The Literary Equivalent to a Slut
You can always tell how much sex a writer gets by how much they write about it in their novels. I can honestly say that George R.R. Martin is a complete and utter virgin. ~ Davidson Howarth
I thought this would make a great blog topic and definitely in line with the psychology of the author influencing the page. I took a class on this once in college. The idea is that our psyche influences our work either consciously or unconsciously. I laughed when I read my fellow author Davidson's post, because, of course, what would this make me when I have a book (California Girl Chronicles) loaded with sexual content? I figured at least the literary equivalent to a slut LOL. I think the truth is that writers aren't going to write about something they are not interested in or that they don't think makes a great story. I suppose I wasn't going to write a contemporary romance in a culture where no one has sex or is not interested in sex. Mind you, 70 percent, according to a media expert, of all searches on Google are for porn. My friend Sonja Fisher still marvels over that one. I wouldn't write about a sexually empowered character if I didn't understand or even appreciate sexual empowerment. If I hated the idea of sex, I wouldn't write a contemporary romance at all. So, I do think Davidson's point is well taken. An author who has issues with his or her sexuality or sexuality in general is more likely to avoid the topic in his/her books. Or, and this is interesting, they might go overboard to mentally explore the possibilities of it. Or, and this is also interesting, they just don't want to talk about it anymore and would rather just do it. Hmm ... the last two theories ... As for California Girl Chronicles, I get asked if I am Brea (constantly) and my answer will remain the same, "No, I am not Brea." Brea enjoys her sexuality, but she makes some really huge errors in judgment. I like to think about it like this: the devil and the angel. "What would you in that situation, Michelle?" Me: "I wouldn't BE in that situation." And there friends answers the question.
I thought this would make a great blog topic and definitely in line with the psychology of the author influencing the page. I took a class on this once in college. The idea is that our psyche influences our work either consciously or unconsciously. I laughed when I read my fellow author Davidson's post, because, of course, what would this make me when I have a book (California Girl Chronicles) loaded with sexual content? I figured at least the literary equivalent to a slut LOL. I think the truth is that writers aren't going to write about something they are not interested in or that they don't think makes a great story. I suppose I wasn't going to write a contemporary romance in a culture where no one has sex or is not interested in sex. Mind you, 70 percent, according to a media expert, of all searches on Google are for porn. My friend Sonja Fisher still marvels over that one. I wouldn't write about a sexually empowered character if I didn't understand or even appreciate sexual empowerment. If I hated the idea of sex, I wouldn't write a contemporary romance at all. So, I do think Davidson's point is well taken. An author who has issues with his or her sexuality or sexuality in general is more likely to avoid the topic in his/her books. Or, and this is interesting, they might go overboard to mentally explore the possibilities of it. Or, and this is also interesting, they just don't want to talk about it anymore and would rather just do it. Hmm ... the last two theories ... As for California Girl Chronicles, I get asked if I am Brea (constantly) and my answer will remain the same, "No, I am not Brea." Brea enjoys her sexuality, but she makes some really huge errors in judgment. I like to think about it like this: the devil and the angel. "What would you in that situation, Michelle?" Me: "I wouldn't BE in that situation." And there friends answers the question.
Comments
Post a Comment