As many of you know – because I’ve told you – I don’t have anything against sex. (Well, not at the moment. It would make writing awkward, and besides it would shock the cats.) I have been happily married for twenty six years and I have two sons, neither of which, despite their belief, is a virgin birth.
I am, however, getting sick and tired of sex in books. Oh, not sex as sex. I mean, most of you know I’m not a prude. I can read sex without much worries (except sometimes I wonder if people bend that way – in other planets, I know they don’t on Earth.) I’ll even admit there was a time when I was about 13 or 14 when I would read an entire book for the three paragraphs of sex. I suppose that was part of the age. You see, I’d never had sex, I assumed it would be an eon, give or take, before I had sex, and I wanted to know everything about it.
So, why am I getting sick of it? Because most of it doesn’t mean anything. Worse, it’s dreary to read.
It’s like there is some directive from above on “there must be sex here.” In fact, I know there is a directive out in Romance about x sex scenes at x places in the book. The number of xxx in which book depends on the line, but it’s carefully dictated. I can also say that in one of my series, I was told I MUST have sex scenes, even though I felt that sex didn’t belong in it.
So some sex in books is the result of pressure from what used to be the only means of getting books on the shelves. And on the part of the publishers, themselves, I think it was an effort to cater to what they perceived to be a universal taste.
Is it a universal taste? I don’t know. I can only tell you what I know and what I think.
I think a lot of the sex in books is boring. It makes no sense, it accomplishes nothing. If it doesn’t outright violate the character – really? A regency girl giving it up after one kiss? – it is at best oh um. They kiss they throb they flutter, they grind, they penetrate, there’s things that get hard and things that get moist, there’s how he’s never had it that good and she’s never felt this way before and zzzzzzzzzzz. What? Sorry. It’s just I’ve read so many of these.
Possibly there is some demographic out there whom this satisfies, who feels thrilled at the mere mention of sex. They’re probably thirteen. Or perhaps fourteen. But there are indications that it’s not the ticket to money and success (except insofar as marketing distorts things) that publishers believe it is. There is a certain hysteria of falling numbers and increasing sex under the belief that doing more of what’s failed is a sane business approach. (Do they teach this in the ivy leagues, or something?)
In my opinion, what sells is not explicit sex, but sexual tension (Something I doubt most publishers – jaded by books crossing their desk every day – might not be able to tell with two hands and a seeing eye dog) does sell. Sexual tension – as opposed to sex – makes the reader continue reading, makes us interested, makes us crave the moment when the two would-be-lovers, yearning for each other bur holding back, finally kiss or even touch.
For instance, Georgette Heyer’s Venetia or Silvester have enough sexual tension in it that at the end of the second, the phrase “Sparrow, Sparrow,” has more excitement in it than any of the multi-page anatomically correct sex scenes I ever read. And, FYI, Heyer is still selling very well indeed.
Not that sex is forbidden in this – I’ve read a few urban fantasies in which the sex builds the sexual tension, due to something the character can’t (or shouldn’t) overcome. Or must overcome. The point being the sex becomes part of the plot and entwines the plot and heightens everything else.
On the other hand, in a lot of urban fantasies and in 3/4 of the romances, you could take the sex scene out completely and no one would notice. Well, maybe the publishers looking for the x that marks the spot. And in many books it gets either clinical and dry, or silly and dreary. If you must describe a part of the female anatomy in such exaggeration that it sounds like a cabbage unfolding and unfolding and unfolding yet again, you’ve probably gone too far. Suggestion and indication – note not prudishness and playing keep away – are more… interesting than tons of ink spilled in the service of anatomic descriptions.
The best way to write sex is the best way to write anything else in a plot: irresistible force meets immovable object (again, and again, and again, harder, faster… er… get your mind out of the gutter. And then come back and toss a life preserver to my mind, would you?) Have your character want, crave, need and yet not be able to get for good and sufficient reason (and there must be a real reason, just as the need must be palpable not just “I want it bad.”) And then have all this serve the greater plot. And then, maybe, just maybe you’ll have something worth reading. (And if you’re writing erotica as such, I highly recommend How To Write Erotica by Valerie Kelly. Actually I highly recommend this book for the writing technique of “immediate writing.” She gives very useful hints on what to give in detail and what to shade in. Caution, it has graphic passages. Not for the squeamish or the faint of heart.) On the other hand, if you don’t want to write explicit sex, be brave and original and keep the graphic sex out.
I believe in the indie market place we’ll see more sex and more sexless books too. I can also easily predict that if the sex counts the book will do well, if the sex doesn’t count…. Yawn, who needs it?
*Crossposted at Mad Genius Club*
According To Hoyt 
Sex boring? That’s heresy!! [Wink]
LikeLike
I wrote about sex in fiction a bit in my blog: http://thewriterinblack.blogspot.com/2011/09/sex-in-fiction.html
Not every story needs to have sex just like not every story needs to have a murder or not every story needs to have someone lose their job or not every story needs to have Timmy fall down a well, but it is, or should be, just as valid in a story as any of those other aspects. And if it is there, I believe the writer should be able to show it on the same footing as any other plot/character motivator. If the murder matters to the story, you describe it in detail. If the sex matters to the story, that, too should be described in detail.
LikeLike
From what I have seen as a non writer. The editors want the sex scenes because it is the only place they get ANY. This of course does not apply to our favorite publisher
LikeLike
As a reader, IMHO, sex should only be in book if the physical act advances the plot somehow. Otherwise, it should be implied; sort of like the movies where the protagonists kiss, the camera pulls away from them to outside the house, and bedroom light goes out.
Also, from an RPG, long ago: Sex is not funny. Frustration is funny… I can see a writer having lots of fun with that!
LikeLike
I’ve always thought seduction was the sexiest part.
In fact, in one of my now abandoned projects I have a scene where the guy is trying to seduce an older woman. She’s entirely against the idea and is even uncertain as to why he would try. He replies it’s like climbing Everest, you do it because it’s there. She misinterprets this to mean that reaching the summit is therefore sex, and he responds that no, sex is popping the champagne after you’ve reached the summit, it’s the celebration after the victory, the real victory is getting the person to want it to.
That’s the way I try to write it, so that that moment when you the reader KNOW the two are going to have sex is the big event, and that the actual sex is just a fait accompli and need not been shown.
Great advice as always.
LikeLike
The same applies double to TV. Personally I think it shows a lack of creativity on the part of the writers. Some times sex can be due to plot developments, but most of the time it’s just tossed in there as filler. Or, as you said, because the publisher demands it (but I thought that was only in the explicitly “romance novel” lines).
LikeLike
Gratuitous sex has reached the point where it now influences how I feel about the price I paid for a book. The book’s value is lowered with every page that I have to subtract from the story because it’s another unnecessary sex scene to be skipped over until I can get back to the plot.
LikeLike
My wife is fan of romance novels and she complains about this kind of thing all the time. From what she tells me, the sex scenes in some of these books seem to be on the “Dear Penthouse” level of erotica. That would tend to suggest they are aimed more at pleasing (pun not intended) the mostly male publishers who print them and not the mostly female fans who read them.
There are ways of putting sex into books without really putting sex into books. For instance, “Stranger in a Strange Land” is pretty much wall to wall implied sex, but there is nothing (outside of the paragraphs describing what a great kisser Michael is) explicit in it. While the sex was a part of who the main character was, Heinlein found no need to describe it in detail. He depended on his audience knowing how such things get done.
LikeLike
Christopher, it absolutely is on the Penhouse letter level or beyond (according to my husband.) I’m not sure most of the publishers are male — I think they’re mostly female, but they are very much group-driven and this is what they believe they should do.
I don’t oppose even explicit sex in books when it needs to be there for character development, though the put tab a in slot b school of writing is annoying. Unless they’re putting it somewhere truly original, like their ear, I don’t CARE. The way it’s written in romance, there’s a lot that’s not even correct. As in “Anatomy doesn’t do that!” “No woman ever felt that” “The writer is a woman! She must be in possession of a vagina!” etc.
LikeLike
I’m against bad sex writing just like I’m against bad writing in general. But sometimes, the sex is the point. Part of the fantasy. I’ve read books that frustrated me because the main characters not only didn’t get it on, they apparently never even considered it.*
We want to be the hot guy/girl and we want to be with someone who wants us, needs us. Guys fantasize about beautiful women who actually want sex and are upfront about that, who are even agressive about that.
It’s escapism. Not every book needs that but the books that are selling sex, adventure, action, they need to deliver on that. So long as its well done, it works for me. My problem is when it’s badly done, poorly motivated/thought out or when it’s shoehorned in where it doesn’t belong.
My $.02
*(I mean, you put two attractive, unattached people of the opposite sex in close proximity for any length of time, they’re going to at least think about it.)
LikeLike
Having read way too many of the oversexed romances reviewed and recommended on Goodreads and similar sites, as well as following the comments on the sites of romance reviewers, I have to say you folks are way off-base. There is a large and very vocal coterie of female romance readers who want it just as hot as the writer can make it. If anything, the editors are being driven by the readers. It isn’t the other way around. But it does often result in inserting the insertion of tab A into slot B where it isn’t needed and where it can even take the reader right out what was otherwise an engaging story.
There are epublishers whose best-selling books are the ones with ratings like four or five “chili peppers.” And their lists are predominantly that type of book. You don’t keep publishing books that are close to or over the porn line unless there’s an audience for them.
LikeLike
well, I think the point is “very vocal”. And my answer on publishing them is “yes you can” — if you push them enough. You’re underestimating what you can find on shelves, and how much that affects what sells. Yes, of course there is an audience for them. Is this audience the same as the audience for “romances” since all the romances now have this? I doubt it. The fact that for the first time HARLEQUIN sales are falling and during a recession, in fact, could be translated as “definitely no.” I think there is as much audience for sex drenched books as for “no sex” or “sweet” (the industry term) romances. I think the LARGEST audience is somewhere in the middle. The most vocal audience might be on the “sex and more sex” but those are the ones who are also still driving the “new book sales.” … because the rest of us know we’re going to skip (not because it’s shocking, but because it’s boring) 1/3 of the pages, so we’ll be d*mned if we buy new. I know of a used bookstore where the hottest trade ins are romances older than twenty years (because less sex.) They have a waiting list of people for them, and btw, most of them not really old people. I think the most audience is somewhere in the middle. I could be wrong, of course, but I’m not the only woman who goes “Whose body works THAT way?” and skips pages.
Now, most of these people aren’t commenting anywhere (remember, internet is biased to not just “technologically literate” but “opinionated.” “Long time reader, never commented” exists.) and most of them are no longer buying romances (or mysteries, which are going the same way.) The publishers who believe that the vocal people are “the readers” have issues.
This reminds me of Janet Evanovich and the whole “Morelli vs Ranger” thing. You see, I was one of her original readers as a young mother, and I LOVED those books. Part of their charm is that no matter how naughty Stephanie was, you knew in the end this series was a romance between Stephanie and Morelli. It started with Morelli’s “you want me bad” in the first book, and you knew this was true. Eventually they’d marry and live in his house, etc. So it was fine for her to flirt with Ranger, because we knew where her true heart was. Here I can speak for my demographic, because we talked Stephanie Plum all the time, at parties, while waiting to pick up the kids, etc. Meanwhile on E’s forum, on the internet, ALL the “chimers in” were college girls, who found Morelli boring and Ranger the “hot” one and kept going on about how she should sleep with Ranger. She finally did, I think in book 9? I don’t know what the result was. I know she’s still a mega bestseller. To me, she broke the character. Most of us who read her then gave up on that book. Again, I don’t know how that played, and it’s hard to tell from the numbers in an industry where push has so much to do with what sells. HOWEVER I’ll also note the author seems to be doing her best to ignore that event, and focusing on Morelli again, so I’ll say that SOMETHING happened sales wise, even though ALL her forum agreed they wanted more Ranger, more sex, now. (I had nothing against sex with Morelli, btw, it just didn’t feel right for the character to sleep with Ranger, given who the character was.)
Understand, I’m not saying that there shouldn’t be sex in books. I’m saying there shouldn’t be badly written sex in books. AND definitely there shouldn’t be sex that doesn’t advance the plot. I also think there should be books that cover an entire spectrum.
LikeLike
It’s a fair cop – those demanding sex are quite vocal and the rest of us are largely indifferent. It ain’t we don’t like sex so much as if it isn’t advancing summat — plot, character, whatever — then it’s just so much pointless verbiage, kinda like an extended car chase: all it is doing is delaying the denouement.
But it’s like guns; LOTS of people generally think reasonable restrictions on ownership of firearms isn’t an entirely bad idea, provided it is handled respectfully, but the people who determine their flippin’ VOTES on the subject run about 95% pro-gun and 5% pro control. Anybody watching the public discussion and reading the papers thinks the whole country’s mad for controlling guns, but the people running for office know if they actually do anything about controlling guns they best have those retirement think tank sinecures lined up.
LikeLike
Definitely in the closed bedroom door category here. I have my own kinks, and rarely does a writer manage to hit the right ones, in the right way, in their scenes, so I usually get more titillated when things are only suggested and I can imagine the details myself. So I don’t write sex scenes, and usually skip them when reading. And almost always find them boring when I do read through them. But I do like novels where they have the long slow burn between characters, nothing much happens but a lot of tension until we get to that closing door somewhere around the ending. And for me it’s usually better if the burgeoning of the affair doesn’t get spelled out, but is left for the imagination of the reader, with all those sidewise glances and near touches.
And I mostly hate romance novels. Nothing more boring than a story where the main focus is on ‘does he want me or not, and how do I feel about it’. I want something where enough other things are happening that the main characters don’t have time for navel gazing, and the ‘but we love each other’ is something of a surprise to both of them when they finally get the time to think about it.
Each to their own, though. There seem to be a lot of people who want the detailed sex scenes, and want stories where the emotional state of the characters is of uttermost importance.
LikeLike
My personal opinion is that sex should be there if it does something to advance the character or the plot. Sex is like most things that people do. There is a time and a place for it. Are your characters going to drop everything to bake a cake in the middle of a chapter?
Besides, most sex scenes end up sounding like plumbing instructions. As you put it in your title, they’re boring.
What is more exciting is hinting at what is happening, and letting the reader’s imagination run wild.
Wayne
LikeLike
I couldn’t agree more. O.k. sex is a fact of life (sorry – couldn’t resist that one) and characters are going to have relationships and so on, but I don’t need the graphic details. Unless they serve to illuminate aspects of a character and/or advance the plot, those kind of scenes are often boring and a distraction from the story.
Melvyn
LikeLike
While I agree that sex is often done badly or simply for titillation factor I do wonder about some of the comments. “I don’t need the graphic details”, “Hinting at what is happening and letting the reader’s imagination run wild”, “I can imagine the details myself”, “no need to describe it in detail.”
Is it just sex or should the same thing also apply to other aspects of the story? In the murder mystery is there no need for the graphic details? In the police procedural can we just let the reader imagine the questioning of witnesses? In the Western is there no need to describe the ranch?
While putting in sex just to have sex in the story weakens the story (just as much as putting in vampires just because vampires are “hot” today or putting in any other aspect that isn’t integrated into the story itself does the same) I don’t see any reason to treat it differently from any other aspect of the story. Neither more nor less.
LikeLike
There isn’t any reason to treat it differently. Here’s the thing, though, in mystery yes, you often don’t put in the grisley details. If it’s a cozy, for instance, you DON’T talk about how the corpse is bleeding precisely from where or how it smells. You just DON’T. However, with sex you get told (I did, in an historical fantasy that was not by any stretch sexual, I got told “you have to have x amount and it has to show this detail.) from what I hear “you have to have sex and it has to be detailed” or it won’t sell. And I think they’re wrong.
LikeLike
That I can agree with. OTOH, I also run into the “you shouldn’t have sex in there” attitude from others.
I’m wondering if it’s not a “bathtub curve” (as opposed to a “bell curve”) with people tending toward one end or the other and not in the middle.
In the book I’m currently shopping around I had originally written one sex scene. During revision I removed it because, for various reasons, it wasn’t right for those two characters to have sex at that point in the story.
Back when I was in the AF, we were told, when it came to assignment requests and the like “the needs of the Air Force come first.” Well, in this case, I think the needs of the story come first.
Within those needs there’s quite a bit of flexibility that can come down to personal taste. (cf the Kipling bit I’m always quoting).
And if one is _going_ to include the sex, whether “necessary” or not, at least try to make it not _only_ sex. Have it say something about the characters or in some way further the story beyond “they had sex here.”
And I think that’s the problem with a lot of sex scenes. They are just sex scenes and aren’t used for otherwise advancing the story. I have been told that the more purposes you can give to anything that happens in a story (advancing plot, developing character, setting the scene, what have you) the better. Too bad that gets forgotten when it comes to sex.
LikeLike
It isn’t just a matter of how much detail you use. It’s how many times. The first sex scene may be interesting (or not, depending on your tastes) but the second, third, etc., are just more of the same. How many times would you repeat the details in other genres?
LikeLike
Very good point. This is something I think Freehold by Michael Z. Williamson handles well. There are several “sex scenes” of moderate explicitness, but each one marks a specific “turning point” in the characters’ increasingly complicated relationship (and not the thing for people who think sex should be strictly one-on-one monogamous).
LikeLike
yes. This is what really gets to me — the “okay, so they have more sex, at the same level.”
Also, David, in procedurals even, the third or fourth instance might be the character talking to his wife and saying “this happened.”
LikeLike
That’s a matter of choosing which ones to show. The ones to be shown are the ones that are important to the story. The ones that are “more of the same” can be elided over. This is, I think, true whether sex or interviewing witnesses. Kendra, Rob, and Marta had considerably more sex than was shown “on screen” but the scenes that were shown underscored significant changes to the characters, particularly Kendra’s changing attitudes.
But in the PR’s I’ve been reading, yeah, most of these stories (short listed for the RITA awards) basically had “insert sex here” type scenes more than were necessary (or which might have been made “necessary” if they were handled differently but which weren’t).
LikeLike
And that’s Sarah’s point. Most sex in most books is there because of a believe that “sex sells”, and not because the sex means anything to the characters or moves the plot.
I wrote a neat little gun fight scene, which I really liked. Then I scraped it. It didn’t do anything for the story, it didn’t tell the reader anything new about the character. Mind you I’m saving it. The basic scene idea will work somewhere else!
Sex is fine, if it means something to the book. If it doesn’t, why is it there?
Wayne
LikeLike
Oh I hadn’t put it in because of any “sex sells reasons.” At the time I thought it did mean something to the characters and move a part of the plot (the character’s growing relationship).
Later, once I had the whole thing in front of me, I decided that that “phase” of their relationship was simply premature at that point.
LikeLike
I’ve just written a book about vampires (yes I know hold the sniggers) and of course if it winds up being successful, I’m going to have to deal with romance and supernatural sex in the series, which is always weird. It’s a YA novel so it can’t get too steamy, but I hope to have fun with it. For example, have you noticed that in YA novels the teenagers always have enough money, time, places to copulate, without interruption? Not to mention the weirdness of having sex with something you think of as “food.” Teenage sex is a hilarious minefield to begin with, it seems to be that supernatural teenage sex would be an endless source of potential humor and embarrassment.
LikeLike
I just about lost a keyboard when I read that line.
Wayne
LikeLike
For a puzzled moment I thought you’d listened to Dave Freer’s and my oldest son (Robert A Hoyt)’s panel at Lunacon about how to cook mermaids…
LikeLike
I have to comment, I have to comment, I have to comment. Me, Me, Me *waves raised hand as if in school* This totally annoys me to no end. I don’t like romance to begin with because I want the plot focus on the adventure not the relationship (Don’t get me wrong relationships of all kinds are important to plot. I just don’t want that the focus.). Sadly since I like Vampire stories I have to wade through the “No this is really UF” when it actually isn’t. So unfortunately I end up reading some Romance with my UF until I know the author actually does that and the Publisher actually tries to sell it that way(I’ll admit one or two was still worth the read).
That said (and to the point) I must be old fashion (I mean really old fashion) because I missed the whole Sex = Romance thing. I mean I’m a guy and I still miss the Sex = Romance thing. My Guy Book says that is what you say to women when seducing them, but I didn’t think anyone actually believed it. I know there have always been the “bodice rippers”, but I didn’t really think they were as main stream as this is now. Jeaniene Frost’s books went really down hill after the second one because every 3 pages the main character had to have sex. I got to the point where I would have been happy with “See page 5 for sex scene” instead.
The ones that really get to me are the books that “Sex with multiple partners = Romance with one”. WTF? I thought I got pegged with male chauvinist pig if I said that. *Flips though pages* Yep right there. See “Prepare right cheek for slap (note not in kinky way) as this generally doesn’t work”. The one that really broke me was Karen Chance with. “I don’t know if I love you because of a spell so I’m going to sleep with someone else just so I can know if I really love you or not. Oh and you set the spell up that way even though you are extremely territorial and don’t want anyone else touching me.” Ummmm…..yeah. That logic makes my brain fizzle out especially with that last part.
I never though I would love an ESRB for books. R3 “Contains no plot, Continued Sex Scenes, Bed Hopping”. I’ve never minded people spoiling a book for me because if I want to read it I’ll do so anyway. I mean I reread good books over and over (your two shifter books for example ;) ). However now I’ll not buy a book(unless I really trust the author) unless I’ve read several spoilers on it.
I feel fairly safe in revealing my Guy Book because it seems to be woefully outdated.
LikeLike
I haven’t come across sex with multiple partners, not even in romances though I’ve HEARD about them (and multiple partners at the SAME TIME, of both sexes.). But talk about your disbelief suspended by the neck, when you have a proper regency Miss who suddenly has to have it, because he looks so good.
At any rate, any man writing from a male perspective the way women ARE written by women in romance with a female perspective would get KILLED. They call Heinlein “sex obsessed” and he’s not EVEN CLOSE to the most restrained of romances. And while I don’t mind relationship oriented books (Yeah, I want an adventure or mystery with it, but I’ll take the relationship-only provided the characters are interesting and the relationship fun. See Heyer, for instance) the “put tab a in slot b” or even “b and c and d and let’s see if it fits in f” just BORE me. Or make me vaguely sick.
LikeLike
Ah, yes, Heinlein. Everybody used to love to rail at Heinlein for all the sex in his books, never mind the weird lifestyles. But are those lifestyles so weird? I know people who are living in marriages like those Heinlein described in “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress.”
Compared to a lot of today’s books Heinlein is fairly pedestrian. But his books still sell extremely well, even though they lack graphic sex scenes. Arthur C. Clarke’s books still sell extremely well even though they have no sex scenes.
I made a decision that unless I was writing pornography (which I don’t), I was going to skip the sex scenes. Have the character wake up in bed tangled up with his or her paramour? Yes. Get into the details of the plumbing? No. It just isn’t necessary, and most of the time it slows down the action.
Wayne
LikeLike
I’ve been unfortunate to run across a few. Generally it seems to amount to “try before you buy” kind of relationships. As has already been mentioned it has to be on the all new plot points check list some Publishers are foisting off. The most blatant one I avoided quite handily, but still looked into for the shear curiosity.
I think the first book that comes to mind and makes me disagree slightly with the supporting plot theory was called Succubus Blues(Title lets you know what you are in for at least). Where the main character has to have sex to survive(hey Succubus!) and cannot have sex with the person she cares for because doing so slowly kills them. *sarcasm* That….plot….drips all kinds of I want to read. *sarcasm*
Not that I fault people that do like it mind you, just don’t try to convince me it is Urban Fantasy with some “Romance” as some readers were. It would be nice if some Writers, Publishers, and Readers were at least honest so I can avoid those books. Its not like you are going to get some scarlet letter or be burned at the stake for it now days. I’m not even going to bat an eye lash at the fact someone does, just move on to a more interesting book. Or return it if they manage to trick me.
Amazon’s suggested books was not helpful on that one. I keep asking them for a “Never in a million years” list so that it might help filtering out those I don’t want recommended to me.
LikeLike
One contra-viewpoint, albeit a limited one: sometimes the sex is justified, interested and necessary to the exploration. I am minded of a Piers Anthony series (before he took up beating Xanth to death) in which (if memory serves) the lead was (for whatever reason) transiting a variety of alien species by occupying host bodies. The book(s) were in part an examination of the many modes of sexual reproduction alternative to the binary fusion practiced by homo-sap. I suspect the examples were drawn from terrestial species, but absent such a need for explaining that male provides sperm to female, female gestates egg is not the only way to reproduce species I doubt much detail is desirable.
LikeLike
Oh, how I agree with this! I’m not a general romance reader, but I’ve read Jane Austen a million times, and most genre books have a romance in there somewhere, even if it’s the B plot. (My current favorite on-going romance is Harry and Murphy in the Harry Dresden novels.)
What is even worse to me than boring sex scenes I could care less about (my father says sex is not a spectator sport), is that I don’t even care about the two characters involved. Lately, it seems as long as you show me a hot guy, that’s all I’m supposed to need to feel anything. Sorry, no, doesn’t work for me. Mr. Darcy is stunning, but we don’t fall in love with him until at least halfway through the book, and it’s not because he’s gorgeous. He earns it! I’m much happier with books where it’s NOT the best looking guy who wins, but the nice funny smart guy who comes through for the heroine.
Which is just a way of affirming what you said – it’s not the sex, it’s the tension that makes us want to read on. I want to root for the pair to get together, to worry that they won’t (every time I read Pride and Prejudice, I’m terrified that Elizabeth won’t bump into Darcy at Pemberley) and to be overjoyed when they do. I have been permanently annoyed with books when the wrong pair get together (Harry should have wound up with Hermione. ;-) ).
And as for sex scenes that don’t fit in the story, if the readers want them, isn’t that what fan fic is for? *tongue partially inserted in cheek, whistles innocently* :-)
LikeLike
I find that, as an immersion reader, I have developed a skill set for skipping gratuitous sex scenes in books. I’m an old (58), retired Marine who mostly can take or leave sex in books. Over the years I have come to have preferences for certain things in books. Implicit sex is not on my list of things I want to read. I don’t find sex in books jarring or even aggravating. Having said that, I do notice when a sex scene is obviouly an insert sex here part of the plot. I just take as part of reading and go on to the next paragraph. When there is sex, I prefer an implied action, but there are other things in books that are much more aggravating to me than sex. I like a plot to move along and I dislike a slow starter, for instance. My own major pet peave in any book of any genre ( I read a lot of different types.) is waiting until chapter four to give a character description. By that time, if the author has ponied up a description, I have manufactured my own. Now you’re telling me that the guy is short or tall, skinny or muscular or fat or 100 other things. Too late, buddy. Now every time you reference your late description, you’re gonna tee me off, maybe to the point where it goes on my pile of “I’ll read when there is nothing else in the house”. You can bet that I’ll be very selective about your next book on the shelf at my local bookstore.
LikeLike
Often NOT the author’s mistake (though it might happen sometimes.) Often the first description gets cut out by the editor for whatever reason, and then when you reference the description late and it’s too late for the reader.
LikeLike