Torture (and porn)

Clearly I'm doing blog titles to get hits from people who will have zero interest in our blog. Sue me. :)

We've talked here before about torturing our characters, how we need to throw the germiphobe into the dumpster, etc.

But doing that in real life, purposefully setting people up for pain, is cruel.

And, of course, I'm talking about The Bachelor. Yes, after SWEARING I'd never watch again (many seasons ago) I have again been sucked back into the busty-and-overly-made-up vortex. One of the times I swore I'd never watch again, I blogged about it, and called the show emotional porn. I stand by that.

And this season they've sunk to new lows. Yes, they always make sure the one who's afraid of flying ends up on plane, and the one who's afraid of heights ends up jumping off something high, but this season there have been two episodes that really made me angry.

One was last night. One of the girls, one of the more sane ones, actually, is deathly afraid of bugs. I mean, she seriously needs some psychological help. And clearly the producers knew this. So where do they send her and the bachelor on the only date she ever gets with him? Into a cave in Costa Rica. With lots of bugs. Nice.

But even more egregious was the Las Vegas episode. One of the contestants lost her Nascar-racer-fiancé in plane crash when she was only 18. Then she found out 3 days after he died she was pregnant. She hadn't been on a plane or anywhere near car racing since he died. Nor has she had a relationship. (and this girl is scary-beautiful. I thought she looked old for early twenties, but they've now shown her a few times without all the make up and my god. It's unfair for one woman to get so much beauty.)

And what do they do???? First put her on a small plane with the bachelor -- presumably similar to the type her fiancé died in. Then, they take her to a Nascar race track. Oh, and the exact same racetrack that her fiancé had a bad crash at when he was racing. Nice.

Sometimes reality TV is a good lesson in how to put your characters in difficult situations. But I ask... should it be?

The movie Stranger Than Fiction suddenly pops to mind, which explored the ethics of torturing fictional characters. But these women on The Bachelor are (at least partially) real. How do the producers sleep at night? Imagine the bad karma.

Sex as an excuse to forget -- good writing

Sex week has yielded an interesting discussion so far -- one I'm not sure I have much to add to. One of the disadvantages to being later in the week, at least when we accidentally fall into one of these theme weeks, is that by Wednesday I've got nothing to say. :) But you know me, I rarely have nothing to say. So here goes...

I've been thinking about the "great sex scenes have to be about the characters' emotions" assertion... And while I don't disagree, I wonder if it's that simple.

I think the key to a great sex scene boils down to what makes any scene great. Clear goals, strong motivations, and lots of conflict and tension.

In a "make them wait" kind of romance I agree it is emotions that make those later in the book sex scenes so wonderful. We're already so invested in the relationship that we're right there with them, and it's easy to feel what the physical intimacy is changing for the couple as they consummate their developing love.

But I do think that an early-in-the book sex scene can work, too. Even if we aren't very invested in the romance at that point of the story. Those scenes don't always work... and if they don't work they can feel horribly contrived, but they can work. And maybe the key to making scenes like that work lies in the same principles that make any scene work -- having a purpose, having conflict, having something happen other than "THEY HAD SEX".

Most experienced writers would never write a scene in which the hero and heroine sweep the floor, or play cards, or even go sky diving, if all that happens in that scene is floor sweeping or card playing or sky diving. Something else has to be going on. Something else has to be revealed. Something needs to change. And "they've had sex now" isn't enough of a change in most cases.

Any scene needs to move the story forward, it needs to have conflict, it needs to have at least one of the major characters wanting something they aren't getting, or getting something they don't want... and if it's pivotal, it needs to have an unexpected outcome, or some kind of a reversal or a turning point.

Most writers know this about scene and story structure (even if it's instinctively). So why do many writers drop these principles when it comes to a sex scene?

What happens during a sex scene needs to matter... it needs to reveal plot points the reader doesn't already know and/or change things... It can't be just about the sex. Those are the skippable sex scenes. If they're skippable -- if you can pick up the story without reading the sex scene and still have the story make sense-- then that sex scene shouldn't be there. Just like any scene that could be skipped shouldn't be there.

Not sure I'm saying anything today that hasn't already been said. And I'm certainly not implying that I always do a good job with this myself... But I did use the word SEX a lot, so maybe we'll get lots of new visitors through google. :)