Wednesday 24 August 2011
Boundaries
I always think of today's guest of honour, Angela Knight, as a bit of a trail blazer in the world of erotic romance, so the prospect of having her here today got me thinking of how the definition of romance had been pushed forward in recent years, and where the boundaries of erotic romance lie now - not just for publishers but for readers, and for writers.
Basically, I suppose, if it's legal and between consenting adults, anything goes in terms of the sexual acts indulged in, and the gender and number of partners involved. With one or two added no-nos that I personally find gross in any case! And I think that's what it comes down to for both readers and writers - within the field of erotic romance, the boundaries are personal. For example, I find it difficult to write about certain sexual acts with any conviction - such as SM related stuff, because I'm just not into pain! Which doens't mean I can't enjoy reading about it if it's well written by someone else - I can then see it through her eyes. So my reader limits are different from my writer limits :)
Other aspects, like bondage, play very close to dangerous issues like force which is never tolerable. And yet many women have fantasies about being tied up. Fantasy being the key here. You can live out your fantasies - whether they involve pain or chain! - if you trust your partner - or partners. Then there's no question of force or fear, and the fantasy can be fulfilled. In fact, I can share a bit of bondage fantasy with you tomorrow from my novella Freeing Al :)
But for today, what I really want to know is, do you have limits in what you're prepared to read or write in the realm of erotic romance? When - if ever! - does it go too far for you?
Marie
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The usual: incest, children, rape, etc. Although I have read the odd rape scene that is important to the sequence of events (Patricia Briggs had her heroine Mercy Thompson raped by a villain in one book).
ReplyDeleteCarol
I think where rape is concerned, the no-no is on rape as titillation, which is something of the problem of the old bodice-ripper historicals to modern readers. In those the heroine was frequently raped by the hero, whom she then loved to distraction!
ReplyDeleteFortunately, most of find the idea of a rapist hero somewhat mind-boggling today! I have heard the theory that those old "rape historicals" were a response to the sexual mores of the time: a heroine could only enjoy sex before marriage if she had no say in whether or not to do it :)
Marie