Rabelasian and picaresque!
Ta, two new words - not sure when I will ever use them but what the heck.
Now I just have to worry about that "perfectly". As apposed to roughly por... ,er no, I don't think I'll go there.
I usually describe it as 'porn' because of the double standards surrounding the question of 'erotica'. What is the difference between erotica and porn? One person's erotica etc. Most erotica probably arouses the reader – so what's the difference with that and porn?
I write stories that deliberately set out to arouse. To me, that's no different to stories that are intended to stimulate in other ways – does a violent scene, for instance, actually stimulate the reader (in general) less than a sexual one? Yet it seems to me that, in the UK at least (and the US, from what I can see), violence is considered as less worrying than sex – films and TV programmes are less censored when they contain violence than when they contain sexual scenes. How on earth have we arrived at a situation in these countries where this seems to be the case? It's less of a problem for children and young people to see dramatised murder on screen than to see dramatised shagging? There is something completely perverted about that situation.
Perhaps the fact that we seem to view sex in such a negative manner is part of the reason that both the UK and the US have such high rates of teenage pregnancy and STDs?
Anyway, that's a little of my 'philosophy' about what I write and that's why I am positive about it, why I call it "perfectly pornographic". I write about consensual sexual scenarios, between adults – usually adults in my own age group (ie past the first flush of youth
) and in which people who are physically not supermodels but, like you and me, have a bit of flesh etc, explore as wide a variety of situations as I am aware of – bi, straight, dominant, submissive, switch ...I write to entertain, but I do like to think that I manage to present a strong picture of female sexuality and female sexual choice.
