"She came with the exhilarating whoops and pant-hoots of a troop of Rhesus monkeys, which was flattering, if alarming."

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

One of the entrants (by Rod Liddle) in the Bad Sex in Fiction Award, apparently to be presented by Sting tonight.

It occurs to me that there is, in fact, no good way to write sex in fiction, except to say: "they had sex" or something similar. Any attempt at describing the actual mechanics is automatically bad sex writing. Even (or perhaps especially) D.H. Lawrence is pretty bad. So can anyone come up with an example of good sex writing?

― Jonathan Z., Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:02 (twenty-one years ago)

I think what you posted is pretty excellent, actually!

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:03 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh come on now, that's fucking appalling!

― Jonathan Z., Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:10 (twenty-one years ago)

i think sex, when described, must be as graphic as humanly possible.

― dyson (dyson), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:12 (twenty-one years ago)

and some appalling fucking, for that matter.

― Jeremy the Kingfish (Kingfish), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:12 (twenty-one years ago)

If you imagine Shaggy or Elephant Man reading the thread title over a nice riddim your life automatically improves

― TOMBOT, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:12 (twenty-one years ago)

I think that sex in fiction (usually) should be handled the way they did in Hollywood films during the Code - lightly implied, but no description of the act itself. Obviously, if the book has a reason for putting the sex in there, though, put it in. But it seems like an awful lot just have the old OSS there just to tittilate.

― Girolamo Savonarola, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:18 (twenty-one years ago)

Surely the thread title isn't INTENDED to be sexy? Does good sex writing have to be arousing?

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:19 (twenty-one years ago)

What is Sting's fucking problem already?

― Allyzay, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:19 (twenty-one years ago)

I wasn't suggesting sex descriptions have to be erotic. I just think they have to be good - or not be there at all.

― Jonathan Z., Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:20 (twenty-one years ago)

Any book describing sex accurately to Sting would have to be, like, 1200 pages long.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:21 (twenty-one years ago)

The concept of Sting presenting the bad sex award makes me laugh. "8 hours and you STILL haven't made me come, you withered old hypocrite"

― Markelby (Mark C), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:21 (twenty-one years ago)

Like Lord of the Rings?

― Allyzay, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:21 (twenty-one years ago)

*bad anal sex joke here*

― Jeremy the Kingfish (Kingfish), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:24 (twenty-one years ago)

There's a great scene in Madame Bovery. Madame and her lover rent a room in a love hotel. Flaubert descbribes the room and the tension. He doesn't describe the sex at all. And it's erotically charged all the same.

Got me going, anyway.

― MikeyG (MikeyG), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:27 (twenty-one years ago)

i think we should write our own and post them here - who's with me?

― stevem (blueski), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:29 (twenty-one years ago)

after the Mills & Boon fest at the all girl FAP i am INSPIRED

― stevem (blueski), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:29 (twenty-one years ago)

head to (NSFW) http://www.literotica.com (NSFW) for more fun.

― Jeremy the Kingfish (Kingfish), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:31 (twenty-one years ago)

The Madame Bovary technique - suggest everything but say nothing - is the only real way to do it.

Also, bad sex writing can be arousing - just as tacky porn can be arousing - but that doesn't make it good writing.

― Jonathan Z., Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:32 (twenty-one years ago)

Tom Robbins is pretty good with writing sex, although I think it has to do with his embracing of the absurdity of it and his sense of humor.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:33 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.asstr.org/
NOT SAFE FOR WORK

― steak and ale, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:34 (twenty-one years ago)

Are weblog posts allowed to enter?

― Tico Tico (Tico Tico), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:34 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah, trying to be erotic in serious fiction is usually just completely embarrassing and silly. Like, I was just paying attention to the plot and the characters and this and that etc, what are a bunch of overwrought nipple descriptions going to add to my experience besides possible jimmy discomfort? Anyway all the sex writing anyone could ever possibly need is for free and viewable from anywhere thanks to Google Groups. Sting is obsolete.

― TOMBOT, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:42 (twenty-one years ago)

You only just now realized Sting is obsolete?

― Allyzay, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:44 (twenty-one years ago)

You asked what is problem was!

― TOMBOT, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:48 (twenty-one years ago)

Obsoletion is the absolute least of his problems! The major problem is just that he's Sting, I mean for fuck's sake. Sting should post to ILX.

― Allyzay, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:53 (twenty-one years ago)

eh orrrrright? anyone oop fer a marafun shagfest laik?

― Sting (blueski), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:56 (twenty-one years ago)

I TAKE IT BACK.

― Allyzay, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:56 (twenty-one years ago)

i have instructed Gareth to charm the NYCers pants off with the 'joke Geordie accent' next week

― stevem (blueski), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:11 (twenty-one years ago)

dornt tek coffee ah tayrke tea ma frend
lyke may torst dunon wen sayd!

― Stingareth (blueski), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:13 (twenty-one years ago)

Gareth is in NYC again next week? Why doesn't he just move here already?

― Allyzay, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:16 (twenty-one years ago)

he stays here for the faux-Geordie banter

― stevem (blueski), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:26 (twenty-one years ago)

Tha winnah.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 21:20 (twenty-one years ago)

Are weblog posts allowed to enter?

genius.

― toby (tsg20), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 22:41 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah, you'd need separate categories, to be fair to the non-blog writers.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 22:46 (twenty-one years ago)

i just thot of sting using the hypocrite crone line on greer, who has some really bad writing in her newish pro-pederast stroketome

― anthony easton (anthony), Thursday, 4 December 2003 08:02 (twenty-one years ago)

I'm reading Cock and Bull by Will Self at the mo. His cynical clinical way of describing sex acts seems pretty OTM to me. If I remember, I'll find out an example.

― Johnney B (Johnney B), Thursday, 4 December 2003 09:19 (twenty-one years ago)

I remember reading a sex-ed-for-crumbsnatchers book as a yoof. It was all poemy about describing sex, and posited that the way the penis fit in the vagina was "like a hand in a glove/like a love in a love".

― nate detritus (natedetritus), Thursday, 4 December 2003 09:28 (twenty-one years ago)

what if you're describing bad sex? doesn't that automatically qualify you for the Bad Sex award? And doesn't that mean you're doing it right?

― Catty (Catty), Thursday, 4 December 2003 11:29 (twenty-one years ago)

take my hand with your glove of love

― the surface noise (electricsound), Thursday, 4 December 2003 23:17 (twenty-one years ago)

And doesn't that mean you're doing it right?

If 'you're doing it right', that doesn't qualify as bad sex, though.

― Nichole Graham (Nichole Graham), Thursday, 4 December 2003 23:23 (twenty-one years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.