse things with 'heel face turns' and constructed shifting floors in which you never get a really solid sense of who you can 'root for': horribly evil characters turn out to have appreciable motivations, seemingly amusing characters aren't so funny in context, heroic guys reveal awful hangups. It's not a waste of time because it's consistent within a larger context, but none of the individual characters get to define what's right and wrong, only what they feel it is.

I don't think you have to be a sadist. Maybe Vonnegut is. I think you have to have a sense of fate- because as an author YOU are Fate for these characters, and at least consciously most of them don't want it to be a good story, they want to get their way. The tension between what they want and what they get is part of what makes a story compelling. The moment they're satisfied and each packed away in their own little box, you're done...


----------

