Speaking of our favorite Smart Pop Book...
Smart Pop has one of the essays up on their website for us all to read along to!
Its called Bon Rapports by Marella Sands. Its all about the language of sex, and LKH.
Now I'm not sure if this is just an excerpt or not (anyone know?), but her essay about sex, stops at The Killing Dance, when Anita and Jean Claude first have sex. Ms. Sands claims that American slang just doesn't do it for her when it comes to sex scenes. She lists the myriad slang terms of the human sexual reproductive system and how they just don't hold up to the "fade to black" that was present in Dracula and older vampire novels. "Honestly, though, one of the best strategies for writing sex scenes is not writing them. Authors like Polidori and Stoker didn’t get to show sex on stage, but perhaps their works were all the more erotic for that. Much as horror movies avoid showing the monster in the first reel, sexy tales that jump straight into bed have a tendency to just lie there like a, well, two-dollar whore. Part of the secret of erotic literature is to make the character, and the readers, wait."
Ok, so we waited. I actually found the sex scene between Anita and Jean Claude appealing when I first read it. I even find it appealing today. After remembering how the sexual tension built between the two characters and how Richard was involved I didn't know who I wanted Anita to get it on with, I just knew I wanted her to get it on with SOMEONE! (I bite my tongue now!) LKH's early sex scenes (pre Narcissus in Chains) had so much sexual tension built in them that I would have to put the book down and fan 12 year old self. Sands states that sex scenes have to be treated very delicately to not just be fluff in your novel, "This paucity of words to describe the act, well, sucks. Hell, you want to set a mood for the readers, right? The sex shouldn’t just be sex, it should lead to character development and plot development and be erotic at the same time. And if that isn’t bad enough, it’s got to be well-written. Who’d set themselves up for that on purpose? Yeah, writers. Many of us aren’t terribly bright sometimes" I know Hamilton didn't use an overabundance of graphic words to describe the first time Anita and Jean Claude had sex because goodness knows I cut my teeth on some pretty raunchy Trashy Romance novels, and I was not shocked by LKH's language, I was enthralled by her sexual tension. I mean jeeze SIX books of tension!
After reading this, I had some major questions about the later Anita books, what are her euphemisms for the body's sexual organs? I for one cannot stand it when an erotic writer calls anatomy parts cute things, or animal things. I'd prefer the clinical term over a baby name for an sexual organ. I have a friend who sees red whenever someone writes about "tits." We know Anita is a "rain maker" and loves whatever LKH calls double penetration, but really, is there anything (besides the execution of said sex scenes in regards to character development) that bother you language wise?
What do you think about the essay and its discussion of the lack of eroticisim in slang? Would it improve or hinder LKH's sex scenes if she added some slang? We obviously agree that less is more when it comes to sex, who would you say has a good handle on the paranormal suspense/romance genre, in regards to story line, character development and sexual tension?
*notice that Ms. Sands is a member of the Alternate Historians, LKH's old editing group. I sense major snark since some of her more pointed comments about the nature of erotic writing say less is more, and Anita hasn't been practicing any abstinence in the past 10 years.
** also, I had a REAL hard time separating Anita from LKH in this discussion. Oops.
Its called Bon Rapports by Marella Sands. Its all about the language of sex, and LKH.
Now I'm not sure if this is just an excerpt or not (anyone know?), but her essay about sex, stops at The Killing Dance, when Anita and Jean Claude first have sex. Ms. Sands claims that American slang just doesn't do it for her when it comes to sex scenes. She lists the myriad slang terms of the human sexual reproductive system and how they just don't hold up to the "fade to black" that was present in Dracula and older vampire novels. "Honestly, though, one of the best strategies for writing sex scenes is not writing them. Authors like Polidori and Stoker didn’t get to show sex on stage, but perhaps their works were all the more erotic for that. Much as horror movies avoid showing the monster in the first reel, sexy tales that jump straight into bed have a tendency to just lie there like a, well, two-dollar whore. Part of the secret of erotic literature is to make the character, and the readers, wait."
Ok, so we waited. I actually found the sex scene between Anita and Jean Claude appealing when I first read it. I even find it appealing today. After remembering how the sexual tension built between the two characters and how Richard was involved I didn't know who I wanted Anita to get it on with, I just knew I wanted her to get it on with SOMEONE! (I bite my tongue now!) LKH's early sex scenes (pre Narcissus in Chains) had so much sexual tension built in them that I would have to put the book down and fan 12 year old self. Sands states that sex scenes have to be treated very delicately to not just be fluff in your novel, "This paucity of words to describe the act, well, sucks. Hell, you want to set a mood for the readers, right? The sex shouldn’t just be sex, it should lead to character development and plot development and be erotic at the same time. And if that isn’t bad enough, it’s got to be well-written. Who’d set themselves up for that on purpose? Yeah, writers. Many of us aren’t terribly bright sometimes" I know Hamilton didn't use an overabundance of graphic words to describe the first time Anita and Jean Claude had sex because goodness knows I cut my teeth on some pretty raunchy Trashy Romance novels, and I was not shocked by LKH's language, I was enthralled by her sexual tension. I mean jeeze SIX books of tension!
After reading this, I had some major questions about the later Anita books, what are her euphemisms for the body's sexual organs? I for one cannot stand it when an erotic writer calls anatomy parts cute things, or animal things. I'd prefer the clinical term over a baby name for an sexual organ. I have a friend who sees red whenever someone writes about "tits." We know Anita is a "rain maker" and loves whatever LKH calls double penetration, but really, is there anything (besides the execution of said sex scenes in regards to character development) that bother you language wise?
What do you think about the essay and its discussion of the lack of eroticisim in slang? Would it improve or hinder LKH's sex scenes if she added some slang? We obviously agree that less is more when it comes to sex, who would you say has a good handle on the paranormal suspense/romance genre, in regards to story line, character development and sexual tension?
*notice that Ms. Sands is a member of the Alternate Historians, LKH's old editing group. I sense major snark since some of her more pointed comments about the nature of erotic writing say less is more, and Anita hasn't been practicing any abstinence in the past 10 years.
** also, I had a REAL hard time separating Anita from LKH in this discussion. Oops.