My first sexual experience was with a woman missing both legs and a pinky finger on her left hand. Her name was Becca and she was a fag hag who tried to hook me up with her friend Adrian because she assumed I was gay. When I told her I wasn't, we ended up awkwardly f***ing on her beige futon later that night.
Until that moment I never realized what a luxury legs were when it came to having sex. Every time I tried to change positions it felt like maneuvering a cadaver that smelled like Chanel. She gave me a kiss when it was over and said to call her. I never did.
posted
It doesn't flow because there doesn't seem to be a point. What is the subject, that legs are important or this guy is some badass cripple swinger? Both would be fine, but with so few lines, one would be best.
Posts: 7 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I liked the way it read. I also liked the understated humor of the situation. I probably wouldn't read on, but it's only because it's not my kind of book. I don't really have anything to offer in the way of criticism, except to say that in a different environment than the forum, I'd spell out all the words. (Thanks for not doing so here.)
Posts: 98 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
It has a shock factor, certainly for someone of my fragile disposition. I would read on to find out where this was going and why exactly you've plunged head first into such perverse subject matter. Hopefully this would become clear soon.
Its generally not the kind of thing I like to think about at any great length, though since you brought it up... I should imagine there would be some interesting positions to explore.
[This message has been edited by Zoot (edited August 23, 2006).]
posted
I would not read on. I also would suggest that you mention that the content is MATURE before displaying your post.
As far as content I think I agree with the post that asked what the point is. There is nothing likable about the POV character that would make me want to read on and some of the words like 'Faghag' make me stop and consider their meaning before moving on because I have no idea if this is an insult to her or if it is a type of personal classification (like a pimp or something).
Bizarre and shocking is a way to hook some readers but offensive and cruel is a way to turn off many others. I say this not from a prudish standpoint but because I think you might want to make us like the character, or at least identify with him, before you start launching into this portion of the story. When you start with this it will be very hard to recover and make the POV character seem like someone to become interested in.
Ughh, not sure if this is useful or just biased commentary. Well, take the above as an opinion from one of your readers.
Also, I don't mean this to sound defensive because I am genuinely curious, but could someone please describe what they found perverse about this piece? That's a general complaint I've gotten from other people I have read it to, but no one has been able to put their finger on it.
Honestly, I think sometimes people use the word perverse for anything outside their own individual comfort zone.
In this scene a guy is telling us how he met and had sex with a woman with no legs. Is everyone implying that to have sex with a disabled person is perverse? That she has gay friends? Do people find the notion of any homosexuality perverse? The narrators care-free and blunt recital about having sex with such a girl perverse?
I'd really like to know, if anyone can detail it further.
[This message has been edited by Swimming Bird (edited August 23, 2006).]
posted
I don't think it's perverse. But I don't think it's particularly pleasant. "A cadaver that smelled like Chanel", after all, is hardly calculated to give a positive image of the whole event.
I've never had sex with someone legless but I would imagine that, convenient though legs are, they would be a touch more mobile and active than a corpse (although there are people, doubtless, who are physically passive during sex, I don't picture them as being the sort to have sex on first meeting, which is what you describe).
But all this is opinion, and so of course you are free to reject it.
As an editor, I might keep reading, because it's very effective in conveying the narrator's character. As usual, you're writing is assured and precise. But as a reader, I doubt I would, simply because I find it distasteful. Yeah, outside my comfort zone, if you will.
posted
This discussion of Pervsion would be more suited for the "Open Discussions about Writing."
I believe perverse (being perverted => aberrant) is a very individual thing. What's perverse for me may not be perverse for someone else, but I hope others will be tolerant enough to allow me to decide what I think is aberrant or perverse on my own - whether or not it agrees with their own definition. I certainly wouldn't demand that someone else accept my definition of perverse.
I'm not particularly horrified by the idea of a legless woman having sex, but you're very disingenuous to describe the encounter in deliberately course and derogatory language and then ask what anyone finds "perverse" about your writing.
Mostly, I just found the narrator implausible. First you say that this is his first sexual experience, and that Becca assumed he was gay. Then they have sex later that night. I'm not disposed to assume that he was there the whole day, so we're not taking a lot of time between "Oh, I'm not gay" and "f***ing on her beige futon". Throughout, you take pains to make it clear that the narrator found the woman unattractive on several levels, and that he didn't enjoy having sex with her at all. Along the way, you have him realize, as a result of this first sexual experience, that it would be helpful for her to have legs. This, combined with his utterly callous attitude, convince me throughly that he doesn't even have the reality of a cardboard cutout.
These various ucontradictions pile up so quickly that I can't believe that you've made even a slight effort to put yourself into the place of either character. Basically, I suspect you're just going for pure shock value. It's true that I'm shocked, but only by the your cynicism about our analytical abilities.
PS: 'We ended up awkwardly...' feels clumsy and needs work.
quote:Until that moment I never realized what a luxury legs were when it came to having sex.
This is kind of given since it was the MC's first sexual experience. Aslo, unless the MC has also lost their legs, which may be the case, it should be: Until that moment I never realized what a luxury legs are...
Recalling the thought here reads more like a fabricated recollection of a thought with the advantage of hindsight and added experience rather than an actual thought someone might have at the time. Same with the changing positions thought and the cadaver. Doesn't ring true, in my opinion. More like something — after the event — that someone imagines they would have, should have or must have thought. That may be fine in the story as it unfolds, but from this snippet the POV isn't convincing. It could be with a couple of tweaks. 2¢
The piece does set-up the expectation that that particular encounter — or some essential and distinguishing element of that encounter — will be essential to the rest of the story. Is it? For instance, does the MC lose his pinky?
[This message has been edited by hoptoad (edited August 23, 2006).]
Printer-friendly view of this topic
