50 Shades - Great, or the Greatest?

Notice I didn't comment on the originality of the story, but rather, the originality of the people who enjoyed it.

Before you dismiss other people's lack of originality, perhaps you should demonstrate some originality of your own.

What makes you think I haven't?

50 shades is crimes against the BDSM community.

As a chick that ACTUALLY practices real BDSM, it's a horrific portrayal of the community.
This book is not about BDSM.
It's a promotion of rape culture.
Numerous times he ignores her using the safe word.
Never does he check on or care about how she's doing or feeling.
Never does he do after-care to ensure she's mentally and physically OK.

Trust and understanding is the very foundation of proper BDSM. This is just a guy hyped up on his own power that likes to abuse women. And it's glorifying this treatment TO women. How many women will get themselves into what is essentially an assault and think "Shouldn't I be enjoying this? It's what happened in 50 shades."

This happened to me. It was horrible and I ended up hurt both mentally and physically.

Notice I didn't comment on the originality of the story, but rather, the originality of the people who enjoyed it.

Before you dismiss other people's lack of originality, perhaps you should demonstrate some originality of your own.

What makes you think I haven't?

It's self-evident from the bitterness in the posts.

Personally, I have respect for anyone who writes something that resonates strongly enough that millions of people will actually hand money over to read it. That's a very difficult thing to do.

Virtually all literature is destined to be forgotten (virtually nobody knows who Du Maurier is, for example) so I don't consider obvious impermanence a compellingly valid criticism.

If you think there was any actual (at least mental) effort put into writing these books, you know nothing. You have no idea what goes into writing something good, making real art and not just throwing a Word-A-Day at a page and adding some sex.

I'm bitter because it's crap and it's being put on a pedestal and being given respect it does not deserve. Millions of people handed over their money for something someone stole from someone else. It's poorly-written, it's plagiarized and 10 years ago wouldn't have seen the light of a professional publishing house.

Its popularity makes me sad for the state of our world. Talent used to mean something. Now all you have to do is make people horny.

I'm bitter because it's crap and it's being put on a pedestal and being given respect it does not deserve.

I get it.

I really do.

You're Diane Chambers.

Ah, yes. S&M for people who don't know anything about S&M.

The fact that it is a competent and comprehensive introductory guide to alternative lifestyles is only one small part of the value of the set.

As a practitioner of some of the fine arts of alternative, these books were deeply condecending. There was nothing comprehensive nor competent in the descriptors of such practices.

No, that doesn't make her a great artist. That simple proves, as I stated, that people are stupid and unoriginal.

I was discussing a movie, "Under the Skin", with a friend recently. It stars Scarlette Johanssen and is unwatchable tripe. He was confused, because it was so bad, about why it got so many positive critical reviews. So was I, so we got to thinking about it and discussing it.

Like most art-house "art", it is intentionally unpleasant, unprofessional, uncomfortable, and at turns plodding, droning and boring. Compared to the average film, there is ten times more "T and A" (and quite a bit of erect C) but absolutely no tittilation; a cynical destruction of sex appeal and sexuality. The plot is extremely narrow but the implications and social commentary are quite broad. It leaves plenty of questions unanswered and in so doing engages the 'critic's brain' without actually delivering much.

It is like a complex flavor profile that isn't so much enjoyable as it is "something to think about". Personally, I like my food to taste good, rather than be complicated.

Unoriginality has a place! I vote for the flavorful predictability of McDonald's over haute cuisine any day. You cannot live on amuse bouche. Originality for originality's sake is frequently applauded disproportionate to merit. Art that merges populism/accessibilty with complexity is where the true meat lies.

McRib.

There is a HUGE playing field between Osetra Caviar and the McRib. There ARE people who can tell a good, compelling story and leave you something to think about (Gone Girl, for instance) while employing top-of-the-line writing.

I've just always liked the hack, formulaic stuff too. It's like a good pun. Not the best form of humor. But charming and real in its simplicity.

Except that Gone Girl wasn't very good, either. Better writing, but the story wasn't anywhere near caviar. Olive Garden, maybe.

She essentially ripped off Rebecca and didn't tell it nearly as well as du Maurier did.

Really? I loved the way the writing went from suffocatingly overdone to spare. I liked the way the several stylistic changes were mapped out to reflect the tone of the story.

There seriously haven't been that many original stories in the world to slam an author for using another's theme. They are all pretty much variations on archetypes. The reason why JRR Tolkien was so amazing (besides the way he could move from alliteration to action to poetry to prose) was because he ripped off incredibly esoteric stuff.

50 shades is crimes against the BDSM community.

As a chick that ACTUALLY practices real BDSM, it's a horrific portrayal of the community.
This book is not about BDSM.
It's a promotion of rape culture.
Numerous times he ignores her using the safe word.
Never does he check on or care about how she's doing or feeling.
Never does he do after-care to ensure she's mentally and physically OK.

Trust and understanding is the very foundation of proper BDSM. This is just a guy hyped up on his own power that likes to abuse women. And it's glorifying this treatment TO women. How many women will get themselves into what is essentially an assault and think "Shouldn't I be enjoying this? It's what happened in 50 shades."

This happened to me. It was horrible and I ended up hurt both mentally and physically.

When does he ignore her use of the safe word?

I agree that it's not an accurate portrayal of BDSM. It's mostly just a bit of kink with a backdrop of BDSM to provide some frisson.

He doesn't ignore it. He stops. But he then won't speak to her for a week and screams at her for using it. Which is probably worse.

Bad, bad, and did I mention it was bad?

Sure, graphic sex scenes are hot but all the hubbub about this book....nah, not worth it.

As a person who crucified it before even reading it telling myself I knew, I KNEW it was going to be bad reading like all the other chick lit that seems to be plagueing the nation, I realized I needed to read it because I was making judgements based on heresay and my own experience with reading.

I'm proud to say I got through 5/6 of that book before I put it down and told myself "Well, I was right."

Yeah, it's garbage.

There were graphic sex scenes in it? (Yes, I read the first two and part of the third.)



I didn't find it very graphic at all and struggled to figure out what the fuss was about the sex in the book. I read them hoping they'd get better and when they didn't I got bored and quit. lol

Trust and understanding is the very foundation of proper BDSM.

You're talking about a very safe, sanitized form of BDSM. Without the element of *actual* danger - ie, to hell with "safe words" - it's really just cosplay.

And there's nothing wrong with that, if that's what floats someone's boat.

But some folks want more (or at least want to fantasize about wanting more).

Hahhaah...sanitized.
I've never used a safe word in my life, but if they're in place then there's an agreement there. You don't set them then ignore them. So, yeah, don't set them if you want (I don't), but if you do, it's not cool to ignore them.

And absolute trust doesn't implied sanitized BDSM in the slightest. Not in my experience (which I'm not interested in detailing in a public forum ahah, but lets just say I've dabbled in a lot). Just because you trust someone doesn't imply that you aren't taking risks. Elements like breath play for example. It is dangerous even if you trust the person handling you.

But, I suppose, there is a great deal of debate around about what makes a good dom. To each their own. If this guy tried to dom me I'd switch on him and he'd get a taste of his own medicine.

....wouldn't be the first time I've done it
Powerlifting ftw.

50 shades is crimes against the BDSM community.

As a chick that ACTUALLY practices real BDSM, it's a horrific portrayal of the community.
This book is not about BDSM.
It's a promotion of rape culture.
Numerous times he ignores her using the safe word.
Never does he check on or care about how she's doing or feeling.
Never does he do after-care to ensure she's mentally and physically OK.

Trust and understanding is the very foundation of proper BDSM. This is just a guy hyped up on his own power that likes to abuse women. And it's glorifying this treatment TO women. How many women will get themselves into what is essentially an assault and think "Shouldn't I be enjoying this? It's what happened in 50 shades."

This happened to me. It was horrible and I ended up hurt both mentally and physically.

When does he ignore her use of the safe word?

I agree that it's not an accurate portrayal of BDSM. It's mostly just a bit of kink with a backdrop of BDSM to provide some frisson.

He doesn't ignore it. He stops. But he then won't speak to her for a week and screams at her for using it. Which is probably worse.

Apparently, you and I are reading different books. In my book, he'd already screamed at her, not spoken to her, started some ill-advised sex play, stopped on the safe word, had a boring conversation about their relationship and took her to Aspen.

Bad reviews? She's sold MILLIONS of copies and is now making it into a movie.

That just proves the masses are stupid. *shrug*

I used to think that about Michael Jackson and Prince. Sad me. The masses are less stupid than they seem. Name a great artist who wasn't celebrated in their own time.

(Of course, I can name some mere hacks who were popular in their own time and never heard of now - I think 50 Shades is one of these. I rate it right about at the "Undomestic Goddess" level. Airplane lit, you know.

Of course there are some priceless ones few have ever heard about either. And I've never been able to tell where "Three Penny Opera" falls on this scale.)

LMAO

Seriously? You're trolling, right? If EL James is a "great artist" in her art of choice, then so was my 3-year-old daughter a great artist with her stick figures and drawing suns in the corner of the paper.

If your three-year-old can convince 100 million people to buy her work, then she's a great artist.

I kind of feel the same way about Madonna.

No, that doesn't make her a great artist. That simply proves, as I stated, that people are stupid and unoriginal.

I read the books so I am "stupid"? You seem to be a real peach. Also, after reading the rest of your posts on this thread, for someone who thought the writing was so dreadful from the 1st page, why didn't you just stop reading?? Seems that you may be "stupid" along with the millions of others that read the books? :huh:

If your three-year-old can convince 100 million people to buy her work, then she's a great artist.

I kind of feel the same way about Madonna.

The difference is between madonna and a three year old, though, is that in thirty years the three year old will have matured a little.

Madonna certainly has her finger on the pulse of something or other. There are few other popular musicians with her staying power, especially women.

I really loved the period where she was trying to land the role of Evita. She put out some good music over about two years. I don't know what she sounds like live, though. And there are still a couple things from the very early years I like. I get tired, though, of the need to shock. It stinks of a lack of talent, even if there is actual talent.

If you've ever seen Lady Gaga before she was Lady Gaga ... She was pretty amazing.

Unfortunately Lady Gaga AS lady Gaga has put me off to having any curiosity about that.

You know who was cool though? Shakíra before she was SHAW-kear-uh.

I'm bitter because it's crap and it's being put on a pedestal and being given respect it does not deserve.

I get it.

I really do.

You're Diane Chambers.

No. I just happen to love and respect literature.

I see no evidence of that. Can't respect literature without understanding the human experience, and if you understand the human experience you understand why things like 50 Shades are important.

What I do see is a whole lot of snobbery, which is pretty much the exact opposite of "love and respect".

From the little bit of the book I could stomach, it appears to be a Spanish fly injected romance novel.
The main characters are pretty much cookie cutter for romance novels... she's beautiful, smart, perhaps struggling, has a stupid, pretentious sounding name... blah blah blah...
He's handsome, wealthy, powerful, also has some dashing, easy-to-remember name

fast forward... he saves her, she saves him right back.

Obviously, romance novels ain't my thing. There's a demand for them, but I'm not convinced that it's really a NEED.

Yer bein' kinda of a stinker, Mr_Knight, but my inner goddess still digs you.

Yes, exactly. The one thing she does differently is introducing the possibility of something more...without ever really paying off. Which is kind of artful. Then she writes some decent sex and WAY TOO MUCH plot.

ETA - I really can't read a whole Harlequin, so keeping me invested over this many pages points to a basic level of storytelling.

Notice I didn't comment on the originality of the story, but rather, the originality of the people who enjoyed it.

Before you dismiss other people's lack of originality, perhaps you should demonstrate some originality of your own.

What makes you think I haven't?

It's self-evident from the bitterness in the posts.

Personally, I have respect for anyone who writes something that resonates strongly enough that millions of people will actually hand money over to read it. That's a very difficult thing to do.

Virtually all literature is destined to be forgotten (virtually nobody knows who Du Maurier is, for example) so I don't consider obvious impermanence a compellingly valid criticism.

If you think there was any actual (at least mental) effort put into writing these books, you know nothing. You have no idea what goes into writing something good, making real art and not just throwing a Word-A-Day at a page and adding some sex.

I'm bitter because it's crap and it's being put on a pedestal and being given respect it does not deserve. Millions of people handed over their money for something someone stole from someone else. It's poorly-written, it's plagiarized and 10 years ago wouldn't have seen the light of a professional publishing house.

Its popularity makes me sad for the state of our world. Talent used to mean something. Now all you have to do is make people horny.

I am amazed at how much attention these bootks are getting. There are sooooo many opinions that it is mind boggling. I thought this book was FICTION. IT'S NOT ABOUT REAL PEOPLE. Yes, there are the percentage that finds it entertaining, the percentage that thinks it's trash, and then the ones that think it's actually a guide to BDSM or rape culture. Seriously???? And for the one that "could stomach" so much of it, sounds like you read a good bit of it, if you knew what you THINK is going on. Another person said they worry about the state of the world.....well, the world was pretty messed up before these books came along.

And as for as this making a person horny, well, if reading these books do it for ya, then go for it.

I really don't see any wrong or right about these books. Yes, I did read all three books. It was pretty "hairy" at first, but the last book was really pretty good. I mean it's not going to win a Noble Peace Prize and I don't think Ms. James was going for any kind of award when she wrote it; however, for people that like romance novels, it's OK. As for as the movie version, well, the I don't know how that will turn out, unless they make all three books into a movie. I'm sure some of you would "boo" that notion. I also wonder if all of the people who think it's trash, hate it, a guide...or whatever, Did you actually READ the whole books or just bits and pieces, or excerpts from the book. There is actually a reason as to why Christian is the way he is. Does that make it right what he does, that's not for me to say.

So in my opinion, (and you know what they say about opinions, everybody has one just like an *kitten*), it's a fictional book about fictional people. I don't believe the author meant for it to be a guide to love, or anything else. She just wanted it to be entertainment. IF, you don't like that kind of entertainment, then DON'T READ it. As with any other form of entertainment, people have their opinions. Don't read it, watch it, or listen to it, if you think you will be offended in any way, shape, or form.

As someone else said, 'I GET IT". I do get where some of you are coming from. But to say it's bad, poorly written, not true to the BSDM culture.....just remember, there it NO RIGHT/WRONG here...ONLY opinions.