When spankings are safe, sane and consensual, they are tremendous fun. Even some non-spankos give a nod in our direction when they let themselves go.
But when they are not, they can be abusive, nasty and/or unpleasant. Even for the most ardent devotee of the profession.
One of my Second Life acquaintances told me of a real life experience when it turned out that her partner was a dyed in the wool sadist, and not only took her to the limits of her safe word, continued on long after reaching that line. Sadists don't seem to care about anything except the own personal gratification, so do take care your potential partner is not an out and out sadist - unless, of course, you wish to explore the darkest recesses of your partner's mind.
Now, I could give you a lecture on safe practices, but, as it happens, I once wrote a short story that spells it all out in a most excellent manner (advt.) So here is A Teaching Moment: a tale I hope that will amuse, erudite and perhaps even edify you.
Friday, June 20, 2014
Thursday, June 19, 2014
S is for Surprise Ending
As authors, we seem to delight in giving our readers an unexpected twists at the end of the tales we tell.
It probably starts with our early (non spanko) childhood efforts - where we pile on invention after invention to put our protagonist - often ourselves - into a wilder and wilder situation. I bet you, like me, resolved the impossibility we had created so used the twist in the tale in the manner of: "... and then I woke up." Gosh - we thought to ourselves - no one will spot that one coming.
But ask any English teacher of kids under the age of 13: they will tell you they see that at least once a semester if not once a week. It would seem we all do it, at least once, in our formative writing days.
This illustrates the nub of the problem - finding really new dramatic twists for short stories is getting almost impossibly hard in all genres. O. Henry alone is charged with using up about 50% of all realistic ironic endings. Fortunately, he was not into spanking faction
That does not help a great deal - for us authors of spanking fiction, the task of finding a novel ending is even harder. We are expected to turn out a tale that meets our reader's expectations that the set up for the spanking is realistic (no easy task), that the spanking will be realistically described (no easy task) and that the aftermath will be consistent with steps one and two. OK, if you have set up steps one and two in a workpersonlike manner, step three is relatively easy.
Step three is relatively easy until you decide it is to contain a twist in the tail. It doesn't have to - mind - if the aftermath is raw, unadorned slaking of lust, the need for a surprise ending has largely gone away. And often a simple acceptance of all that has gone before is quite OK. Not stunning, but very acceptable.
But if you do decide you want a surprise ending, I think you should take counsel that some surprise endings have been done so often that they now are virtually cliches. You might know the sort of thing: the school-girl is actually his adult wife. The assumed victim of the beating was really in charge the whole time. The unwilling victim finds the event has really been extremely rousing much to much mental confusion. If a beating for such a minor offense is warranted, just wait until the major offense is discovered. And so on.
There are new surprise endings waiting to be mined, and the mind games to unearth them are great fun.
But if you are new to writing spanking fiction, I would suggest you go and read a vast amount of spanking short stories by other authors - as due diligence to understand what the reading audience expects, and to make sure your "new" really astonishing twist hasn't been used so many times it causes a yawn rather than a shocked smile of congratulation.
When you do succeed in your quest for a new twist in the tail, I promise you your reading public will sure let you know.
It probably starts with our early (non spanko) childhood efforts - where we pile on invention after invention to put our protagonist - often ourselves - into a wilder and wilder situation. I bet you, like me, resolved the impossibility we had created so used the twist in the tale in the manner of: "... and then I woke up." Gosh - we thought to ourselves - no one will spot that one coming.
But ask any English teacher of kids under the age of 13: they will tell you they see that at least once a semester if not once a week. It would seem we all do it, at least once, in our formative writing days.
This illustrates the nub of the problem - finding really new dramatic twists for short stories is getting almost impossibly hard in all genres. O. Henry alone is charged with using up about 50% of all realistic ironic endings. Fortunately, he was not into spanking faction
That does not help a great deal - for us authors of spanking fiction, the task of finding a novel ending is even harder. We are expected to turn out a tale that meets our reader's expectations that the set up for the spanking is realistic (no easy task), that the spanking will be realistically described (no easy task) and that the aftermath will be consistent with steps one and two. OK, if you have set up steps one and two in a workpersonlike manner, step three is relatively easy.
Step three is relatively easy until you decide it is to contain a twist in the tail. It doesn't have to - mind - if the aftermath is raw, unadorned slaking of lust, the need for a surprise ending has largely gone away. And often a simple acceptance of all that has gone before is quite OK. Not stunning, but very acceptable.
But if you do decide you want a surprise ending, I think you should take counsel that some surprise endings have been done so often that they now are virtually cliches. You might know the sort of thing: the school-girl is actually his adult wife. The assumed victim of the beating was really in charge the whole time. The unwilling victim finds the event has really been extremely rousing much to much mental confusion. If a beating for such a minor offense is warranted, just wait until the major offense is discovered. And so on.
There are new surprise endings waiting to be mined, and the mind games to unearth them are great fun.
But if you are new to writing spanking fiction, I would suggest you go and read a vast amount of spanking short stories by other authors - as due diligence to understand what the reading audience expects, and to make sure your "new" really astonishing twist hasn't been used so many times it causes a yawn rather than a shocked smile of congratulation.
When you do succeed in your quest for a new twist in the tail, I promise you your reading public will sure let you know.
Wednesday, June 18, 2014
R is for Robo-spanker
Outside of the sci-fi world of eroticobots, a la "The Gleam in Her Eye", there really are mechanical devices designed to impart a series of blows to a penitent's bottom.
The grand-daddy is actually called "The Robo Spanker". If you want to investigate the machine, don't use Googol to find their web site- Googol is about the most anti-spanking search engine out there. (In fact, let's all boycott Google totally - that will teach them to be so anti-spanking).
The Robo spanker is a simple back and forth whacker - making the paddle its best implement - for unless the victim changes body position, all strokes will land pretty much on the same spot.
The video producers at Pain-4-Fem came up with their own contraption, that uses a rotating arm to deliver a cane or whip stroke. To overcome the possibility of all strokes landing on the same sport, with much whirring, the delivery arm rises and lowers different amounts between consecutive strokes. Even if you have not watched any of their videos, you might have come across a picture or two of their models on the photo-blogs. The precision of the closely packed parallel stripes is the hallmark of a bottom striped with such mechanical efficiency.
The Instamatic II is the latest addition to the market of automated spankers. It is controlled by a pc program, and absent partners could, conceivably, deliver precise punishments from long distances by simply changing the programs variables. A whole new variation on "the long arm of the law", if you will.
For my tale "The Punishment Program" I combined the Instamatic II programming with the whirring noises of the Pain-4-Fem device.
I suspect the inventors of such devices might have a bigger market than one would first think. Since 20% of those with our taste have never told another person about their liking, it suggests that there are several million potential buyers in the USA alone.
If we had some way of being more open about our foible, that would surely open up the number of consensual spankings while making substantial dents in the profits of the mechanical device manufacturers.
The grand-daddy is actually called "The Robo Spanker". If you want to investigate the machine, don't use Googol to find their web site- Googol is about the most anti-spanking search engine out there. (In fact, let's all boycott Google totally - that will teach them to be so anti-spanking).
The Robo spanker is a simple back and forth whacker - making the paddle its best implement - for unless the victim changes body position, all strokes will land pretty much on the same spot.
The video producers at Pain-4-Fem came up with their own contraption, that uses a rotating arm to deliver a cane or whip stroke. To overcome the possibility of all strokes landing on the same sport, with much whirring, the delivery arm rises and lowers different amounts between consecutive strokes. Even if you have not watched any of their videos, you might have come across a picture or two of their models on the photo-blogs. The precision of the closely packed parallel stripes is the hallmark of a bottom striped with such mechanical efficiency.
The Instamatic II is the latest addition to the market of automated spankers. It is controlled by a pc program, and absent partners could, conceivably, deliver precise punishments from long distances by simply changing the programs variables. A whole new variation on "the long arm of the law", if you will.
For my tale "The Punishment Program" I combined the Instamatic II programming with the whirring noises of the Pain-4-Fem device.
I suspect the inventors of such devices might have a bigger market than one would first think. Since 20% of those with our taste have never told another person about their liking, it suggests that there are several million potential buyers in the USA alone.
If we had some way of being more open about our foible, that would surely open up the number of consensual spankings while making substantial dents in the profits of the mechanical device manufacturers.
Tuesday, June 17, 2014
Q is for Question
Spankos are very secretive about their fondness for spankings. Some of us have never told anyone, not a single soul, about our liking - ever. And I am talking big numbers: 20% or more are that reticent.
When asked, Spankos keep it to themselves for they say in surveys that they think that those without our taste will look on us as perverts in need of medical treatment and that we are a danger to children
So, part of the LSF spanking survey allowed "vanilla" participants to answer a very short survey designed to answer the question "What do you really think of us?" The number of respondents to the survey who stated that they are of a vanilla persuasion is not large enough to be totally reliable. But since every single one answered some questions in an identical manner, we should look at them as setting some sort of trend.
Here are the questions, and responses, set to the vanilla community who took part:
So - while they might not understand us, every single one disagreed with the statement that we are perverts, that we need treatment and that we are a danger to children. And I personally take great comfort in that.
However, the number of respondents is quite small. If you can assist in getting the vanilla community to weigh in on the topic, you could always use this link. It is the same one that contains the spanking survey, but an early question splits the respondents to their own sections.
When asked, Spankos keep it to themselves for they say in surveys that they think that those without our taste will look on us as perverts in need of medical treatment and that we are a danger to children
So, part of the LSF spanking survey allowed "vanilla" participants to answer a very short survey designed to answer the question "What do you really think of us?" The number of respondents to the survey who stated that they are of a vanilla persuasion is not large enough to be totally reliable. But since every single one answered some questions in an identical manner, we should look at them as setting some sort of trend.
Here are the questions, and responses, set to the vanilla community who took part:
Are you male or female? Male 40.00% Female 53.33% Prefer not to say 6.67% How old are you? Under 30 26.67% Between 30 and 40 13.33% Between 40 and 50 33.33% Over 50 26.67% Were you spanked as a child? Never 13.33% Rarely 53.33% Often 20.00% Very often 13.33% If you had to make a guess, how many times do think Spankos got spanked when they were kids? Never 0.00% Rarely 35.71% Often 50.00% Very often 14.29% Again, if you had to make a guess, at what age do you think most Spankos first get fascinated by spankings? Before Puberty 20.00% At Puberty 26.67% Between puberty and 20 26.67% Between 20 - 40 6.67% Over the age of 40 0.00% No idea at all 20.00% In general, which of the following statements apply to spankos? I cannot understand them 7.14% They are very nice people 28.57% They are perverts 0.00% They need medical or psychiatric treatment 0.00% They are harmless 14.29% They are a danger to children 0.00% They are like everyone else 78.57% They are fun people 7.14% If it is consensual between adults, that's OK 57.14%
So - while they might not understand us, every single one disagreed with the statement that we are perverts, that we need treatment and that we are a danger to children. And I personally take great comfort in that.
However, the number of respondents is quite small. If you can assist in getting the vanilla community to weigh in on the topic, you could always use this link. It is the same one that contains the spanking survey, but an early question splits the respondents to their own sections.
P is for Pilmsoll
A plimsoll is a sort of old fashioned Gym shoe - with a flat, rubber sole.
Gosh, that is very interesting, Dave - but so what? I hear you ask.
According to some surveys, the plimsoll and its more modern cousin, the carpet slipper, are weapons of choice when it comes to whaling a partner's backside. It is a hangover from post-WW2 Britain, when the plimsoll was the main weapon of rank and file school teachers. The cane tended to be for more serious offenses, and in some schools restricted to the Headmaster/mistress and his/her deputy. So your class master, to keep order and decorum, would often rely on a plimsoll to aid in keeping order.
The thing about the plimsoll is that when used as a simple spanking implement - straight back and to like a hand or even a paddle - it is extremely mild indeed. It takes a great deal of effort to infuse a deeper shade of pink using one in this manner.
But in the hands of a master - or a mistress even - it can deliver a sting of exquisite sharpness and an instant band of deep red. It is all in the manner of delivery.
The expert does not swing backwards and forwards like a paddle. The delivery is a sweeping swipe, from right to left, across the buttocks so that the flat rubber has an effect similar to "Chinese Burn". And strokes delivered in this manner are extremely painful: jumping up and down from foot to foot while blinking back tears of disbelief from the impact of a single whack - that sort of extremely painful.
So - should you come across an old fashioned plimsoll, and add it to your collection - do take care how you actually use it. If your partner is expecting a set of playful pats and gets a blistered backside instead, you might have a lot of explaining to do.
For Safe, Sane and Consensual are our watchwords. A plimsoll might very unexpectedly find you on the wrong side of that dividing line.
Gosh, that is very interesting, Dave - but so what? I hear you ask.
According to some surveys, the plimsoll and its more modern cousin, the carpet slipper, are weapons of choice when it comes to whaling a partner's backside. It is a hangover from post-WW2 Britain, when the plimsoll was the main weapon of rank and file school teachers. The cane tended to be for more serious offenses, and in some schools restricted to the Headmaster/mistress and his/her deputy. So your class master, to keep order and decorum, would often rely on a plimsoll to aid in keeping order.
The thing about the plimsoll is that when used as a simple spanking implement - straight back and to like a hand or even a paddle - it is extremely mild indeed. It takes a great deal of effort to infuse a deeper shade of pink using one in this manner.
But in the hands of a master - or a mistress even - it can deliver a sting of exquisite sharpness and an instant band of deep red. It is all in the manner of delivery.
The expert does not swing backwards and forwards like a paddle. The delivery is a sweeping swipe, from right to left, across the buttocks so that the flat rubber has an effect similar to "Chinese Burn". And strokes delivered in this manner are extremely painful: jumping up and down from foot to foot while blinking back tears of disbelief from the impact of a single whack - that sort of extremely painful.
So - should you come across an old fashioned plimsoll, and add it to your collection - do take care how you actually use it. If your partner is expecting a set of playful pats and gets a blistered backside instead, you might have a lot of explaining to do.
For Safe, Sane and Consensual are our watchwords. A plimsoll might very unexpectedly find you on the wrong side of that dividing line.
Monday, June 16, 2014
O is for Over The Knee
I haven't looked, but I would not be surprised if the majority of my fellow A-Z bloggers chose Over The Knee for their letter O.
Over the knee spankings have a special niche in our style of life. I suspect that it is the most popular real life spanking method: the intimacy of close body contact, the stimulation of bare hand on bare bottom and the sheer unscripted spontaneity of it all makes for a delightful experience. And a rather special form of foreplay.
But as spanking authors, such instant fun makes it a method of spanking that seldom turns up in our works of fiction. Those bloggers who recount their real life spanking adventures often relate over the knee sessions with their partners: but those who specialize in spanking fiction tend to shy away from it.
This possibly because spanking erotica lends itself best to the ritual and the sting that comes from some dreaded implement, not from a quick romp around the bed covers.
A real life OTK can last for ages and ages: gentle slaps that arouse a pinkness slowly and bringing a deep personal satisfaction: trying to capture such a session in print would involve much repetition. The real life experience does not lend itself to prose, for constant repetition - on the page - is more likely to bore than to titillate.
With an over the knee spanking, there is no lengthy anticipation, no formal submission to accept the coming ordeal, no bondage, no whips, no chains. Props that make fiction more intense, even if rarely - if never - part of one's actual bedroom activity.
So we have what must be the spanko author's greatest enigma: the most enjoyable real life spankings are the very worst for including in spanking fiction.
Which really is very curious, don't you think?
Over the knee spankings have a special niche in our style of life. I suspect that it is the most popular real life spanking method: the intimacy of close body contact, the stimulation of bare hand on bare bottom and the sheer unscripted spontaneity of it all makes for a delightful experience. And a rather special form of foreplay.
But as spanking authors, such instant fun makes it a method of spanking that seldom turns up in our works of fiction. Those bloggers who recount their real life spanking adventures often relate over the knee sessions with their partners: but those who specialize in spanking fiction tend to shy away from it.
This possibly because spanking erotica lends itself best to the ritual and the sting that comes from some dreaded implement, not from a quick romp around the bed covers.
A real life OTK can last for ages and ages: gentle slaps that arouse a pinkness slowly and bringing a deep personal satisfaction: trying to capture such a session in print would involve much repetition. The real life experience does not lend itself to prose, for constant repetition - on the page - is more likely to bore than to titillate.
With an over the knee spanking, there is no lengthy anticipation, no formal submission to accept the coming ordeal, no bondage, no whips, no chains. Props that make fiction more intense, even if rarely - if never - part of one's actual bedroom activity.
So we have what must be the spanko author's greatest enigma: the most enjoyable real life spankings are the very worst for including in spanking fiction.
Which really is very curious, don't you think?
Sunday, June 15, 2014
N is for Narrative
Writing conversations can be tricky - and their are a number of points of style and usage you should keep in mind.
The first is getting the text to read like the spoken word sounds. "I have not." might look OK, but "I haven't" sounds better. Routinely search your text to turn 'I will' into 'I'll' and so on. 'Can't' might not be a proper word in the purist's lexicon, but in narrative it is far superior to 'cannot'.
Secondly, beware of using dialogue to tell the reader what the protagonists already know. I shall make up a bad example so you know what to avoid: "Hello Samantha, my wife of 25 stormy years. Are you still doubting the wisdom of taking that management position when other better qualified candidates now have to report to you?" OK - a bit over the top, but we all fall into the trap of getting people to tell each other things they both know to fill the reader in on what it is going on. It often works well - just make sure it works well when you actually use the technique.
The way we write dialogue has changed over the years. Again, I'll make up a piece in the style that was in vogue in the 1930's and 40's:
The above exchange could, nowadays, be written as:
I don't offer the second version as a masterpiece of literaly style: it is just a case study to show the differences between the old way and the new.
However, sometimes you simply have to have a "he said" or similar, just to remind the reader where we are in the to and fro of an exchange of ideas when it is not blindingly obvious who is saying what. And when we have a three-way, or more, dialogue, we are simply forced to identify each speaker in turn. But evern then do try to avoid the adjectives if you can, If you want to be in the modern style, that is. And even the modern fashion will change over time: another good reason for reading the works of other authors.
Do take very good care if you write historical pieces of a serious nature. I once had a Cromwellian soldier say "I don't know". You would not believe how many contacted me to say that one of
Cromwell's troops could not have possibly said that. "I know not" was the syntax of the day and "I don't know" did not evolve until a century or more later. If you want your dialog to ring true to all readers, you need do your homework first. There is a huge army of linguist purists out there.
Finally, the best advice I can give is read your dialogue aloud - yes, really - read it aloud (but out of the earshot of others). You will quickly spot verbalizations thatt do not right ture. And that is about 95% of the battle.
The first is getting the text to read like the spoken word sounds. "I have not." might look OK, but "I haven't" sounds better. Routinely search your text to turn 'I will' into 'I'll' and so on. 'Can't' might not be a proper word in the purist's lexicon, but in narrative it is far superior to 'cannot'.
Secondly, beware of using dialogue to tell the reader what the protagonists already know. I shall make up a bad example so you know what to avoid: "Hello Samantha, my wife of 25 stormy years. Are you still doubting the wisdom of taking that management position when other better qualified candidates now have to report to you?" OK - a bit over the top, but we all fall into the trap of getting people to tell each other things they both know to fill the reader in on what it is going on. It often works well - just make sure it works well when you actually use the technique.
The way we write dialogue has changed over the years. Again, I'll make up a piece in the style that was in vogue in the 1930's and 40's:
"Are you angry with me?" Samantha asked nervously.
"I am absolutely furious with you!" David snarled contemptuously.
"Oh. You are not going to beat me?" she whispered piously.
"I shall cut you to shreds!" he roared angrily.The new style is to cut out all words that could be synonyms with "said" and to cut out all those -ly style adjectives. And, if it helps move the plot forwards, to give some descriptive text so that the reader can work out the emotion for himself or herself.
The above exchange could, nowadays, be written as:
"Are you angry with me?" Samantha pressed herself against the chair back in front of her, and tried to keep the tremor in her leg in check.
"I'm absolutely furious with you!" David tore the offending letter in half, smashed it into a tightly packed ball and flung it into the fireplace.
"Oh. You're not going to beat me ,,," Words said in a hushed whisper, so quiet he was not supposed to hear them.
.He stood up, strode across to the mantel and picked up the riding crop. He turned and faced her. "Beat you? I'm going cut your hide to shreds for this."
I don't offer the second version as a masterpiece of literaly style: it is just a case study to show the differences between the old way and the new.
However, sometimes you simply have to have a "he said" or similar, just to remind the reader where we are in the to and fro of an exchange of ideas when it is not blindingly obvious who is saying what. And when we have a three-way, or more, dialogue, we are simply forced to identify each speaker in turn. But evern then do try to avoid the adjectives if you can, If you want to be in the modern style, that is. And even the modern fashion will change over time: another good reason for reading the works of other authors.
Do take very good care if you write historical pieces of a serious nature. I once had a Cromwellian soldier say "I don't know". You would not believe how many contacted me to say that one of
Cromwell's troops could not have possibly said that. "I know not" was the syntax of the day and "I don't know" did not evolve until a century or more later. If you want your dialog to ring true to all readers, you need do your homework first. There is a huge army of linguist purists out there.
Finally, the best advice I can give is read your dialogue aloud - yes, really - read it aloud (but out of the earshot of others). You will quickly spot verbalizations thatt do not right ture. And that is about 95% of the battle.
.
Friday, June 13, 2014
M is for McLintock
The film McLintock bought to the big screen a truly authentic spanking scene (and one faked one as well).
When John Wayne's character (George Washington McLintock) whaled Maureen O'Hara's rump with a small flat shovel, he really did spank her. Maureen reported that it could not have been any other way, and that her butt was "black and blue" for more than two weeks after. Well, it was a Western with "Taming of the Shrew" overtones - Maureen's character was even named Kate.
And when Maggie Gyllenhaal got spanked in Secretary, she also agreed to take a real walloping rather than fake it. What she had not allowed for was that by the time the shoot was over, the scene had been shot 15 times (from various angles) and she found that her rump got steadfastly more sore as the day wore on.
Jenny Maxwell always said that her spanking at the hands of Elvis Presley - In blue Hawaii - really hurt : her dress was wet from just leaving the sea which made the slaps sting more - but her co-star was extremely reticent on how much effort he had put into it.
Over at the other extreme of on-screen spankings, Keira Knightly reportedly had to have a couple of ounces of booze just to be able to have a camera record someone pretending to belt her bottom. It would not have been possible for her to stand the emotional nightmare of pretending to like be spanked without the prop of alcohol to lessen the trauma. (Do I detect a hint of "the lady dost protest too much" in her publicity?)
But, the truth be known, Keira's position is more common in film land than we spankos like to pretend is the case. Helena did not actually feel a single swat, despite her pretty tears and yelps in Lady Jane. Holy Aird did not get caned or beaten with a sjambok in Happy Valley - despite being cast in other movies that had her on the wrong end of a thrashing or two.
Indeed, a number of directors faced with spanking action in a script take the easy way out, and have it off-screen (but within ear shot) so they can be true to the script without having to risk any real bruising taking place. The belting Brook Shields was scripted to get in Pretty Baby was as savage as anything ever portrayed: the strap tore the seat out her night dress. Having the deed done in a closed door shed, and allowing her to defiantly cry "It didn't hurt at all!" after it was all over, softened everything down and avoided a long drawn out battle with the censors.
I personally thing main stream movies would improve markedly if spanko script writers were allowed to add more plausible dialogue, and genuine spanko actresses found to fill the more important roles.
I still cannot get over that we saw a double in Nymphomaniac, and that it was not really Charlotte Gainsborough's bottom that was getting thoroughly slapped with a riding crop. We really need to take action if we are going to put an end to all this Tommy-rot. And I am reasonably certain that the Duke would be on our side. Let's see if McLintock can still ride the range.
When John Wayne's character (George Washington McLintock) whaled Maureen O'Hara's rump with a small flat shovel, he really did spank her. Maureen reported that it could not have been any other way, and that her butt was "black and blue" for more than two weeks after. Well, it was a Western with "Taming of the Shrew" overtones - Maureen's character was even named Kate.
And when Maggie Gyllenhaal got spanked in Secretary, she also agreed to take a real walloping rather than fake it. What she had not allowed for was that by the time the shoot was over, the scene had been shot 15 times (from various angles) and she found that her rump got steadfastly more sore as the day wore on.
Jenny Maxwell always said that her spanking at the hands of Elvis Presley - In blue Hawaii - really hurt : her dress was wet from just leaving the sea which made the slaps sting more - but her co-star was extremely reticent on how much effort he had put into it.
Over at the other extreme of on-screen spankings, Keira Knightly reportedly had to have a couple of ounces of booze just to be able to have a camera record someone pretending to belt her bottom. It would not have been possible for her to stand the emotional nightmare of pretending to like be spanked without the prop of alcohol to lessen the trauma. (Do I detect a hint of "the lady dost protest too much" in her publicity?)
But, the truth be known, Keira's position is more common in film land than we spankos like to pretend is the case. Helena did not actually feel a single swat, despite her pretty tears and yelps in Lady Jane. Holy Aird did not get caned or beaten with a sjambok in Happy Valley - despite being cast in other movies that had her on the wrong end of a thrashing or two.
Indeed, a number of directors faced with spanking action in a script take the easy way out, and have it off-screen (but within ear shot) so they can be true to the script without having to risk any real bruising taking place. The belting Brook Shields was scripted to get in Pretty Baby was as savage as anything ever portrayed: the strap tore the seat out her night dress. Having the deed done in a closed door shed, and allowing her to defiantly cry "It didn't hurt at all!" after it was all over, softened everything down and avoided a long drawn out battle with the censors.
I personally thing main stream movies would improve markedly if spanko script writers were allowed to add more plausible dialogue, and genuine spanko actresses found to fill the more important roles.
I still cannot get over that we saw a double in Nymphomaniac, and that it was not really Charlotte Gainsborough's bottom that was getting thoroughly slapped with a riding crop. We really need to take action if we are going to put an end to all this Tommy-rot. And I am reasonably certain that the Duke would be on our side. Let's see if McLintock can still ride the range.
L is for Lust
Spanking is one of the greatest aphrodisiacs ever discovered - well, at least for us spankos it is.
And we have contemplated more than once that the standard base plot of our style of fiction is set up, execution, aftermath. All our concern about the set up is that it is believable, and the execution is that the pale moons turn to the exact shade of crimson that denotes perfectly cooked buns.
The aftermath can be as un-erotic as corner time (for those who do not find corner time to be a turn on), as simple as quiet contemplation, or the onset of wild, un-abandoned lust of a heady and bodice ripping nature.
If you have not been down this route before, you have to make an early decision as to which style of erotica you are going to stay with. If your early stuff is gentile euphemisms and then you suddenly unleash a stream of stream of conscious dirty-talk on your audience, you will really tick them off. And those who revel in s.o.c. dirty talk have long dismissed you as an author of interest: so even that group will not make good the mass exodus of readers you have just lost.
I suggest that in this specific area you do actually write for yourself: even though everywhere else I have counseled you to put your audience first. For, putting this as delicately as I can - if you are personally uncomfortable when presented with a string of four lettered cuss words, you will never be able to write them with any degree of ease. And it will show through.
On the other hand, if "she felt her whole body strain in expectation of him taking her as he wanted..." leaves you squirming - then don't write that sort of stuff!
When writing the spanko part of your story, you have an audience who share a very significant trait with you: but when you branch off into erotica, you have as many different potential audiences as they are ways of describing how two people satiate the sexual desires.
There are, at base, three different tracks. Polite euphemisms, clinical descriptions, wild abandon descriptions. The first does not directly mention body parts by namee, the second uses the "correct" medical terminology for them, and the third makes use of raw and bawdy language to paint the picture.
Each will work very effectively for some readers, and not for others. So once you decide to indulge in a spot of purple prose, pick the shade you like and carry with you those readers who have the same taste as you. Each to their own, as they say elsewhere about something completely different.
And we have contemplated more than once that the standard base plot of our style of fiction is set up, execution, aftermath. All our concern about the set up is that it is believable, and the execution is that the pale moons turn to the exact shade of crimson that denotes perfectly cooked buns.
The aftermath can be as un-erotic as corner time (for those who do not find corner time to be a turn on), as simple as quiet contemplation, or the onset of wild, un-abandoned lust of a heady and bodice ripping nature.
If you have not been down this route before, you have to make an early decision as to which style of erotica you are going to stay with. If your early stuff is gentile euphemisms and then you suddenly unleash a stream of stream of conscious dirty-talk on your audience, you will really tick them off. And those who revel in s.o.c. dirty talk have long dismissed you as an author of interest: so even that group will not make good the mass exodus of readers you have just lost.
I suggest that in this specific area you do actually write for yourself: even though everywhere else I have counseled you to put your audience first. For, putting this as delicately as I can - if you are personally uncomfortable when presented with a string of four lettered cuss words, you will never be able to write them with any degree of ease. And it will show through.
On the other hand, if "she felt her whole body strain in expectation of him taking her as he wanted..." leaves you squirming - then don't write that sort of stuff!
When writing the spanko part of your story, you have an audience who share a very significant trait with you: but when you branch off into erotica, you have as many different potential audiences as they are ways of describing how two people satiate the sexual desires.
There are, at base, three different tracks. Polite euphemisms, clinical descriptions, wild abandon descriptions. The first does not directly mention body parts by namee, the second uses the "correct" medical terminology for them, and the third makes use of raw and bawdy language to paint the picture.
Each will work very effectively for some readers, and not for others. So once you decide to indulge in a spot of purple prose, pick the shade you like and carry with you those readers who have the same taste as you. Each to their own, as they say elsewhere about something completely different.
Wednesday, June 11, 2014
K is for Kindle
By far the greatest retailer of e-books is Amazon by way of its Kindle operation.
And you should always consider self-publishing on Kindle - for there is no charge to do so and you get a royalty for every copy purchased by the public at large.
There are some traps to avoid.
If you do not want, or cannot afford, professional editing of your draft manuscript, you will have to turn your .doct into an old fashioned .doc and make it fit for e-publishing. This can be a lengthy process, depending upon how many e-publishing formatting rules you unwittingly broke while churning out that draft. But your helpful e-publisher might be able to help when you load your files: auto text checking takes place.
The Kindle automatic text vetting system does not pick up very much more than spelling mistakes. You might consider setting up a Smashwords account (it is free) and using their auto vetter to eliminate all major format errors. Newbie authors love indenting lines with the tab key and separating paragraphs with the enter key: both techniques tell some publishing systems to do odd things with the format. Smashwords makes you take them all out - every single one - so that your text is readable on all devices. The first time takes so long you make sure that future works enter into the system far more cleaner.
Kindle insists that you only have one account with them. And each account can only have one bank account to receive the royalties you earn. And you are not supposed to share your account details with any third party: all in all it is very tricky to have a partnership unless you, and they, turn a blind eye. An account has to have a unique email address, a unique bank account and a unique tax id in order for it to be unique. Creative people have found ways to provide all three, to the complete satisfaction of all concerned.
Kindle will offer you special deals in exchange for having exclusive rights to publish your book, each deal being a full 90 days with no time off for good behavior. And this is really simple math: if you are only using Kindle, you would be mad not to take the special offer. And if you have multiple outlets, you should totally avoid it: you might get some extra cash from Amazon, but will have to give up all other book sales by way of compensation.
When it comes setting a price for your work, there are some boundaries you should be aware of. Kindle is happy with works between $1.99 and $9.99 - they will give you 70% of the take as a royalty. But between $9.99 and $200.00 you can only have 35%. Over $200.00 and you are back at 70% again. So unless you have a really perverse trust in your best lucky number, make he price $9.99 or less - or over $19.98 Once the price gets over $19.98 a 35% royalty is larger than a 70% royalty on a $9.99 work.
If any of this requires deeper explanation, do drop me a line. After you have dropped in on Kathy to see what she has chosen for her K topic.
And you should always consider self-publishing on Kindle - for there is no charge to do so and you get a royalty for every copy purchased by the public at large.
There are some traps to avoid.
If you do not want, or cannot afford, professional editing of your draft manuscript, you will have to turn your .doct into an old fashioned .doc and make it fit for e-publishing. This can be a lengthy process, depending upon how many e-publishing formatting rules you unwittingly broke while churning out that draft. But your helpful e-publisher might be able to help when you load your files: auto text checking takes place.
The Kindle automatic text vetting system does not pick up very much more than spelling mistakes. You might consider setting up a Smashwords account (it is free) and using their auto vetter to eliminate all major format errors. Newbie authors love indenting lines with the tab key and separating paragraphs with the enter key: both techniques tell some publishing systems to do odd things with the format. Smashwords makes you take them all out - every single one - so that your text is readable on all devices. The first time takes so long you make sure that future works enter into the system far more cleaner.
Kindle insists that you only have one account with them. And each account can only have one bank account to receive the royalties you earn. And you are not supposed to share your account details with any third party: all in all it is very tricky to have a partnership unless you, and they, turn a blind eye. An account has to have a unique email address, a unique bank account and a unique tax id in order for it to be unique. Creative people have found ways to provide all three, to the complete satisfaction of all concerned.
Kindle will offer you special deals in exchange for having exclusive rights to publish your book, each deal being a full 90 days with no time off for good behavior. And this is really simple math: if you are only using Kindle, you would be mad not to take the special offer. And if you have multiple outlets, you should totally avoid it: you might get some extra cash from Amazon, but will have to give up all other book sales by way of compensation.
When it comes setting a price for your work, there are some boundaries you should be aware of. Kindle is happy with works between $1.99 and $9.99 - they will give you 70% of the take as a royalty. But between $9.99 and $200.00 you can only have 35%. Over $200.00 and you are back at 70% again. So unless you have a really perverse trust in your best lucky number, make he price $9.99 or less - or over $19.98 Once the price gets over $19.98 a 35% royalty is larger than a 70% royalty on a $9.99 work.
If any of this requires deeper explanation, do drop me a line. After you have dropped in on Kathy to see what she has chosen for her K topic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)