That something else is important and mysterious and a wellspring of great literature. Tolstoy investigated it, but the laws of his time limited what he could write about it. When Anna Karenina and Vronsky make love for the first time, he is forced to use asterisks. But he uses three lines of asterisks!

I'm very glad that today literature need not blush.
 

Rick Norwood,
Just so no one misunderstands: I don't think sex is "dirty." I very much do think it is something beautiful and profoundly meaningful in the right context. But I also think that it's a private thing and that by 'watching in' on other people (even made-up people) have sex as a means of personal entertainment cheapens sex because it distorts how we think of sex.

To me, three lines of asterisks is more "WOO-HO!" than if the author had given us a play-by-play of their love-making. As I've said before, I have an imagination. For me, Lizzy and Dacy touched hands at the end of Pride and Prejudice is more titillating than a detailed description of their marriage night. Sometimes more description isn't necessarily needed nor the better option.

[This message has been edited by DebbieKW (edited July 04, 2007).]
 

quote:

---

The idea that sex is "dirty", and should be compared with excrement and death, has always seemed strange to me.

---

Rick Norwood, I think you are perceiving it to be a more common view than it is. Given respect and in its proper context, sex is a beautiful God-given thing. When you dirty it up by objectifying it and abusing it, it becomes a bad thing. I don't think you should avoid pornographic type writing because sex is dirty; I think you should avoid pornographic writing because people and sexuality are precious.

Voyeuristic writing demeans sexuality, it doesn't respect it.
 

I've read so many that there isn't (there might be on some rare occasion and I'm going to miss it, darn!) anything I haven't read or seen on video before. I'm not interested in being titillated by the same thing over and over again.
 

I agree. I've read a lot of fantasy with "romps between the sheets," and I completely skip over the romps. Back when I was a teenager and thought that I might miss something important if I skipped them, I read those scenes and found that they seemed rather similar to those in other books and didn't turn out to be important to the plot after all. I think that's why I'm a bit skeptical about the argument that "detailed sex scenes are necessary to advance the plot." If I routinely skip these scenes and can still perfectly follow the story, then was it really that necessary? Such scenes may be necessary in some stories that I haven't read, but I suspect that most romp scenes could be compressed to one sentence or removed completely and not be missed (unless that genre demands them). *shrug* Just my 2 cents.
 

That said I do tend to fall into the bedroom door closed group, though I have read several books where graphic sexual scenes were used effectively to illustrate aspects of the characters, the society or the setting with great effect and without being gratuitous.

But lets please NOT start the porn thing from the other thread again...

 

Interesting point to chew on. If readers are voyeurs does that make the writer a kind of exhibitionist? There are people out there who go around in long coats and "flash" unsuspecting women. Others, for whatever reason, are not so inclined. Instead they sweat over their word processor and crank out thousands of words. When the book/story is finished they send it to an editor in the hope that it will be published and thousands, perhaps millions of people will read it. One exhibits his physical attributes, the other exhibits the product of his mind.
 

god do i hate Librail thinking. sex is a beautifl thing and shoukd be used with carifully.
Rommel Fenrir Wolf II
 

I think it's often missing for three reasons.

First, as you say, it can get in the way of the story the writer is trying to tell. Asimov's robot stories are largely absent sex, and even when it's included it's hardly erotic. I assume he was mainly interested in exploring how the three laws of robotics would work in various scenarios.

Second, it's often missing because, as others have said, moral righteousness has become enshrined in laws and regulations constraining publishers and freedom of expression.

But third, I think it's plain difficult to write. I've tried a few times and mine always seems juvenile.

I think good sex in books is subtle, not graphic. Indeed, the censorship of recent decades often encouraged subtle, sexy stuff. ("Is that a gun in your pocket or are you just pleased to see me?")

I think good sex in fantasy, in addition to moving the story along, flirts with the reader. It's indirect, full of innuendo; it teases, laughs, attracts, intruigues. It tells us something about the characters, how they feel about themselves and each other, their world and its mores. We learn who's dominant, self confident, in need of comfort, love or fun.

Now if I could just do it ...
Pat
 

Lynda, married 36 years and still delighted with him!
 

I remember a Poul Anderson novellette, don't remember the name, where in one section the hero is a young bachelor and in the next section he is married. Since the story was about starships, not about human relationships, sex and even romance would have been off topic.

On the other hand, the Hugo winning story "Oceanic" could not exist without a very graphic sex scene, because the story is about the effect on human beings of greatly altered sexuality on an alien planet in the far future, and it would be a shame if the taboos that have only lowered in the last few decades had prevented that story from being told.

In my story, "A Dangerous Education" I deliberately skip over the sex, but I do have a scene set in the afterglow -- during which the protagonists discuss education, because they are both teachers, and that is a topic teachers talk about. Since the story is about education, a sex scene would be out of place, but a little romance helps make the characters more likable.

[This message has been edited by Rick Norwood (edited July 05, 2007).]
 

"I think if fewer stories portrayed casual sex, things might improve (a lower divorce rate would be a nice thing for this country, don't you think?)."

Well, being divorced I might agree, for the poor affect it's had on my kids. Yet, it's also a relief to be free of my ex. I've alwas believed divorce is a bad thing primarily because of the potential for damage for the kids. (And that's leaving aside the issue of damaging them anyhow by staying together and arguing.)

Rick's remark that Oceanic explores the implications of altered sexuality reminds me of the influence Heinlein had on my thinking.

In 'Time Enough for Love' Heinlein explores a world where we can manipulate genetics and reliably control whether or not coupling leads to children. Recreational sex is regarded as normal (because in a world free of jealousy and unwanted kids, why not enjoy?) as are extended families where people couple with members of either sex as the mood takes them, and all agree to look out for all the children. In this world, divorce becomes a non-issue, and the kids are cared for and loved immensely.

This was fiction that influenced me, still does. It's one of several reasons I'm liberal and tolerant in my views. It's the kind of SF I've always loved for its ability to explore new worlds, not just of science, but new moralities that become possible because of scientific advances.

So I think that, depending on what we want to show in our SF, we can avoid casual sex if we want to show a future where that is the norm, or portray lots of it if that is what we are speculating about. As for influencing others through our stories, well, that's a story yet to unfold ...

Cheers,
Pat
 

Whether or not something is necessary or adds to the plot is largely a matter of opinion. I have read books (mostly written by Mercedes Lackey) in which a huge part of the story is about a romantic relationship and when it comes time for the climax (yes, there is double entendre there) they skip over to something else. I am left feeling disappointed that the storyline was unfulfilled.

On the other hand, I have read sex scenes borne of nothing so much as a man and woman happening to be in the same place at the same time. They feel like some stupid person told the author that sex sells and so after they wrote the story, they found a spot to squeeze it in. These are completely unfulfilling and meaninglesss. Even boring.

Like anything else in fiction, this is about dramatic tension. I find it hard to understand the original poster's assertion that sex is left out because it is too complicated -- both because it isn't always left out and because complications make for richer stories. Who wants to read a flat story, or write one? All right, I've met a few. We don't read the same things.

The only way to entirely get rid of sexual tension is to have only one gender represented in your book -- and even then it's not 100%. Whether you show the sex scene or not, the tension is something that authors need to know how to deal with.

 

Sex is not something that you do for ten minutes twice a week.

I once wrote, "Everything is about sex except sex." And then, with a great sense of deja vu, I heard exactly the same line in an off-Broadway play. So at least two independent writers arrived at the same conclusion.

The sex life of the man who invents the time machine is going to be very different from the sex life of a starship captain. This means that a person's sexual nature is going to have a great influence on whether that person becomes an inventor or a pilot.

You only write a sex scene if something dramatic happens. But, for an example of an indispensable sex scene, see the film Ryan's Daughter.
 

For me the essence of needed nudity was found in "love actually." in the relationship between the two body double actors, John and Judy.

To those who object to any view of the naked body I'm sure this particular story was gratuitous and thats fine based on personal tastes.

However to me it illustrates an important facet of "true love;" namely that love is not simply in getting/being naked together. These two characters are, until final act, only ever seen on screen together at some stage of nudity.

Yet because John expresses interest in Judy as something other than a naked body a relationship begins and is developed well over the course of the movie.

This nakedness and the simulated sex the characters do as body doubles for a movie is not gratuitous to me because without this blatant display of flesh the point that the joining of flesh alone does not constitute love would be missed.

Much sex/nudity in movies and books is for titillation but this entire plot line is an well written exception.
 

Oh... well to clarify that. No, in my case it didn't work.
 

In any case, when I write, I'm trying to write the best story I can, and I use whatever I need to achieve that goal. I'm very glad that I live in a society where that is permitted (with a few exceptions, most of them absurd).
 

It is ironic that the age of puberty is decreasing and it is coming earlier and earlier. I know I was shocked when my 11 year old daughter started needing feminine products 2 years before I expected. A stable sedentary society means it is safer to produce offspring earlier and it seems mother nature is following that trend by making boys and girls fertile at younger and younger ages, which is at odds with societies trend to extend childhood and the onset of adult responsibilities more and more in the same stable society. After all if things are safe why force children to grow up any faster than they have to.

Thanks mother nature :-) She can be a pretty twisted bitch at times...

 

I highly recommend these to people who want to read good SF with interspecies relationships that doesn't involve warfare.

The horomones in our food, esp. cow's milk and beef, (to up production) are causing that accelerated development--and other problems. So don't blame nature's course. It's all in the people's choices. As always.

The workshop online by Jennifer Crusie and Bob Mayer (a romance and suspense writer collaborating) last week discussed Action Scenes: Sex.
It was very interesting to hear a successful romance author say that sex is just another form of action. It has to be integral to the story. I recommend anyone thinking about this subject and judgment in writing go read the post on that site.

http://www.crusiemayer.com/workshop/
 

quote:

---

It was very interesting to hear a successful romance author say that sex is just another form of action.

---

Thank you for posting that. I think that is a good perspective.
 

quote:

---

When Anna Karenina and Vronsky make love for the first time, he is forced to use asterisks. But he uses three lines of asterisks!

---

I don't remember that. I'll have to check it out, if I remember by Monday.

I do think one thing about Fantasy is that it is an escape from our own culture. But along with that you lose many of the benefits of our culture. Liberation of women and free love are as modern as the automobile, and they just don't belong in fantasy. In particular, fantasy tends more toward a Medieval European milieau. Now you can break with that, but it will have to involve something unfamiliar, like in Enchantment part of what works is that Ivan is Jewish, which has a very different view on women and sexuality.

I also think there's a degree to which the freedom from traditional religion in Fantasy requires the author to establish what is the ultimate good and evil in the culture. I don't read much fantasy, but I gather that some are more equal that others to this task.
 

Without these elements, it's just porn.

what is the point of a book with sex in it unless it runs like a porn. one of the short stories i wrote back in the 11th grade was confiscted by one of my teachers. she called it a "SCIFI porno" i said she was insain. although i think i was the reson she might have retired.
Rommel Fenrir Wolf II