|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Romantic Conversationalist
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 9:38 am
Claire Burmot Not all books containing sexual scenes are "Smut". It all depends on your author. Some make it just whore-ish. Others can make it works of art. I'm not trying to persuade people, but, it can make good drama in some books. Well. sorta. That action (not going into detail about it) yes, but I guess as a young-adult, I like some of my books having some action. But it depends on the author and whether or not you like their work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 1:46 pm
Fairgrass Claire Burmot Not all books containing sexual scenes are "Smut". It all depends on your author. Some make it just whore-ish. Others can make it works of art. I'm not trying to persuade people, but, it can make good drama in some books. Well. sorta. That action (not going into detail about it) yes, but I guess as a young-adult, I like some of my books having some action. But it depends on the author and whether or not you like their work. That's what I love about writing and reading. If it's your story you have complete control. You dictate what people will and won't due. You create the drama and don't just stand by and let it flood over you. On a smaller version of playing god. but that makes me sound like a control freak, which i'm not. I like writing stories. Expecially when I have this great idea and can find no output for it. But reading stories is great also. So I guess, (random thought here..) reading sex scenes for some people is the same as masturbating in your mind? neutral
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Romantic Conversationalist
|
Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:25 pm
Claire Burmot So I guess, (random thought here..) reading sex scenes for some people is the same as masturbating in your mind? neutral
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 5:11 pm
I think that books with sex scenes are fine, but they should at least have some story purpose. Also, it depends on your definition of "smut." I, for one, would rather read a graphic scene then one filled with phrases like "ebony globes" and "glowing passion."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 7:14 pm
Eh...I just skim over those parts in books, though there is a stupid, needless one in the book "saberiel' somone turned this guy to wood and got him naked first, and now this girl finds him naked! and thinking hes a wood statue she studys him....I could go without reading that all my life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2005 9:41 pm
I've never seen a smut scene in a book that seemed like it was absolutely necessary or at least couldn't have been treated more tastefully or just implied. Usually when a graphic scene is hinted at or implied, it seems to work better in the story, because you see the effects of it without being distracted by all the "action". It just breaks up the flow of the book for me because I have to skip so many pages, go "ew, nasty," and then figure out where to start reading again. This is one of the reasons I don't read much fantasy -- I've been surprised with totally unnecessary stuff too many times.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:55 pm
Dragon_Fire1995 Eh...I just skim over those parts in books, though there is a stupid, needless one in the book "saberiel' somone turned this guy to wood and got him naked first, and now this girl finds him naked! and thinking hes a wood statue she studys him....I could go without reading that all my life. I read that. What was your beef with that? She'd never seen a naked boy before, and she didn't "study" him. She just looked him over and was all embarrassed. So, not only do you think that qualifies as "smut", but it continues to haunt you? I'm sorry I can't let this go, but it didn't even describe anything through euphemisms, much less tell you what she saw when she was embarrassed! We should be glad you weren't Sabriel, or she would probably have had a heart attack right there. *sigh* Excuse my sarcasm. I still have about thirty-five hundred words left in my English report, so I'm a little tasty. EDIT: That's "testy." Now I'm the embarrassed one...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 10, 2005 6:49 pm
I like smut, but too much drives me up the wall!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 11, 2005 3:09 am
I read a book called the Iron Dragons daughter and all it basically was is sex sex sex sex. I mean come on! A little is okay maybe but when you go into detil and its every five pages your like AHHHHHH!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 11:45 am
You mean like in "Blood and Chocolate" by Annette Curtis Klause? Where it's packed to the brim with hormones? stare
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 12:08 pm
There is nothing wrong with a little smut sprinkled throughout the book. But smuty scenes should be like any other scene in the book - they should add to the plot, or character development, or SOMETHING. When it is obvious that the author has just added smut for the sake of smut, he or she is obviously a smut-peddler and should be turned from his/her smuty ways.
As a writer, I know that smut can be a difficult area to visit. Often I have wondered to myself, 'does this smut really need to be here?'. Also, they are not the easiest scenes to write. I can't count the times have I simply written 'insert smut scene here'. But a little smut in the right area can really add something to a book, the idea is to try to not to over-smutify it.
Ok, so you caught me. I don't really care, I just wanted to use the word 'smut' as many times as possible.
smut
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:02 pm
Nighky Krayhart I read a book called the Iron Dragons daughter and all it basically was is sex sex sex sex. I mean come on! A little is okay maybe but when you go into detil and its every five pages your like AHHHHHH!!!!! You know, I thought that when I read that book, but I realized a few things when I reread it: 1: That book takes place in the fairy world. In a place that's basically the next thing to metaphysical, sex would have great importance. 2: It really fit the theme of the book. It was never contrived or overly disgusting. And most importantly: Reread it. Count the sex scenes. There's three. What's more, after reading it, I was left with a feeling that these scenes were decribed in detail, like you said. But I soon realized that only one of the sex scenes actually describes what happened, and it's only about two (short) paragraphs long. I don't know how Michael Swanwick does it, but he manages to give you the feeling he went into huge amounts of detail, while actually being fairly sparse and concentrating on emotions. I was trying to show one of the dirty aprts in that bok to my friend to show him how detailed it was, and I realized: It wasn't. Crazy, huh?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2005 8:52 pm
Well, I suppose it all depends on the Book really. Take Anne Rice for example. It would be odd to Not have it there. But, on the other hand, a smutty bit in a Tamora Pierce or Harry Potter book would be odd. Maybe in fanfiction, but never in real life. wink
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 2:50 pm
I agree with the majority here:
Unnecessary smut I don't like, if it's done nicely and fitting into the context I don't mind 3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 7:42 pm
I'm not a big fan of intimite scenes. That's why I like teen romance novels. I think that "seeing the sex scenes in a comic book is worse than reading the words."
(( I can't stand the f-bomb word in books. stressed I DON'T MIND HEARING IT OR READING IT IN MESSAGE BOARDS BUT NOT IN BOOKS! scream scream ))
Sorry. sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
