Writing Styles, particularly lemons
Aug. 3rd, 2004 11:42 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
branchandrootOk, since Omi encouraged me to come back to it, here's that nice, calm essay I was planning to write yesterday.
There are three main categories of style that spring to my notice, when I read how fans write lemons, though it does extend to general style, too.
One seems to derive from doujinshi. It uses a lot of the same conventions, despite being a text rather than pictoral format. This is the style where no holds seem to be barred. A lot of crack-fic is done in this style. Peculiar things happen, narrators intervene at random, the characters are often aware of being characters, and often act in ways that would be thoroughly bizarre for their original incarnations, and all these things are taken completely and blithely for granted. Mpreg is a good example of the oddness in question. In specifically sexual terms, extremely conventionalized roles are generally adhered to for both the males depicted (and it's almost always males, when this style is used to write sex scenes in English-speaking fandom). One character will become delicate, weepy and victimizable, while the other will become oversexed and aggressive, regardless of how badly these roles may clash with their usual characterization or physical appearance. This style is the source of the infamous "height rule"; that is, whoever's taller gets to be on top. Physiology is one of the things that is cheerfully ignored, in this style. All the parts in question self lubricate, and, for the purposes of description, the anus may be assumed to be between the legs at times. Not to put too fine a point on it, the males in question are written using exaggerated versions of "traditional" Japanese feminine and masculine roles. These are the roles described by the borrowed terms uke and seme.
Myself, I find the psychology that comes along with this style of writing sex to be extremely disturbing and not erotic. One of the standard conventions is for the uke to protest and resist, and for the seme to ignore it. The source of the convention appears to be an assumption that good girls always have to claim not to want sex (example: Kaoru, third season or Rurouni Kenshin, fantasizing about her wedding night with Kenshin, and repeating "no" and "stop" all the while giggling and, in reality, having a nosebleed), and the uke role is the role of a good girl. This convention also appears to be the source for a frequent eroticization of rape, in this style. The line of consent is blurred in the first place, and the underlying assumption that the most unwilling/resistant uke will become willing once touched enough, makes it possible to rationalize the use of force and violence by having the uke accept it after the fact.
Let me rephrase that. It's possible for some people to rationalize it. It turns my stomach, very literally, whether in the "token resistance" form or in the "acceptance of brutal rape" form. They're different stopping points on the same continuum, and they both make me ill.
That unwilling-to-willing shift also gives rise to one of the conventions that seems to have wandered out of the dj style's bounds and infected other styles. This is the assumption that the beginning of sex will be painful. Always, or damn near. But that it will get better, as the sex goes on, and eventually result in a foaming, frothing, drooling orgasm.
While it might not sound like it, I actually consider the dj style a perfectly valid one, at least physically. The improbabilities, the variable geometry physiology, the cross-dressing and pregnancy and all the other crack, I think it's perfectly viable, especially if it's done without apology. That's the trick, you see, not to even try to rationalize it. And if it's a given author/reader's cup of tea to make one character pleased to have been raped by another, it's not like I can stop them. Avoid the stories, definitely. Point out, in appropriate forums, that I think it's really sick and twisted, certainly. Write long essays on the cultural roots of the phemomenon and earnestly encourage both Japanese and US denizens to be aware of them, you betcha.
Onward, then.
Another style is the realistic one. This tends to be the style most favored by fans of domestic US media, most probably because the majority of that media is live-action. A realistic style comes more easily when describing real, live people, however improbable the setting in which they're put. The realistic style attempts to preserve whatever acculturation the characters seem to have. Because a lot of it is US-middle-class based, that acculturation tends to be men who grunt and scratch and have pissing contests, figurative and literal both, and women who deal in some fashion with pressure to be delicate and ladylike and soft. When it comes to sex, and especially male-male sex, this style makes sure to take Issues into account--gay issues, feminist issues, racial issues, job issues. It also takes some trouble to adhere to human physiology, always mentions the lube or lack thereof, is careful to use physically possible sexual positions, makes sure first-time sex is embarassing and uncomfortable for all parties, and avoids any emotional mushiness when both characters are manly types. Or, at least, makes them deeply embarassed about it. The sex tends to be strongly flavored by whatever existing relationship the characters have in the source text, rather than being taken out of context.
A lot of very powerful stories come out of this style, and I consider it a perfectly reasonable choice. But I do not consider it the be-all-end-all of writing styles, nor the only worthwhile one that a serious writer should aspire to. If a proponent of the realistic style were to insist that I, for example, should only use that style for writing either gen or sex, and I were to ask them why, what that style has going for it that it should overwhelm all other choices, judging from what I've read on bbs, the only answer most such proponents could come back with would be "Because it's more real!" Tautology, anyone?
Because my goal in writing sex scenes is usually to have my readers identify with the view-point character, I tend toward the romance style.
The romance style derives from US serial and historical romance novels. It revels in emotional entanglement and emphasizes interpersonal relationships over action. And, whatever the angst and emotional storms, the sex is always good sex, and generally fluffy sex. Everyone has excellent orgasms, or at least every vpc does, and every sexual partner is either experienced and/or careful enough that any pain or discomfort is minimal. While trust issues arise, they are resolved in good time to lead into easy sex. When the romance style is applied to non-fluffy sex, it tends to be so overwhelmingly pleasurable that there isn't any room for Issues to crop up because the vpc is having too much fun.
When this, traditionally female-male, format is applied to male-male fic, interesting compromises tend to get made. The romance style usually adheres to the proper physics of the designated location, and the average physiology of the human male. On the other hand, it just as often assumes a greater willingness to verbalize and act out mushy emotional attachment than most socialized males in either the US or Japan are comfortable with. The style of pleasure described also tends to take forms more generally considered feminine: whole body, slow building.
In it's own way, the romance style is every bit as unrealistic as the dj style, just in a different direction. As long as it's the direction you want the story to go, that should be no problem.
You see, the thing is, I think the choice of style really has to depend on what you want to do with the story in question. If you want to explore gritty, real-life problems, the realistic style is probably your best bet. If you want to write a story that makes the readers laugh and say "that's so incredibly fucked up, but really a lot of fun", then it's time for the dj style.
For myself, when I write sex scenes, I aim for a female audience. I want my readers to feel safe, as well as titillated. For this purpose, the romance style, which puts the vpc's experiences in terms that are familiar to feminine socialization, and goes straight for maximum pleasure, however unrealistic, is the most useful style. This is not to say I don't add twists, whenever it seems appropriate or called for: a switch to the penetrative view-point, an interlude where trust and comfort do affect the sex and make it uncertain, a first time that's as messy and sloppy and clumsy as most first times really are.
It all depends on what you want to do with the story.
There are three main categories of style that spring to my notice, when I read how fans write lemons, though it does extend to general style, too.
One seems to derive from doujinshi. It uses a lot of the same conventions, despite being a text rather than pictoral format. This is the style where no holds seem to be barred. A lot of crack-fic is done in this style. Peculiar things happen, narrators intervene at random, the characters are often aware of being characters, and often act in ways that would be thoroughly bizarre for their original incarnations, and all these things are taken completely and blithely for granted. Mpreg is a good example of the oddness in question. In specifically sexual terms, extremely conventionalized roles are generally adhered to for both the males depicted (and it's almost always males, when this style is used to write sex scenes in English-speaking fandom). One character will become delicate, weepy and victimizable, while the other will become oversexed and aggressive, regardless of how badly these roles may clash with their usual characterization or physical appearance. This style is the source of the infamous "height rule"; that is, whoever's taller gets to be on top. Physiology is one of the things that is cheerfully ignored, in this style. All the parts in question self lubricate, and, for the purposes of description, the anus may be assumed to be between the legs at times. Not to put too fine a point on it, the males in question are written using exaggerated versions of "traditional" Japanese feminine and masculine roles. These are the roles described by the borrowed terms uke and seme.
Myself, I find the psychology that comes along with this style of writing sex to be extremely disturbing and not erotic. One of the standard conventions is for the uke to protest and resist, and for the seme to ignore it. The source of the convention appears to be an assumption that good girls always have to claim not to want sex (example: Kaoru, third season or Rurouni Kenshin, fantasizing about her wedding night with Kenshin, and repeating "no" and "stop" all the while giggling and, in reality, having a nosebleed), and the uke role is the role of a good girl. This convention also appears to be the source for a frequent eroticization of rape, in this style. The line of consent is blurred in the first place, and the underlying assumption that the most unwilling/resistant uke will become willing once touched enough, makes it possible to rationalize the use of force and violence by having the uke accept it after the fact.
Let me rephrase that. It's possible for some people to rationalize it. It turns my stomach, very literally, whether in the "token resistance" form or in the "acceptance of brutal rape" form. They're different stopping points on the same continuum, and they both make me ill.
That unwilling-to-willing shift also gives rise to one of the conventions that seems to have wandered out of the dj style's bounds and infected other styles. This is the assumption that the beginning of sex will be painful. Always, or damn near. But that it will get better, as the sex goes on, and eventually result in a foaming, frothing, drooling orgasm.
While it might not sound like it, I actually consider the dj style a perfectly valid one, at least physically. The improbabilities, the variable geometry physiology, the cross-dressing and pregnancy and all the other crack, I think it's perfectly viable, especially if it's done without apology. That's the trick, you see, not to even try to rationalize it. And if it's a given author/reader's cup of tea to make one character pleased to have been raped by another, it's not like I can stop them. Avoid the stories, definitely. Point out, in appropriate forums, that I think it's really sick and twisted, certainly. Write long essays on the cultural roots of the phemomenon and earnestly encourage both Japanese and US denizens to be aware of them, you betcha.
Onward, then.
Another style is the realistic one. This tends to be the style most favored by fans of domestic US media, most probably because the majority of that media is live-action. A realistic style comes more easily when describing real, live people, however improbable the setting in which they're put. The realistic style attempts to preserve whatever acculturation the characters seem to have. Because a lot of it is US-middle-class based, that acculturation tends to be men who grunt and scratch and have pissing contests, figurative and literal both, and women who deal in some fashion with pressure to be delicate and ladylike and soft. When it comes to sex, and especially male-male sex, this style makes sure to take Issues into account--gay issues, feminist issues, racial issues, job issues. It also takes some trouble to adhere to human physiology, always mentions the lube or lack thereof, is careful to use physically possible sexual positions, makes sure first-time sex is embarassing and uncomfortable for all parties, and avoids any emotional mushiness when both characters are manly types. Or, at least, makes them deeply embarassed about it. The sex tends to be strongly flavored by whatever existing relationship the characters have in the source text, rather than being taken out of context.
A lot of very powerful stories come out of this style, and I consider it a perfectly reasonable choice. But I do not consider it the be-all-end-all of writing styles, nor the only worthwhile one that a serious writer should aspire to. If a proponent of the realistic style were to insist that I, for example, should only use that style for writing either gen or sex, and I were to ask them why, what that style has going for it that it should overwhelm all other choices, judging from what I've read on bbs, the only answer most such proponents could come back with would be "Because it's more real!" Tautology, anyone?
Because my goal in writing sex scenes is usually to have my readers identify with the view-point character, I tend toward the romance style.
The romance style derives from US serial and historical romance novels. It revels in emotional entanglement and emphasizes interpersonal relationships over action. And, whatever the angst and emotional storms, the sex is always good sex, and generally fluffy sex. Everyone has excellent orgasms, or at least every vpc does, and every sexual partner is either experienced and/or careful enough that any pain or discomfort is minimal. While trust issues arise, they are resolved in good time to lead into easy sex. When the romance style is applied to non-fluffy sex, it tends to be so overwhelmingly pleasurable that there isn't any room for Issues to crop up because the vpc is having too much fun.
When this, traditionally female-male, format is applied to male-male fic, interesting compromises tend to get made. The romance style usually adheres to the proper physics of the designated location, and the average physiology of the human male. On the other hand, it just as often assumes a greater willingness to verbalize and act out mushy emotional attachment than most socialized males in either the US or Japan are comfortable with. The style of pleasure described also tends to take forms more generally considered feminine: whole body, slow building.
In it's own way, the romance style is every bit as unrealistic as the dj style, just in a different direction. As long as it's the direction you want the story to go, that should be no problem.
You see, the thing is, I think the choice of style really has to depend on what you want to do with the story in question. If you want to explore gritty, real-life problems, the realistic style is probably your best bet. If you want to write a story that makes the readers laugh and say "that's so incredibly fucked up, but really a lot of fun", then it's time for the dj style.
For myself, when I write sex scenes, I aim for a female audience. I want my readers to feel safe, as well as titillated. For this purpose, the romance style, which puts the vpc's experiences in terms that are familiar to feminine socialization, and goes straight for maximum pleasure, however unrealistic, is the most useful style. This is not to say I don't add twists, whenever it seems appropriate or called for: a switch to the penetrative view-point, an interlude where trust and comfort do affect the sex and make it uncertain, a first time that's as messy and sloppy and clumsy as most first times really are.
It all depends on what you want to do with the story.
