If SF/F books had MPAA ratings, what would be your taste: R? PG-13? PG? NC-17?

[j. d. worthington]

Originally Posted by Dr. Atomic

This has become a really stimulating discussion. (Sorry, had to say it...)

No, you didn't have to say it... but it's a darned good line...

As I said: I can't think of any "hard" sf right off the top of my head that makes use of it in this way, but I'll see if I can pull anything out of that chaotic jumble that my memory has become. If I do, I'll pass it on. And if anyone else has any ideas... I'd like to hear 'em.

[Blue Tyson]

The whole range, because there would be books of interest in all of them.

[apokalypsis]

In the evolution of my thought process of how to edit certain scenes in my manuscript, I stumbled across a 1908 essay by Bram Stoker on the need for censorship of novels. It was kind of odd reading it, and then thinking that this was written by the author of Dracula. Stoker argued that 'reticence,' which I might rephrase as 'restraint,' is the hallmark of fine art. Don't make it all blatant -- evoke feelings, rather than just showing or telling everything.

I'm not sure if I agree with all of Stoker's points, but it did make me think about my task as a would-be author: Good writers seduce the reader, rather than propositioning them; they flirt, with hints and subtle cues that lead us on, rather than exposing themselves.

Even if it's valuable to shock people at times, it benefits from a well-crafted set up.

[j. d. worthington]

Agreed. Again, it depends on the needs of the story in question. I'm a very big fan of hints, ambiguity, and subtlety (as evinced by the fact that my favorite writers in the "horror" genre are such people as Blackwood, Machen, Benson, Radcliffe -- yes, that Radcliffe -- etc., and I think the quintessential Edwardian ghostly tale would have to be "Thurnley Abbey", which almost unbelievably restrained). However ... as the man says, "for every thing there is a season", and there are times when being explicit to the point of assaulting the reader really is the best approach. As a writer, the challenge is to learn when to use what in this area; and the more versatile your arsenal, the better a writer you'll be.

[HappyHippo]

Originally Posted by Dr. Atomic

Just because I want to make sure I'm clear on the subject - I've never had a problem with sex in stories, and I've read numerous books where sex itself is integral to the plot. And, in many cases, so was a bit of graphic description, especially when it helps the reader learn more about the characters. I've just yet to encounter a plot -- particularly a hard sf story -- that benefited from really graphic descriptions of sex. As in, whole scenes that drift towards erotica in their levels of graphic description. They always seemed like, "And now we take a moment to watch the characters get laid! We'll return to the story after this voyeuristic break!"

...Clearly, I just haven't read the right books.

This has become a really stimulating discussion. (Sorry, had to say it...)

I agree! I've just posted this as one of my book turn-offs (pun unintended) in another thread. It's really intensely annoying to suddenly veer off the thread of a story just because today's audience seem to want more sex, more violence, or whatever.

With books, as with my taste in films, I'm a PG, maybe 12A kind of person. I don't mind reading books with sex, violence or bad language in them, but it never enhances the book for me. Example: Clive Barker. I've read three of his books, and given up on them now because I find them TOO disturbing - the sex is weird, the language foul, and the violence is sometimes horrific. I appreciate this is the genre he writes in, but I, personally, cannot handle it. Therefore, I now self-censor, and rarely read anything outside my comfort zone.

(I did pick up a fantasy book by Anne Rice at the library which said it was about sleeping beauty. The insides didn't really match the blurb on the back ... I suppose it's the other kind of 'fantasy'!)