How do you know when you're reading good erotica?
An article this week proposed 5 ways to know you're reading good erotica, based on a discussion panel on sex from the Philippine Literary Festival. Commenters included Pammy Godoy, Bambina Oliveres, and Mina V. Esguerra. Looking into these women, I think the latter two at least should be going on my TBR list.
But the article's suggestions for what makes good erotica seem to revolve around a somewhat "apologetic" view of writing about sex. With the exception of the second point which points out the benefits of frank language as opposed to flowery metaphor, quite a lot of this article advocates separating erotic content from pornography, including deep emotional impact, and being sure to include the "consequences" of sexual acts as well. While these points certainly have their place in the right romance, does it really make for good erotica?
In my opinion, erotica is a style of pornography and shouldn't apologize for that. Pornography isn't latently evil, after all, in written form or otherwise. Obviously there is poorly written and poorly acted pornography, but the existence of it doesn't reflect on the concept or genre as a whole. There is some lovely, romantic, engaging, and passionate pornography out there, as well as some excellently presented fetish, kink, power exchange and even instructional pornography (Nina Hartley puts out some great instructionals). So contrasting erotica against porn to indicate one is better than the other or one benefits by not sinking to the other's level is, to me, a bit short-sighted.
Add to that the fact that not all erotica really needs to be "emotionally fulfilling" -- at least, not in the sense this article seems to indicate, that being a romantic emotional fulfillment. I find some of the most powerful erotica is that which teaches us to be more emotionally invested and fulfilled in ourselves and our desires, rather than seeking some legitimizing emotional connection with a partner every time.
Finally, I find quite a lot of fault with the final premise of the article, that one must also consider the "effects" and "consequences" of sexual engagement (unplanned and teen pregnancies being specifically referenced). I don't personally think that's what erotica is about. The article points out we should remember sex as a procreational activity first and foremost--a premise that sounds unsettlingly like pro-life arguments against abortion and birth control. Not only do I find fault with this point in an article supposedly defining good erotica, I find it borderline offensive.
What say you? Do you think this article touches on good points for erotica authors to consider? What do you think makes erotica "good"? Please share your thoughts with us in the comments, I'm excited to know what you think!
Pammy
Godoy, Bambina Olivares, and Mina V. Esguerra - See more at:
http://preen.inquirer.net/13035/5-ways-to-know-youre-reading-good-erotica#sthash.U2huhbjT.dpuf
Pammy
Godoy, Bambina Olivares, and Mina V. Esguerra - See more at:
http://preen.inquirer.net/13035/5-ways-to-know-youre-reading-good-erotica#sthash.U2huhbjT.dpuf
Pammy
Godoy, Bambina Olivares, and Mina V. Esguerra - See more at:
http://preen.inquirer.net/13035/5-ways-to-know-youre-reading-good-erotica#sthash.U2huhbjT.dpuf
Pammy
Godoy, Bambina Olivares, and Mina V. Esguerra - See more at:
http://preen.inquirer.net/13035/5-ways-to-know-youre-reading-good-erotica#sthash.U2huhbjT.dpuf
