# Fifty Shades of Grey



## Lilly Davidson (Aug 27, 2012)

Has anyone here read it? I wondered what the opinion was here. 

Personally I have *not* read it. Something really really puts me off - I am not exactly sure what. I am a stubborn person and don't like to follow the crowds. The fact that it is trumpeted as such a popular book, the cheapness and availability of it in the supermarket right in my face as I do my shopping. The way that women of every age seem to be loving it. The sheer publicity! 
Maybe one day I might read it. 

I have read so many articles and listened to discussions on radio 4 and TV about it so I_ feel_ like I _have _read it! Certain critics and writers have commented that it is not a well written book and is not likely to win any literary prizes. 

(Please do forgive me if anyone else has posted this very topic here, I could not find it).


----------



## cazann34 (Aug 27, 2012)

I like you haven't read it nor do I intend to for the same reasons. I remembered seeing it on Kindle - they were practically giving it away and now its a world wide hit. I find that curious. Is it all hype? 

I too would be interested to find out what others think.


----------



## Bloggsworth (Aug 27, 2012)

It was written, people buy it, people read it, the author is making money - More power to her elbow. It is probably infinitely more readable than _Finnigans Wake..._


----------



## JackKnife (Aug 27, 2012)

I read about 100 pages of the first book, going in and knowing how awful it would be. It was more of a dare than anything.

That said, I really don't understand how people can not only finish the books, but worship them. They're poorly written, extremely repetitive, and make me wonder if there was ever an editor involved in the process at all. If so, I'd hate to see how the books looked before that editor got to them.


----------



## squidtender (Aug 27, 2012)

I know half a dozen people who are reading it and they have several things in common: They don't read, they're not especially bright, and they're evenly split between unhappily married and unhappily single women.


----------



## Nemesis (Aug 27, 2012)

Sounds about right Squid ^^' I might pick it up, if I find it for free, and I'm desperate and lonely and feeling neglected.....


----------



## Sam (Aug 27, 2012)

It is the first book in the history of Amazon to have both 5,000 1-star and 5,000 5-star reviews. 

In my opinion, it's watered-down (that is to say, bad) writing for women who want a fantasy about the perfect man. I have no idea why a man would have any desire to read it.


----------



## Jeko (Aug 27, 2012)

Haven't read it. 

Won't read it.

It's already awful.


----------



## Jeko (Aug 27, 2012)

Sam: Only if they see their wife reading it.


----------



## Nemesis (Aug 27, 2012)

I would be shocked if you did lol


----------



## Jeko (Aug 27, 2012)

I've read one page of Twilight. 

How many Hail Marys should I do for that?

Not that I'm Catholic.

At all.


----------



## Nemesis (Aug 27, 2012)

oh! Blasphemy Cadence! 20 Hail Marys at least to atone for it. Glittery vampires -_- doesn't make a lick of sense.


----------



## Lilly Davidson (Aug 27, 2012)

squidtender said:


> I know half a dozen people who are reading it and they have several things in common: They don't read, they're not especially bright, and they're evenly split between unhappily married and unhappily single women.



That actually is accurate for what I have seen too. Those might well be the target audience!


----------



## Bachelorette (Aug 27, 2012)

I heard on AW that it was originally a Twilight fanfic that had been posted online, and it was so popular that stuff happened and Random House gave this woman a book deal, but she had to change it just enough, of course, so as not to be sued for copyright infringement.

That right there is reason enough to put as much space between myself and those books as is humanly possible.


----------



## JackKnife (Aug 27, 2012)

Bachelorette said:


> I heard on AW that it was originally a Twilight fanfic that had been posted online, and it was so popular that stuff happened and Random House gave this woman a book deal, but she had to change it just enough, of course, so as not to be sued for copyright infringement.
> 
> That right there is reason enough to put as much space between myself and those books as is humanly possible.


You heard correctly. 50 Shades was originally posted online as a Twilight fanfiction with Christian/Edward and Ana/Bella (Anabella!) meeting on more business-like terms. Also, no vampires, just S&M. When it was picked up by a publisher, she had to tweak it, of course. I believe it was originally posted as fanfic under the pen name 'Snowqueen Icedragons'. :cool2:


----------



## Lilly Davidson (Aug 27, 2012)

That does explain why my daughter and her friends love it so much. They are crazy about all these True Blood and Vampire books and DVD sets. None of that appeals at all to me.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Aug 27, 2012)

Okay, I have not read the whole book (just some of the free bit you can see on Google books), but I did notice one thing that I was wondering about. The MC is called Ana. There is constant back and forth between her and the guy about her eating habits (she doesn't eat because she's sad, aw, poor baby). Is there a not-so-subtle romanticization of anorexia here?


----------



## miller.4314 (Aug 27, 2012)

Being a male, I have no desire to read this book. It's obviously geared toward a female audience. However, I know many females who have read the books, so I know quite a bit about the story. For those females who have become obsessed, what is the appeal? Unless your a sadistic lover yourself, no part of these books seems worth the read.


----------



## Lilly Davidson (Aug 28, 2012)

Hi Miller.4314

A good point. To me, being in a happy stable marriage, sex has always been within the context of love and mutual respect. I have no wish to read about sadism and bondage etc, so I too feel no need read it. Yet so many female friends keep saying 'have you read it?'  It's almost like all of us *should* be reading it. 

I think if critics and readers had said it was a beautifully written literary masterpiece, I might then have been interested in it. But the impression so far is that it is far from that and is simply a lightweight best selling holiday read.


----------



## HKayG (Aug 28, 2012)

I've read it.

I'm not stupid nor am I unhappily single or in an unhappy marriage.

Sorry for bucking the trend.

For me it was getting sucked into the hype and I wanted to read it just to have an opinion on it.  After all, how can you have an opinion on a book you have not read? The other thing is, once i start a book I can't finish half way through. I have to read it till the end.

It's not particularly well written (in fact it's not at all well written...) and it's not a book I would recommend. But you do see an improvement in the books as they go on. However it is too repepetitive, the sex scenes do get boring and it is a little predictable.

However, it's different to anything that has ever been sold to this extent before. And all credit to her for writing a book (however bad it may be) that has made her more money than any of us could dream of.

Yes, it's a badly written book, but in terms of success I don't really see an argument.


----------



## Nemesis (Aug 28, 2012)

I find the idea very appealing, but I'll probably just go write my own (odds are even at my level of writing it'll be better written!)


----------



## Lilly Davidson (Aug 28, 2012)

Hi HKayG

That is fair enough, it is good to get an appraisal from you as someone who has read it. Indeed you have a valid point in that we cannot ever truly judge a book unless we have read it.


----------



## Bachelorette (Aug 29, 2012)

HKayG said:


> After all, how can you have an opinion on a book you have not read?



I agree to an extent. I read the first Twilight book for that very reason - I wanted to see if it was really as bad as everyone said it was. And, yes, it _was _that bad. I'll grant that fanfiction, in VERY RARE instances, can be well written. But we're talking about a fan fic of a book that's already terrible. The odds that it would be worth my time to read are so low, I see no reason to bother.

Also, I don't think Kyle was saying that _all _people who read 50 Shades are unintelligent, unhappy women - I think his point was that those are the types of people most likely to love the books and think they're wonderful.

Your point about reading the books first is largely valid. It's true there is a huge subsection of people, both male and female, who hate on Twilight and 50 Shades because it makes them feel cool. "Thank God I'm not THAT stupid," they think. It's just an excuse to feel superior to others.

When I worked at Borders, every single female employee there was obsessed with Twilight and Edward. I found it very puzzling, and a little annoying, but since I once, of my own free will, sat through EVERY SINGLE EPISODE of Dragonball Z to make my boyfriend-at-the-time happy, I felt that I was in no position to judge.


----------



## Artanyis (Aug 30, 2012)

Okay, JackKnife is correct, it was a fan fiction, and a bad fan fiction based off of a bad series of books.

My problem with Fifty Shades of Gray is that it paints BDSM and bondage in a really bad light.  There is a phrase in the community, SSC, Safe, Sane, and Consensual.  Bondage is about trust, not torture, if both parties don't enjoy it, you're doing it wrong. Fifty Shades of Gray is a story about a really bad BDSM relationship full of abuse, mental and physical.  I read part of it, and will probably go back and read the rest so I could start a breakdown of all the things that are wrong in it... maybe not, I really hate the book...

If you want to know more about what healthy BDSM is check out "Screw the Roses, Send me the Thorns." or for some healthy BDSM fiction, "Exit to Eden"

I don't know how many people here are part of this scene, I'm assuming not many by the responses listed here, or, since there is so much stigma about it, most aren't willing to post.  But if people keep publishing crap like Fifty Shades of Gray that outlines an abusive relationship as a normal BDSM relationship, things will only get worse, peoples preconceptions will continue to shift in the wrong direction, and more people will get hurt becuase they will not know what they are doing, or what is normal and healthy.


----------



## JackKnife (Aug 30, 2012)

I'm not into BDSM, but I'm not against it, and it's another of the major complaints I always heard about 50 Shades; that it was an unrealistic interpretation of the lifestyle bound to give a lot of people the wrong idea about it. Then again, though not technically quite so BDSM-based, Twilight was another series of books with an abusive relationship that masqueraded as 'true love' and fooled a lot of girls into thinking as much.


----------



## Artanyis (Aug 30, 2012)

> _Twilight was another series of books with an abusive relationship that  masqueraded as 'true love' and fooled a lot of girls into thinking as  much._


Exactly.  There is a blog that dissects Twilight, it is funny and very interesting, just google What Went Wrong, a Dissection of Twilight and you'll find it.


----------



## Artanyis (Sep 1, 2012)

So I'm giving another push through the first book, I'm about half way through... oh gods the writing is bad, Christian Grey is pretty much a sociopath, and a dick.  But at least he has a character, no matter how badly designed he is.  The main character, Ana, is dumb, flat, stupid, and boring is the entire character.  The write seems to believe that EVERYTHING is based of of sight / physical beauty, there is nothing else the world that matters.  I'm really trying not to give up, to actually finish, but it is so horribly badly written.

Now as far as the horrible betrayal of the BDSM Scene, yeah its bad.  The concept of the safe word is that it is different to each individual, it is a word that is so ingrained into your being that if something is going too far for you to handle safely mentally or physically you can say it without even having to think about it; mine is Egypt.  In the book Christian Grey (the dom) gives Ana (the sub) safe words to use.  So that she would have to actively think of the actual word, which requires higher cognitive function, which is not always available when you're being bombarded with so much stimulation.  No mention of a safe item yet.  They also make a point of say that the Sub can not say no to the master.  It doesn't work that way, you can still say no, you can always say no.  I should have it finished by the end of next week.  I'll say more...


----------



## Kyle R (Sep 1, 2012)

Just going to express my personal opinion here (and I know it may not be a popular one): In fiction, whatever can go wrong, should go wrong, and then some.

So, if there's a bondage scene with a safe word, then the person better forget the safe word.

If there's a relationship, it should be abusive. Or, somebody should cheat. Or, somebody should get hurt in a car accident.

If there's a person swimming in an ocean, there should be a man-eating shark that attacks.

(Speaking strictly in regards to fiction, that is. In real life any of those things would be terrible.)


So all the complaints about how Edward was an abusive boyfriend? I say, "So what? That makes good fiction." A boyfriend who says, 'Yes, dear. Whatever you want, dear' and gives her flowers every hour on the hour may be a nice boyfriend in real life, but not good for fiction.


Make him neurotic, obsessive, posessive, confrontational, a psychopath who's dangerous but too charming to resist. Make the protagonist follow him to the depths and abandon all logic and self-preservation. Throw her into the danger pit.

This is part of what haters dislike about those books, without seeming to understand that those traits are exactly what has made the author a best-seller--often in spite of less-than-stellar prose.


Most readers are sadomasichistic, though they want things to end up good in the end. They want to see characters suffering, be it emotionally, or physically. Ideally, both.

Is Christian Grey a jerk? If the book is going to be successful, he better be. Throw in the bad qualities with the good. That is why people keep reading, to see what will go wrong.

They want to be swept up in the: lust, sex, danger, _whatever_, while simultaneously being safe from it all. They want to experience the worst the author can come up with, and then, find out how the protagonist prevails.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Sep 1, 2012)

It's really not that different from a book by Danielle Steele or whatever bodice-ripper author. Heck, it's not that different from a guy reading Hustler. For some reason women aren't ashamed of it. Slightly better cover design, I guess.


----------



## Sam (Sep 2, 2012)

KyleColorado said:


> Just going to express my personal opinion here (and I know it may not be a popular one): In fiction, whatever can go wrong, should go wrong, and then some.
> 
> So, if there's a bondage scene with a safe word, then the person better forget the safe word.
> 
> ...



My problem with books like _Fifty Shades of Grey _and _Twilight _is not that the writing is mediocre, or the characters flat, or the story almost non-existent. It's that the author is using them to fulfil a fantasy. Edward Cullen is portrayed as the perfect man (he sparkles, for crying out loud) and Christian Grey is the best lover in the world and a self-made billionaire despite never lifting a finger during the entire novel. 

What makes a character in a novel relatable? Flaws, normality, and the will to keep getting back up when knocked down. Nobody is perfect. Everyone has bad days, makes mistakes, and everyone suffers in a different way. When you bring in a character who's perfect, it's not a story anymore. It's a fantasy. I don't want to read about Mr Christian 'Perfect' Grey who can make women orgasm without touching them. Yes, you read that correctly. No matter what he does, he ends up smelling like roses. Those characters are worthy of hate, not respect. It's like a jock in a clichéd high-school movie who goes around bragging about his conquests whilst beating the crap out of anyone he likes. You just want to punch a character like that in the nose. I can't relate to them; I don't _want _to relate to them. 

Clancy's Jack Ryan is a character _anyone _can relate to. A family man whose love for his country makes him join the CIA as a consultant. We see his fears, his flaws, his mistakes. And as a result we can root for this character. He's a good man who wants to do right by his country and his family. A man who suffers nightmares when a mission requires him to kill an enemy combatant. That's _real. _There's no fantasy there. No depiction as a perfect man who saves the world, pleasures his wife without touching her, and makes millions without lifting a finger. And, by the way, Clancy's _Clear and Present Danger _was the best-selling novel of the 1980s. And _what _a novel. You're not going to find a single sex scene when you read it, but I can guarantee you that you won't put it down.


----------



## Bachelorette (Sep 2, 2012)

KyleColorado said:


> Make him neurotic, obsessive, posessive, confrontational, a psychopath who's dangerous but *too charming to resist*.



This right here is where your argument falls apart regarding Edward, at least. There is NOTHING charming about him. He's too flat and uninteresting and one-dimensional. He just happens to be very good looking which for me, as a reader, is not enough.

I pretty much agree with what you said, though. Still, if you're going to have a female character abandon all reason and fall madly in love with a "psychopath," she too ought to be more than merely a hollow placeholder for reader self-insertion. We as readers have to care that this woman is in danger, and the writer does that by making her a PERSON. Bella, as she has been written, scarcely counts as a person.

Having said all that, I think the problem is that, as a writer myself, I'm more sensitive to and aware of what is "bad" writing. The average reader, though, just wants a fantasy. And admittedly, these books are that thing. It's kind of like how a trained musician can tell when someone is a little off-key, and is therefore irritated about it, but the average listener just likes the beat and the guitar solo, or something.


----------



## JimJanuary (Sep 2, 2012)

I haven't read _50 Shades,_ and probably never will (unless large sums of money are involved), but I have read an amusing review of it.
Katrina Lumsden (Charlotte, MI)'s review of Fifty Shades of Grey


----------



## Kaleidoscopic (Sep 3, 2012)

lasm said:


> Okay, I have not read the whole book (just some of the free bit you can see on Google books), but I did notice one thing that I was wondering about. The MC is called Ana. There is constant back and forth between her and the guy about her eating habits (she doesn't eat because she's sad, aw, poor baby). Is there a not-so-subtle romanticization of anorexia here?



And Christian's sister is named Mia. Ana and Mia. Anorexia and Bulimia.


----------



## JackKnife (Sep 3, 2012)

Kaleidoscopic said:


> Christian Grey is an abusive, controlling millionaire and Anastasia Steele (seriously, those are their names) is a naive 20-something old with no purpose in her life other than worshiping Christian Grey, complaining about EVERYTHING and discussing her 'inner goddess'.
> 
> But on the bright side, if that piece of shit can get such a huge fanbase at least we know that our books have a chance :icon_cheesygrin:


You know, _Twilight_ is the reason I started writing. I've always had ideas, but never had the confidence to believe they could go anywhere. I felt that, if something like _Twilight_ could achieve such success, why can't I? I've heard success in writing called 'winning the book lottery', though - it's probably got a lot to do with luck and finding the right publishing house.

Speaking of inner goddesses, though... (NSFW - language and content warning!)


----------



## TheWonderingNovice (Sep 3, 2012)

^ very clever Kaleidoscopic, but I do agree with your opinion on the books. For me I thought it was trying to be too erotic and I did not enjoy it. In America this book has been in the news so many times, one report says it has cause a mini-babyboom.


----------



## Kaleidoscopic (Sep 3, 2012)

JackKnife said:


> You know, _Twilight_ is the reason I started writing. I've always had ideas, but never had the confidence to believe they could go anywhere. I felt that, if something like _Twilight_ could achieve such success, why can't I? I've heard success in writing called 'winning the book lottery', though - it's probably got a lot to do with luck and finding the right publishing house.
> 
> Speaking of inner goddesses, though... (NSFW - language and content warning!)



While I have no doubt that luck plays a huge role in it, I've also heard that agents and publishers do legitimately want great stories to sell. And we know that there's an audience for them because there are just as many people who hate poorly written books as there are people who love them. Never doubt yourself 

Ahahahaha that video made my day! I must say, _my inner goddess is doing the merengue with some salsa moves._ :lol: Another direct quote from the book.


----------



## Kaleidoscopic (Sep 3, 2012)

TheWonderingNovice said:


> ^ very clever Kaleidoscopic, but I do agree with your opinion on the books. For me I thought it was trying to be too erotic and I did not enjoy it. In America this book has been in the news so many times, one report says it has cause a mini-babyboom.



Wow, a mini babyboom? It really bums me out that there are authors out there who write really hot, erotic stories and they get passed over for someone who steals characters and doesn't have enough respect for the written word to even have her novel edited. :disturbed:


----------



## TheWonderingNovice (Sep 3, 2012)

^ Your preaching to the choir.


----------



## JackKnife (Sep 3, 2012)

Actually, I'm pretty sure there must have been an editor. Any large publishing house gives you one before they put your work out to the world, don't they? If that's the case, it's pretty horrifying. You need to ask yourself what it looked like _before_ the editor even touched it.


----------



## Kyle R (Sep 3, 2012)

Bachelorette said:


> I pretty much agree with what you said, though. Still, if you're going to have a female character abandon all reason and fall madly in love with a "psychopath," she too ought to be more than merely a hollow placeholder for reader self-insertion. We as readers have to care that this woman is in danger, and the writer does that by making her a PERSON. Bella, as she has been written, scarcely counts as a person.



She's a standard Mary Sue, a female character with no flaws (or flaws that make her endearing), whom all the male characters are attracted to, that the readers can slip on like a disguise to live the romance and passion and excitement of the story vicariously.

Katniss Everdeen from _The Hunger Games_ is the same thing.

And yes, I personally don't like using Mary Sues (or "Marty Stus") in my writing, but I can see why they are so successful. For many readers, a Mary Sue is exactly what they are looking for.


I try, though it sometimes can be hard, not to hate the super popular books that some argue are full of bad writing. The writing may be bad, but the decisions made by the author are what got them so successful.

_Twilight_ and_ Shades of Grey_ both have something to teach you, for those willing to look. 

The trick is to look past the amateur writing and to identify the components that brought them success.

I don't think much of the argument of, "Ah, they are just crap and only stupid/immature people like them." Those who believe this are only seeing a fraction of the reality, and are missing the bigger picture.



There are key things that brought them fame and fortune. For writers seeking success, I recommend they put their egos aside for a moment and identify the things that worked for those authors, instead of automatically dismissing them because of the writing flaws.


----------



## jacqueline (Sep 3, 2012)

i would have never read this book except for a fellow coworker's comment: "i'm not a person who has ever read in their whole life and i just can't put it down". she really wanted someone to talk with about it. so i bought all three and read them this summer while laying out in the sun. that's pretty much my review - they are good beach books. you know, the mindless books you read while relaxing on the beach. she and most everyone else i know who read them were aghast and in awe(?) of the sexual things that happened in the books. pretty much past the first few encounters, i thought it was all the same stuff throughout three books. but i read them and they were ok. i lend them out, doubtful i would ever read them again. i do want to give the author a little bit of credit though. she accomplished getting thousands (millions??) of women to read a book. the coworker i talked about previously is now reading regularly and having a great time doing it. that's pretty daggone neat, i think.


----------



## Kyle R (Sep 3, 2012)

Sam W said:


> My problem with books like _Fifty Shades of Grey _and _Twilight _is not that the writing is mediocre, or the characters flat, or the story almost non-existent. It's that the author is using them to fulfil a fantasy. Edward Cullen is portrayed as the perfect man (he sparkles, for crying out loud) and Christian Grey is the best lover in the world and a self-made billionaire despite never lifting a finger during the entire novel.
> 
> What makes a character in a novel relatable? Flaws, normality, and the will to keep getting back up when knocked down. Nobody is perfect. Everyone has bad days, makes mistakes, and everyone suffers in a different way. When you bring in a character who's perfect, it's not a story anymore. It's a fantasy. I don't want to read about Mr Christian 'Perfect' Grey who can make women orgasm without touching them. Yes, you read that correctly. No matter what he does, he ends up smelling like roses.



I just saw this now, Sam. Sorry for missing it.

Yes, I agree with you that a character that struggles to overcome his or her own flaws is far superior to a perfect character. But I think you also described why many readers like those perfect characters: it's a fantasy.

A lot of romances are full of these archetypical male leads who are "perfect" in their own sort of way, and female readers gobble them up like popcorn. The most popular, in my opinion is the brooding bad boy from the wrongside of tracks, with a heart of gold. Think: that blonde kid from the show "The O.C.", or Edward, or the lead from "One Tree Hill", or or or.. (et cetera).

Me personally, I agree with your idea of what makes for a good character. But I also see why those overly-perfect male leads are so appealing.


----------



## Sam (Sep 3, 2012)

KyleColorado said:


> She's a standard Mary Sue, a female character with no flaws (or flaws that make her endearing), whom all the male characters are attracted to, that the readers can slip on like a disguise to live the romance and passion and excitement of the story vicariously.
> 
> Katniss Everdeen from _The Hunger Games_ is the same thing.
> 
> ...



In what way does _Fifty Shades of Grey _impact at all on my genre? 

If you'll allow me to be blunt, Kyle, what you're essentially saying is that the path to success is creating a novel so clichéd, so full of one-dimensional characters, so bereft of any discernible story as to be nothing more than the fantastical writings of a high-school girl; a novel whose main character is a farcical example of what a man should truly be. I would rather gather my novels, take them outside to be stacked in a pile, douse them with diesel and toss a match onto them, before I would ever consent to writing a story with 'perfect' characters created for nothing more than a cheap thrill. 

I don't like authors who live vicariously through their characters. I don't like characters whose utter lack of personality and ridiculous perfection make them similar to a beautiful girl used in a movie for her looks and nothing else. I want to relate to a character. I want to know that their fears and doubts are the same as mine. Because that's what makes readers root for people that don't even exist. Why would I root for a character who's a self-made billionaire, has no flaws, looks like an amalgamation of Brad Pitt and George Clooney, and is brilliant at everything he sets his hand to? Where is the likeability? The humanity? The little things which make him different than every other person walking the planet? Even the best-looking person in the world has off-days. Makes mistakes. Demonstrates the quality of being human. 

I might as well be reading a story about a robot.


----------



## jacqueline (Sep 3, 2012)

Sam W said:


> I don't like authors who live vicariously through their characters. I don't like characters whose utter lack of personality and ridiculous perfection make them similar to a beautiful girl used in a movie for her looks and nothing else. I want to relate to a character. I want to know that their fears and doubts are the same as mine. Because that's what makes readers root for people that don't even exist. Why would I root for a character who's a self-made billionaire, has no flaws, looks like an amalgamation of Brad Pitt and George Clooney, and is brilliant at everything he sets his hand to? Where is the likeability? The humanity? The little things which make him different than every other person walking the planet? Even the best-looking person in the world has off-days. Makes mistakes. Demonstrates the quality of being human.



I agree. The author created "vanilla" characters, if you will. 8)  Characters are the heart of the book and my favorite authors are ones who know how to create memorable characters. I feel those authors are going the distance to put out a good story. I don't think the Anastasia or Christian characters were given much thought by the author. They seem more like a bland Barbie Doll and Ken couple (well, the sex-rated version).


----------



## Kyle R (Sep 3, 2012)

Yes, it depends on the genre.

Generally those perfect characters are not protagonists, but romantic leads.

And yes, I personally am not a fan of perfect characters, just as many here are not, but they are undeniably popular. I can't point at them and denounce them when they are clearly the reason those authors are so successful.

It's easy to say Stephenie Meyer and E.L. James are doing something wrong. Sometimes I've caught myself believing that I can write better than them. It's a very common reaction. "I can do better than that!"

But hey: they are best-selling authors. They are clearly doing something right.

I personally have no intentions to write like them, but I feel an author needs to respect and acknowledge success when it exists, and, when possible, learn from it. There is always something that can be learned.


At least to me, the success of these novels has taught me that the "heartthrob" character is a valid one, at least in the romance market.


----------



## Bachelorette (Sep 3, 2012)

KyleColorado said:


> For many readers, a Mary Sue is exactly what they are looking for.



Right. That's what I said:



			
				Me said:
			
		

> The average reader, though, just wants a fantasy. And admittedly, these books are that thing.







> The writing may be bad, but the decisions made by the author are what got them so successful.



Granted. But not everyone is looking to be successful in that way, nor, as Sam pointed out, is everyone writing in that genre. Which you admit later on, I know, but I'm just reiterating the point.



> _Twilight_ and_ Shades of Grey_ both have something to teach you, for those willing to look.



Of course they do. I never said they didn't.



> I don't think much of the argument of, "Ah, they are just crap and only stupid/immature people like them."



Nor do I. In fact, the whole argument that only stupid/immature people like Twilight or whatever is grossly sexist. Why? Because stupid entertainment generally enjoyed by men (pro-wrestling; brainless action flicks) is considered "cool". Stupid entertainment generally enjoyed by women is considered just that: stupid. And the women who like it? Also stupid. And how many male fans of Twilight are there compared to female fans? So, you see why I take issue with that argument as well.

But I do think that at least some of the people who like Twilight, while perfectly intelligent, are simply unaware of what good writing is, either due to lack of variety in what they read, or a simple lack of caring. 

It's like me and my father. He's a real audiophile, and he can tell what headphones and devices produce excellent quality sound, and which ones don't. He can't stand to listen to his Styx and Tom Petty and Eddie Money through cheap headphones. 

Me, though, I have no problem picking up $10 ear buds at Wal-Mart and listening to my music with them, because I can't tell the difference, and don't care to (largely because I can't afford to start buying $80 headphones...). 

It's the same thing: if you're aware of the difference between good writing and bad, it will bother you; if you aren't, it won't.



> There are key things that brought them fame and fortune.



Right. It's the use of familiar archetypes, ones that are so ingrained in our collective subconscious that, if we happen to relate to or lust after a certain archetype, we won't care how they're presented. 

When I read Twilight, I understood completely how a lot of girls and women could relate to Bella, the "waif" archetype, insubstantial and Mary Sue-ish as she is. Heck, even I related to her at a few points in the story. I've never, though, understood the lust for the "bad boy" archetype - it just doesn't appeal to me personally, which is, admittedly, probably why I saw nothing charming about Edward.

But anyone can learn about character archetypes without having to sit through those books. There's a really good one called _The Complete Writer's Guide to Heroes and Heroines._ You can even invert the heroic archetypes as presented and make archetypical villains. It's a much, much better way to familiarize yourself with the device than reading Twilight. IMO.


----------



## Artanyis (Sep 5, 2012)

*EDIT: I have just gone back and read every ones posts, making sure I understood the points of view that have been put on here.  Now I want everyone who is following this to read this post.  You can skip the big paragraph if you want, but do not skip the last two.  Very simply, I can not condemn someone for bad writing, I don't really care, it's annoying, but ultimately unimportant.  The issue should not be how well it is written, or how well rounded and intricate the characters are, but how a book like this is perceived.  If you don't understand than read the rest of this post.*

I apparently missed a lot in the last few days.  It's not that the relationship is abusive or not, or that the characters are flat or neurotic or what not, it's that its being passed off as normal.  There are a lot of people who think that the relationship in twilight is healthy, that it is how a relationship should work.  Same thing in fifty shades of grey, it is being passed off as a normal BDSM relationship.  Which is not true.  There are parts that are correct, but there are a lot more that are wrong.  Books like this are being listed as romantic stories for young adults, young people who are still easy to influence.  And it is teaching them that it's alright to actually hurt someone in a BDSM relationship because it makes you feel good.  Which is not true, some of us like pain, to varying degrees, but it is a lot about intention.  I use this example a lot, because it is easier to relate too.  I have studied a lot of martial arts, and one of them is Russian Systema, in Systema we would do a drill every once in a while to help teach us how to properly take a punch, our instructor would have us relax and concentrate on breathing, then organ level punch us in the stomach, let us relax again and get our breathing right and do it again and again until we start to white out.  It hurts, a lot, but because his intentions were not malevolent, they were not intended to hurt us but to help us, to teach us, the pain was something that was just physical, like when you go for a long run and your legs burn, it's a good pain.  In fifty shades of grey the writer passes off that it is normal in a BDSM relationship for the dom to want to hurt the sub because he enjoys the pain it causes, he actually wants to hurt her, not cause a pain that is enjoyable.  This is not normal, that makes it unhealthy.  I do not care if writer intended this as an unhealthy relationship or not, that is unimportant, but the publishers are printing and advertising it to the wrong markets and people are being mislead by books like this as to what is normal and healthy.  I think I would be okay if at any point it was actually explained that the relationship here is not normal, that it is not healthy, and they are in it because both of them are messed up in the head.  But they don't, I'm almost through the first book and I am still waiting for Grey to slit Ana's throat.

I think I am explaining this badly I think.  In a nutshell, my problem is not with the story or writing.  Yes it is badly written, okay, makes it hard to read but unimportant.  What is important is to how the book, characters, and story are portrayed.  The publishers pass this off as normal, it is influencing people in a negative way and teaching people that abusive relationships are healthy.  I am just waiting for the news article that says someone beat their girlfriend to death in BDSM play because they read about it fifty shades of grey.

That is my problem with it, not the story, the way it is perceived, same with twilight for that matter, books like this show stalking as normal romantic behavior, that mental and physical abuse is ok if you love him / her.  That these ideas are being put into circulation to young adults and children and that there is no mention of the fact from the publisher or author that this is not normal.  I'm sorry, but anyone who says it is ok to strip a person of their right to say no to a situation is not human.

Just to reiterate, it is not acceptable to physically or mentally abuse someone becuase they love you.  It is not acceptable to stalk someone because you love them.  And it is not acceptable to tell people otherwise.


----------



## Sam (Sep 6, 2012)

Artanyis said:


> *EDIT: I have just gone back and read every ones posts, making sure I understood the points of view that have been put on here.  Now I want everyone who is following this to read this post.  You can skip the big paragraph if you want, but do not skip the last two.  Very simply, I can not condemn someone for bad writing, I don't really care, it's annoying, but ultimately unimportant.  The issue should not be how well it is written, or how well rounded and intricate the characters are, but how a book like this is perceived.  If you don't understand than read the rest of this post.*
> 
> I apparently missed a lot in the last few days.  It's not that the relationship is abusive or not, or that the characters are flat or neurotic or what not, it's that its being passed off as normal.  There are a lot of people who think that the relationship in twilight is healthy, that it is how a relationship should work.  Same thing in fifty shades of grey, it is being passed off as a normal BDSM relationship.  Which is not true.  There are parts that are correct, but there are a lot more that are wrong.  Books like this are being listed as romantic stories for young adults, young people who are still easy to influence.  And it is teaching them that it's alright to actually hurt someone in a BDSM relationship because it makes you feel good.  Which is not true, some of us like pain, to varying degrees, but it is a lot about intention.  I use this example a lot, because it is easier to relate too.  I have studied a lot of martial arts, and one of them is Russian Systema, in Systema we would do a drill every once in a while to help teach us how to properly take a punch, our instructor would have us relax and concentrate on breathing, then organ level punch us in the stomach, let us relax again and get our breathing right and do it again and again until we start to white out.  It hurts, a lot, but because his intentions were not malevolent, they were not intended to hurt us but to help us, to teach us, the pain was something that was just physical, like when you go for a long run and your legs burn, it's a good pain.  In fifty shades of grey the writer passes off that it is normal in a BDSM relationship for the dom to want to hurt the sub because he enjoys the pain it causes, he actually wants to hurt her, not cause a pain that is enjoyable.  This is not normal, that makes it unhealthy.  I do not care if writer intended this as an unhealthy relationship or not, that is unimportant, but the publishers are printing and advertising it to the wrong markets and people are being mislead by books like this as to what is normal and healthy.  I think I would be okay if at any point it was actually explained that the relationship here is not normal, that it is not healthy, and they are in it because both of them are messed up in the head.  But they don't, I'm almost through the first book and I am still waiting for Grey to slit Ana's throat.
> 
> ...



That's like saying you want to win a world championship with Ferrari but you don't care about the nuts and bolts of the car. That's what earns you a couple of vital seconds, whether it be in the pit lane, off the starting grid, or in the final straight. An author who doesn't care about being able to write a sound story devoid of elementary grammar mistakes, is an author who doesn't care about their reader(s). A good story written badly might keep teenage girls and middle-aged mothers content, but any reader who reads on a consistent basis is familiar with the difference between good and bad writing, and won't be swayed by fanciful stories designed to hide mediocre prose. 

That's another reason why _Fifty Shades of Grey _has over 5,000 1-star ratings on Amazon.


----------



## Whisper (Sep 6, 2012)

Sam W said:


> That's another reason why _Fifty Shades of Grey _has over 5,000 1-star ratings on Amazon.



And most of the 1-star reviews are better written then the book itself.

(I'm sad I know this)


----------



## Artanyis (Sep 6, 2012)

> That's like saying you want to win a world championship with Ferrari but  you don't care about the nuts and bolts of the car. That's what earns  you a couple of vital seconds, whether it be in the pit lane, off the  starting grid, or in the final straight. An author who doesn't care  about being able to write a sound story devoid of elementary grammar  mistakes, is an author who doesn't care about their reader(s). A good  story written badly might keep teenage girls and middle-aged mothers  content, but any reader who reads on a consistent basis is familiar with  the difference between good and bad writing, and won't be swayed by  fanciful stories designed to hide mediocre prose.



I think you have completely missed the point of my post.

I personally hate the bad writing in this book, it's atrocious.  But some people like sloppy easy to read flat writing... I'm just not one of them.  In my opinion, the style and level of writing in the book is semantics, people are going to disagree about it being good or not based on technical information.  No, Fifty Shades of Grey will never win an award for it's writing, but it doesn't have to to still be influential.  My point is that there is already a stigma against BDSM because of misconceptions and all this book does is expound and expand those misconceptions to the general public who know no different, furthering a bias and stigma against those of use who are part of that scene.

To use your racing analogy, say the sponsor of a racer, Ferrari, puts their driver in a brand new, untested vehicle, it goes really fast at first, with terrible fuel efficiency and bad handling, the car spins out, takes two or three more out with it and explodes in a giant fireball.  Someone uploads a video to the internet, 1 million people see your logo, and although the press is bad at first, someone finds a redeeming point, and people like seeing the carnage, now there are 20 million people who have seen your logo, they think this is normal and fine behavior, for a car to explode.  The influence is huge and probably helps Ferrari but gives people the wrong idea about the industry.

Yes, we all know about cars because they pervade our lives, but not everyone one knows about BDSM.  So some misconceptions at the beginning, getting blown out of proportion and sent around as the norm is going to have, probably, terrible consequences on the rest of us.

Do you understand the point I'm trying to make about the book?


----------



## Sam (Sep 6, 2012)

Artanyis said:


> I think you have completely missed the point of my post.
> 
> I personally hate the bad writing in this book, it's atrocious.  But some people like sloppy easy to read flat writing... I'm just not one of them.  In my opinion, the style and level of writing in the book is semantics, people are going to disagree about it being good or not based on technical information.  No, Fifty Shades of Grey will never win an award for it's writing, but it doesn't have to to still be influential.  My point is that there is already a stigma against BDSM because of misconceptions and all this book does is expound and expand those misconceptions to the general public who know no different, furthering a bias and stigma against those of use who are part of that scene.
> 
> ...



Sorry, yes, I'm with you now. 

It's a completely farcical reconstruction of BDSM. It's not about someone enjoy hurting someone else. BDSM is a relationship based on trust; you trust that the dominant party isn't going to inflict severe damage on you when you're at your most vulnerable. That's why most BDSM lairs use safety words for when it becomes a matter of life or death.


----------



## Artanyis (Sep 6, 2012)

Thank you, I am unfortunately soap boxing here.  I don't think I would have a problem with the book, past the bad writing, if it wasn't being passed of by everyone so easily as normal, if people understand that it is not a normal BDSM relationship and that this is 100% fiction through and through, I might even be ok with it.  But that is sadly not the case and it bugs me, probably a lot more than it should, that people are reading this and thinking that this is what a BDSM relationship looks like...


----------



## tepelus (Sep 6, 2012)

I agree with you, Artanyis, 100%. I've seen on Facebook how the women are raving about this book, praising how well-written it is, and I try so hard not to say anything at all, especially since I haven't read the book but have read excerpts and know from those that it is not a well-written book nor a book I have any interest in. Twilight was bad enough. I may not have read the book, but I have read the opinions of others having read it and so many reviews I feel like I know much of what it is about. When I asked these women what it was that they liked so much about these books, no one would answer me but one person and what she said blew my mind. What I know of the unhealthy relationship portrayed in this book and the sequels, I couldn't believe that the woman said she likes them because it is a fantasy that she wishes she could live. Really? You wish to have a relationship like this? I just don't get it. So that there kind of proves what Artanyis has said, but this woman is in her mid-30's, not her teens and twenties and should be able to make the distinction between a healthy relationship and one that isn't.


----------



## Kryptex (Sep 6, 2012)

I have not read the novel myself, I am unwilling to pay £3.90 for a book which has received very poor reviews, the quality is apparently dreadful & the way it is composed is also terrible. My source? My cousin who bought it and read it a few days ago. Her view was that it is nothing except jumped up drivel, a house-wifes fantasy about the way a man should treat her or something of the sort.

I refuse to purchase said book because it seems - it is nothing other than soft porn for the female side of the species.


----------



## Kyle R (Sep 6, 2012)

Artanyis said:


> It's not that the relationship is abusive or not, or that the characters are flat or neurotic or what not, it's that its being passed off as normal. There are a lot of people who think that the relationship in twilight is healthy, that it is how a relationship should work. *Same thing in fifty shades of grey, it is being passed off as a normal BDSM relationship. Which is not true. There are parts that are correct, but there are a lot more that are wrong.* *Books like this are being listed as romantic stories for young adults, young people who are still easy to influence*. And it is teaching them that it's alright to actually hurt someone in a BDSM relationship because it makes you feel good. In fifty shades of grey the writer passes off that it is normal in a BDSM relationship for the dom to want to hurt the sub because he enjoys the pain it causes, he actually wants to hurt her, not cause a pain that is enjoyable. This is not normal, that makes it unhealthy. I do not care if writer intended this as an unhealthy relationship or not, that is unimportant, but the publishers are printing and advertising it to the wrong markets and people are being mislead by books like this as to what is normal and healthy. I think I would be okay if at any point it was actually explained that the relationship here is not normal, that it is not healthy, and they are in it because both of them are messed up in the head. But they don't. . .



Hi Artanyis. I respect your point, but I don't fully agree with it.

I understand you don't want people to get the wrong idea about BDSM, but I don't consider it valid to blame the author for writing a relationship that doesn't fit _your_ notions of how a relationship should be. 

It is her book and her characters, and they can behave in any manner she wants them to. Especially when, as far as I know, this particular author made no claims to be representing any sort of lifestyle, other than the one she was imagining in her head. 

I just get a little tired of people attacking a book, as if the author holds some sort of responsibility to write it the way _they _feel it should be written.

I feel we as writers should be defending and celebrating the creative liberties of our fellow authors, not attacking them for it.


----------



## Sunny (Sep 6, 2012)

^^double like! ^^


----------



## JackKnife (Sep 6, 2012)

I don't dislike _Fifty_ or _Twilight_ for the way their characters interact or how twisted the relationships are. Twisted relationships in books, shows, movies, or anything are way more interesting to dissect than perfect ones. Every story needs strife - a central conflict to revolve around - or something out of the ordinary to appeal, but I don't think that's what either Stephenie Meyer or E. L. James were going for. All the same, this is what they've achieved, and I guess what I hate more than the poor writing is the fanbase who have come to believe either sort of abusive relationship is perfectly acceptable in real life. It bothers me that so many women in my life who I believed were a bit more intelligent than this buy into Edward or Christian as the perfect partner, despite the huge dangers present.


----------



## Artanyis (Sep 7, 2012)

Kyle, I have repeatedly stated that whether or not you like the story or the writing is not really important.  The book is fiction, the characters and events are what the writer intended to complete this work of fiction.  My problem is how the writer, and mostly the publishing company and it's fan following, are promoting it as normal, which it is not.  I do not dislike the book for it's incorrect depiction of BDSM, unhealthy relationships, or bad writing, I am not blaming the writer for creating a relationship that does not fit my views as normal, I am blaming them all for promoting it as normal.  For furthering a misconception that is based off of fiction and not fact.

I feel like I'm still not explaining this well...

Book = not important to me.
baseless preconceptions portrayed by the book and taken as fact by people = important to me.


----------



## Sam (Sep 7, 2012)

KyleColorado said:


> Hi Artanyis. I respect your point, but I don't fully agree with it.
> 
> I understand you don't want people to get the wrong idea about BDSM, but I don't consider it valid to blame the author for writing a relationship that doesn't fit _your_ notions of how a relationship should be.
> 
> ...



You aren't getting Artanyis' point, Kyle. It would be like writing an abusive relationship and the author making it blatantly clear that he felt it was his right to smack around his partner, and then four million women reading it and thinking, "Oh, so _my _partner smacking me around means he loves me!" 

It's a misappropriation of a BDSM relationship, and the fact that the author tries to pass it off as 'normal' within that world is even more pathetic. These people can't even do research, for crying out loud.


----------



## wyf (Sep 7, 2012)

Artanyis said:


> And it is teaching them that it's alright to actually hurt someone in a BDSM relationship because it makes you feel good.  Which is not true, some of us like pain, to varying degrees, but it is a lot about intention.
> 
> **snip**
> 
> Just to reiterate, it is not acceptable to physically or mentally abuse someone becuase they love you.  It is not acceptable to stalk someone because you love them.  And it is not acceptable to tell people otherwise.



I'm not sure what you're saying. Are you saying that all BDSM relationships are intrinsically bad, or only if they're non consensual. Having been in BDSM relationships I can tell you that they only really work because of love and trust. When you put your physical wellbeing in the hands of another, you have to trust them. Its a power exchange. And in aconsensual relationship between two adults, its up to them to set limits, however far off your moral scale they maybe, not for others to dictate. 

As for non-consensual play and stalking being bad, thats a given, isn't it?

50 shades is an ok book. But its a writers perception of BDSM, a work of fiction. People aren't going to beat their girlfriends to death after reading 50 shades any more than they'll attack prostitutes with chainsaws after reading American Psycho.

They may, though, if they're lucky, be tempted to experiment a bit more.


----------



## wyf (Sep 7, 2012)

Sam W said:


> It would be like writing an abusive relationship and the author making it blatantly clear that he felt it was his right to smack around his partner, and then four million women reading it and thinking, "Oh, so _my _partner smacking me around means he loves me!"



I dont think people are that stupid. Lets say I stab you. Do you think thats ok because you read about  a stabbing in a book?



Sam W said:


> It's a misappropriation of a BDSM relationship, and the fact that the author tries to pass it off as 'normal' within that world is even more pathetic. These people can't even do research, for crying out loud.



There are many more than 50 shades of 'normal' sam. But I agree about the research thing. It has several inaccuracies, But again, its fiction. Its one person's imaginings. Its not real, nor is it portrayed as being real.


----------



## wyf (Sep 7, 2012)

tepelus said:


> ...should be able to make the distinction between a healthy relationship and one that isn't.



Just because a relationship doesnt rely on sex with the lights out under the covers on a friday night does not make it unhealthy. Some of the most healthy and loving relationships I have known were between couples who chose to play master and slave.


----------



## JackKnife (Sep 7, 2012)

I don't think anyone's trying to say BDSM relationships are bad. In fact, quite the opposite - it's been established that these sorts of relationships happen quite frequently and are a matter of love and trust, which is not displayed in _Fifty_. Therein lies the problem; the misappropriation of a loving, trusting relationship that happens to lean on BDSM tendencies is perpetuated by everyone who reads it as 'exciting' and totally normal. The characters in this book are a classic abuse case, which would be fine if that's how this book was marketed and received, but it's not. People are saying this is how relationships ought to be, getting ideas about how a real BDSM relationship functions, and generally setting themselves up for very dangerous events in the future if they follow this line of thought.

No, that's not to say that everyone who reads this book is going to go out and find an intensely controlling psychopath to be their Christian Grey, but there are those who will, just as there are those impressionable folk who will look for their Edward Cullen out there, and that's pretty scary.


----------



## Artanyis (Sep 7, 2012)

> I'm not sure what you're saying. Are you saying that all BDSM relationships are intrinsically bad...


No, I enjoy a BDSM relationship with my girlfriend, more on the intention in a moment.


> 50 shades is an ok book. But its a writers perception of BDSM, a work of  fiction. People aren't going to beat their girlfriends to death after  reading 50 shades any more than they'll attack prostitutes with  chainsaws after reading American Psycho.


I love the example of American Psycho...


> They may, though, if they're lucky, be tempted to experiment a bit more.


That comes closer to my point, if they do experiment a bit with BDSM they should do it with a good understanding about safe play, not with an understanding that it means removing someones ability to consent.  People understand culturally that slapping someone with a chainsaw is bad, murder is not good...  but there is a stigma against talking about what happens in the bedroom, so people are less likely to do proper research or talk to people who know what they are doing; and this book perpetuates a notion that BDSM is about removing consent and about inflicting pain, which it is not, so it is propagating a misconception that could be dangerous when mixed with the social stigmas of our cultures.

I do not know if this is what E. L. James believes is a normal BDSM relationship, I went through her website and didn't find anything about her opinion on it.  Ultimately it doesn't matter because it is just a work of fiction.  But I would love it if she or her publisher were to actually acknowledge that this is not an example of a normal BDSM relationship.

Note: there are estimated 20 million copies sold, and considering that LOTS of people borrow books or buy them second hand or listen to audio versions or steal in a myriad of different ways currently available thanks to the internet, that 20 million is probably closer to 40 million... That's a lot of people who may be misunderstanding BDSM.



> I dont think people are that stupid. Lets say I stab you. Do you think thats ok because you read about  a stabbing in a book?


When you use examples that are too far removed from a situation it looses potency.  Lets bring your example closer to home, knife play.  Personally I do not enjoy it, my girlfriend was ruined to it when a previous lover of hers swore they knew what they were doing, and in fact did not, cutting her deeply leaving scars and causing actual pain.  In knife play it is *VERY* important to know what you are doing, know where the nerve clusters are, know how deep the skin is, where it is stretch to tightly and so on.  Knife play can be enjoyable if someone knows what they are doing, being able to cut just a little in the skin where it will heal without scars and is not likely to even bleed much, you have to know where major nerve clusters are to avoid them becuase if you hit a nerve cluster like the ones at the sides of your spine near the lumbar, you can cause excruciating pain and real permanent damage.  Lets say that in books 2 or 3 (which I have not read) they do some knife play.  Some couple reads it, decides they know what they are doing, and one of them presses to deeply, or splits a nerve cluster.  If you damage a major nerve cluster, it will never heal, you will be in pain for the rest of your life.  Or worse, one of them slips and nicks an artery.

Unfortunately that example plays more off of the need for proper research, and not off of my actual complaint.  But the point is still that the book is being propagated as a misrepresentation of BDSM.



> You aren't getting Artanyis' point, Kyle. It would be like writing an  abusive relationship and the author making it blatantly clear that he  felt it was his right to smack around his partner, and then four million  women reading it and thinking, "Oh, so _my _partner smacking me around means he loves me!"
> 
> It's a misappropriation of a BDSM relationship, and the fact that the  author tries to pass it off as 'normal' within that world is even more  pathetic. These people can't even do research, for crying out loud.


Thank you Sam, a tenth of the words and you hit the nail on the head.  My job tends to require me to explain complex issues to people with no backing in computer engineering, yet I can not seem to explain a simple concept about my opinion on the way a book is being promoted.



> I don't think anyone's trying to say BDSM relationships are bad. In  fact, quite the opposite - it's been established that these sorts of  relationships happen quite frequently and are a matter of love and  trust, which is not displayed in _Fifty_. Therein lies the problem;  the misappropriation of a loving, trusting relationship that happens to  lean on BDSM tendencies is perpetuated by everyone who reads it as  'exciting' and totally normal. The characters in this book are a classic  abuse case, which would be fine if that's how this book was marketed  and received, but it's not. People are saying this is how relationships  ought to be, getting ideas about how a real BDSM relationship functions,  and generally setting themselves up for very dangerous events in the  future if they follow this line of thought.
> 
> No, that's not to say that everyone who reads this book is going to go  out and find an intensely controlling psychopath to be their Christian  Grey, but there are those who will, just as there are those  impressionable folk who will look for their Edward Cullen out there, and  that's pretty scary.


Thank you, it seems everyone can communicate my opinion better than me


----------



## Kyle R (Sep 7, 2012)

Artanyis said:
			
		

> I do not dislike the book for it's incorrect depiction of BDSM, unhealthy relationships, or bad writing, I am not blaming the writer for creating a relationship that does not fit my views as normal, I am blaming them all for promoting it as normal*.*



From what I've seen, Christian Grey is described (on the jacket cover) as being "tortured" and "consumed by the need to control." He does not seem to be a portrayal of an ideal BDSM partner. Rather, he seems like a passionate and slightly dangerous young man whom the protagonist is seduced by.

Again, I am firm in my belief that a writer has the creative freedom to depict a relationship in any way he or she chooses. That includes depicting a BDSM relationship in a way that may not fit the definition of a healthy one. 

I know you are saying that you don't want people to get the wrong idea. And that's a noble standpoint for you to have, in my opinion. But I don't think this responsibility falls on the author's shoulders in this case.

Would you be happy if the BDSM relationship in this book were a healthy one? One that accurately depicts the mutual trust and love of a couple exploring their sexual desires?

Would it be the same story if that were the case? If Christian Grey were a nice, well-adjusted, respectful young man who treats Anastasia lovingly and gently, and within the "correct" boundaries of what you deem appropriate?


I suppose the question becomes: 

Is it required of the author to ensure her characters are engaging in a healthy and appropriate relationship?

I say, No. That's kind of the whole point of the book, isn't it? It's supposed to be sexy and romantic and wild and potentially dangerous.


I don't consider it a book about "BDSM." I view it as a book about Christian Grey and Anastasia. 

And just like people in the real world, their relationship may or may not follow the rules.


----------



## Sunny (Sep 7, 2012)

KyleColorado said:


> And just like people in the real world, their relationship may or may not follow the rules.


What? What rules? WHO makes these rules and why are they not handed out in pamphlets at my Dr's office?


----------



## jacqueline (Sep 7, 2012)

I love that this thread is going into a deeper thought on the subject of these books. I find the last several posts very interesting and enlightening. Artanyis, I do believe that there will be incidents where someone is taking something they know nothing about and going too far with it. I expect to see such a report(s) on the news before we start hearing about the Fifty Shades babyboom at the end of the year and next year. Also I expect with that, a lot of babies will be named Christian and Anastasia <<_sticks finger down throat and gags out, "oh it will TOTALLY happen!_>>
Although I have not experimented with BDSM, I have read such sexual content before. I do believe that beyond a certain surface entertainment with this lifestyle that it does require more knowledge of where one would be going with it or about it. The thought of irresponsibility in this area had never occurred to me. I wonder what conversations were had by the publisher's legal experts - certainly this would have been brought up. 
But I agree with KyleColorado also in saying an author should have the freedom to make the character as they wish. The line on that would be drawn by the publishers and the readers. We can say what we wish but the book is overwhelmingly popular. Part of writing a book and having it become a bestseller is to entertain and this author has done that ~ certainly for some more than others.


----------



## wyf (Sep 8, 2012)

Artanyis said:


> No, I enjoy a BDSM relationship with my girlfriend, more on the intention in a moment.
> 
> 
> That comes closer to my point, if they do experiment a bit with BDSM they should do it with a good understanding about safe play, not with an understanding that it means removing someones ability to consent.



I'm sorry but I HATE that. Thats the double standard of the morally righteous - "Its ok for me, I'm clever and adult, but we need to protect the people too stupid to tell finction from reality...

I don't mean to be personal, and I apologise iof you take it that way, but your argument stinks. 90% of us don't start out reading _the Dummy's Guide to BDSM_. We make it up as we go along. Or we see stuff on video, or read about it, hey, lets try this, but don't like the look of that... 

People are not going to sink into abusive relationships because they read a book. Give people a little credit for not being the cretins you assume them to be.


----------



## Sam (Sep 8, 2012)

Let me use an analogy from my genre, for clarity. 

Let's say I'm writing a story about a group of Navy SEALs. For anyone who has never done research on the SEALs, or knows little to nothing about them, they are quite possibly the greatest anti-terrorist unit in the history of modern warfare. Some of training these men do _just to get into the screening process_ is unbelievable. When (_if_) you become a Navy SEAL, you can attest to being the best of the best, because only the best get in. 

Now, let's say I exercise my creative liberty and write a story about a group of incompetent Navy SEALs, it sells 50 million copies, and everyone who has never read anything about the unit suddenly think all SEALs are a bunch of fools. Is that not a disservice to my reader? Am I not misappropriating the entire platoon of Navy SEALs, who have strained every sinew to be where they are? 

Can you not understand, then, the dangers of people misunderstanding a proper BDSM relationship? We owe it to our readers to make sure our stories are as authentic as they can be. When you make a character like Christian Grey, who's as authentic as a fanfic of _Twilight_, with the intention of using him as nothing more than a sexual fantasy for women, _and _have him butcher the entire principles of BDSM along the way, it's kind of hard to argue that authors should have creative liberty.


----------



## Kevin (Sep 8, 2012)

Sam W said:


> Let me use an analogy from my genre, for clarity.
> 
> Let's say I'm writing a story about a group of Navy SEALs. For anyone who has never done research on the SEALs, or knows little to nothing about them, they are quite possibly the greatest anti-terrorist unit in the history of modern warfare. Some of training these men do _just to get into the screening process_ is unbelievable. When (_if_) you become a Navy SEAL, you can attest to being the best of the best, because only the best get in.
> 
> ...


 I think it's up to the reader and perhaps the critics to come to their own conclusions about authenticity. Writers make things up. They 'get creative', fabricate; lie. Sometimes even with an agenda. What would you do, make it so that they're not allowed to? I just think that part of practicing freedom in a free society is taking chances, even if it means being exposed to fantasy.


----------



## Artanyis (Sep 8, 2012)

> I suppose the question becomes:
> Is it required of the author to ensure her characters are engaging in a healthy and appropriate relationship?
> I say, No. That's kind of the whole point of the book, isn't it? It's supposed to be sexy and romantic and wild and potentially dangerous.
> I don't consider it a book about "BDSM." I view it as a book about Christian Grey and Anastasia.
> And just like people in the real world, their relationship may or may not follow the rules.


Please reread my posts, kyle, I believe you are still misunderstanding me since you seem to be arguing a point that I have agreed with from the very beginning.  I have no problem with the book, I have no problem with how the book is written (past the bad grammar, improper use of words...) I have no problem with the portrayal of the characters, it is 100 percent, unequivocally unimportant to me at the moment.  The story is just fiction, one hundred percent, and that is what I would like people to understand.  That it is just fiction.  My problem is that the events, and actions, and concepts in the book are being promoted as normal.  Which they are not normal for a BDSM relationship.



> I'm sorry but I HATE that. Thats the double standard of the morally righteous - "Its ok for me, I'm clever and adult, but we need to protect the people too stupid to tell finction from reality...


You would not believe the number of people I run into who assume that BDSM is about just hurting people, that look at a book like fifty shades of grey and go "See! BDSM is about rape and abuse!"  The problem is because of the social stigma against BDSM that people don't have enough of a knowledge base to distinguish that the concepts in this book are just fiction, and not fact.  Yes, everyone realizes that is just a story about BDSM.  But the understanding of that as fiction ends there.  All to often do people not realize that the depiction of BDSM in this book is also fiction.  People are not stupid, nor should they be protected.  But they should not be given misconceptions and told that they are fact.



> I don't mean to be personal, and I apologise iof you take it that way, but your argument stinks. 90% of us don't start out reading the Dummy's Guide to BDSM. We make it up as we go along. Or we see stuff on video, or read about it, hey, lets try this, but don't like the look of that...


I'm sorry wyf, because what you just said means that you don't like my opinion that people should research what they are doing, that they should talk to people who already know about it.  It's not a double standard, I didn't just suddenly start tying up my girlfriend and having fun with floggers.  I was originally introduced to it by a previous lover.  We talked about it, she introduced me to others who gave me more information.  I did research online, hell, I went to a knot tying seminar in Norfolk of all places.  And I can almost 100% guarantee that if you got on fetlife or some similar board, that people would tell you the same thing, if you like what you read in fifty shades and want to try it, research first, understand that the concepts in the book are close, but skewed off center.  I am not saying that people shouldn't experiment, or that they are too stupid to try it, that is actually completely opposite to what I am saying, I want them to experiment, to try new things, to explore something different and fun, to break down the social stigma against talking about it in the open.  It's kind of like rock climbing, you wouldn't go rock climbing without at least looking up a list of equipment you needed on line.  Sure, you may scale a small face, maybe 20-30 feet, without training or equipment, but it's dangerous, any experienced climber would tell you to do some research, talk about what you want to try to climb, and get the right equipment first so that it can be a fun experience with as little risk as possible.
I am sorry that you think people should jump blindly into things that they don't know about instead of researching it first.  Not my opinion, but best of luck to you.



> People are not going to sink into abusive relationships because they read a book. Give people a little credit for not being the cretins you assume them to be.


I give them plenty of credit, I do not think that people will suddenly start smacking around their lover because they read fifty shades, you seem to take my argument and run it to the extremes and still miss the point.  I want people to understand that the concepts in the book are just fiction.

Let me try this another way,  would you say the sky is blue?  of course you would, you can look up and see the sky is blue, you were raised with people telling you the sky was blue.  You were raised with people telling you that that colour is blue.  Now, lets say you were born blind.  You have never seen the sky, you do not know what it looks like, you are told it's blue.  You grow up knowing that it is blue, because that is what you are told.

But what if no one ever talked about they sky.  What if you are blind, and have never seen the sky and have no knowledge or basis for colour?  Then someone told you the sky was purple.  You have no backing to argue otherwise, purple seems just as good as any other colour that you have never seen or talked about, yes, you may be skeptical that it is purple.  But you have nothing else to go on, so at the moment you must assume it is fact because you have no other referance.  So now, if another blind man asks you at some point, what colour is the sky, your only point of reference is purple, so that is what you say, and the misconception spreads because people don't talk about it openly.

So to reiterate: There is a stigma against talking about BDSM openly, or pretty much anything that happens in the bedroom, and suddenly someone says "BDSM is about inflicting pain and removing someones ability to consent" Because there is no reference to say otherwise, this is taken as fact.  And no, not everyone believes it, but there are plenty of very smart people who just don't have a reference to say otherwise.  And to be honest if 1% of the 40 million people who have read the book get the idea that it's about removing consent and inflicting pain, than the misconception has spread too far.

I have been arguing a single point, and repeating myself again and again for what, two weeks now?  I think I shall withdraw from this thread.  I will continue to follow it but I will probably not post again, there just doesn't seem to be much point since I say something and people continue to take a single line out of context and misconstrue my opinion on the book.

Honestly, the book is horribly written, the erotic scenes aren't even that hot, the amount of misused words is staggering, the grammar mistakes hurt my brain, and the repetitive phrasing is painful.  There was one spot, only one that I thought the writing was good in, it was one of the email conversations, if she had removed the overly repetitive "to:" and "from:" and dates and signatures, than it would have been excellent, becuase for once the conversation and description flowed and sounded natural, and for once in the entire book, I actually got into it.  But only that once.


----------



## Artanyis (Sep 8, 2012)

Actually, real quick, I want to try something to better represent my point.
Wyf, what do you do for a living?


----------



## Bachelorette (Sep 8, 2012)

Sam W said:


> Let me use an analogy from my genre, for clarity.
> 
> Let's say I'm writing a story about a group of Navy SEALs. For anyone who has never done research on the SEALs, or knows little to nothing about them, they are quite possibly the greatest anti-terrorist unit in the history of modern warfare. Some of training these men do _just to get into the screening process_ is unbelievable. When (_if_) you become a Navy SEAL, you can attest to being the best of the best, because only the best get in.
> 
> ...



I agree with you Sam, in theory, but there's a difference between your Navy Seal example and 50 Shades. The Navy SEALS, from what you're saying, are not incompetent fools, and likely never will be. Abusive BDSM relationships, on the other hand, really DO exist - and the people in them may very well consider them to be "normal" and "healthy". For all we know, E.L. James is in one herself, and that's why she chose to portray it that way.

Further, there are also some who would argue that ANY BDSM relationship, no matter how considerate and loving, is unhealthy, sick, and immoral. So, where exactly does one draw the line?

Having said that, I do see, in a way, the dangers of people viewing the BDSM relationship in 50 Shades as "normal", but ultimately I have to agree with Kyle:



> _Its ok for me, I'm clever and adult, but we need to protect the people too stupid to tell finction from reality..._



It seems to me that the people who would hate on BDSM because of 50 Shades are the type of people who would hate on it anyway. And the type of people who decide, "Wow, BDSM sounds like a lot of fun!!" based on 50 Shades would do well to look into the matter and see how it's really done before trying it out. The fact that many people probably won't is unfortunate, but it's their choice.

I guess I just think that we're treading a dangerous road when we say that someone "should" or "shouldn't" write about something in a certain way. For instance: a rape victim may well take offense to A Clockwork Orange, and the way Burgess appears to portray rape as something that Alex just eventually grows out of. Granted, the story is about free will, not rape, but it's still perfectly understandable that a rape victim may be offended by it. I somehow doubt, though, that anyone could rightfully argue that Burgess should never have written the story.


----------



## Kyle R (Sep 8, 2012)

Artanyis said:


> The story is just fiction, one hundred percent, and that is what I would like people to understand. That it is just fiction. My problem is that the events, and actions, and concepts in the book are being promoted as normal. Which they are not normal for a BDSM relationship.



I'll requote myself to save time :encouragement::

_I don't consider it a book about "BDSM." I view it as a book about Christian Grey and Anastasia.

And just like people in the real world, their relationship may or may not follow the rules._


----------



## wyf (Sep 10, 2012)

I couldn't agree more. Each relationship, BDSM or otherwise, evolves to suit the wants/needs of those involved. My own would certainly not fit any stereotypical pattern, but serves us very well.


----------



## shabazz (Sep 25, 2012)

I can't find the book in my country (Nigeria)but I will read from curiosity. The author is making millions, I want to learn how to write a bestselling book regardless of its content or style of writing. :grin:


----------



## Sam (Sep 25, 2012)

shabazz said:


> I can't find the book in my country (Nigeria)but I will read from curiosity. The author is making millions, I want to learn how to write a bestselling book regardless of its content or style of writing. :grin:



If there was a formula for writing a best-selling novel, everyone would have a best-selling novel. It doesn't work that way.


----------



## Kyle R (Sep 25, 2012)

Sam said:
			
		

> If there was a formula for writing a best-selling novel




First person + 

bad prose +

female Mary Sue protagonist + 

gorgeous male love interest who's dark and mysterious and brooding +

who grudgingly admits that he's enthralled with her for her Mary Sue-ness but + 

a villainous family/organization/monster tries to seperate the couple, or is after the Mary Sue + 

gorgeous male love interest fights to protect her + 

he gets hurt and now Mary Sue tries to protect/save him + 

Mary Sue fights the villainous family/organization/monster + 

Mary Sue almost loses but miraculously wins somehow + 

villainous family/organization/monster is chased off/destroyed/falls off a cliff + 

gorgeous male lead tells Mary Sue he loves her +

gorgeous male lead proposes to Mary Sue but +

another gorgeous male lead shows up and says he loves Mary Sue too +

Mary Sue feels conflicted and doesn't know what to do +

announcement of upcoming sequel =


Best-Seller plus hordes of screaming female teenage fans +

angry writers everywhere 

\\/


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Sep 25, 2012)

you forgot the most important parts, Kyle:

- Mary Sue gets to enjoy doing all those dirty things she secretly likes because an authoritative Daddy-figure told her she has to!
- Repressed women everywhere get to feel naughty and tingly
- it's all okay because it's lerve


----------



## Lilly Davidson (Sep 26, 2012)

Dear KyleColorado, 
Lol! The perfect formula to get rich quick...


----------



## DanesDarkLand (Sep 26, 2012)

Sister read the series and was disappointed in the extreme.  Harlequin Romance meets BDSM without a lot of knowledge of the Alt. lifestyle.  Those who lead a very sheltered life might find themselves with wide eyes, but if you wouldn't read a Harlequin, you wouldn't want to read this.  I also think that if you've watched the movie 9 1/2 weeks, you've read the books already.


----------

