Self-analytical nonsense.

[whatho]

I've been analysing my own writing, like a total git, and what I've mostly been contemplating... oh look, speed-walkers. You can't see them. They're outside. Yes. Things I refuse to write about in a straightforward fashion. That's what I'm talking about. You know quite probably that I don't write anything very, you know, massively sexual. Because it makes me laugh and I think it's anti-erotic, primarily. But there are a couple of much less explicable things that I won't write with any real clarity... and they'd be including kissing and crying. I've sort of been aware that, over the past few months, I'd avoided the use of those verbs or synonyms thereof in descriptions of the events they traditionally describe, but it occured to me in reference to something I wrote a while ago that I'm not even obliquely describing the events themselves anymore. I'd instead be describing secondary events that seemed very likely to have come about as a result of those actions (I don't know... weird post-kissing tastes; asthmatics coughing after kissing smokers, that sort of thing), or I'd be describing it on a wholly metaphorical level: I'd bang on about something that may or may not be standing in for the event in question. There's a chap on the telly who looks a great deal like Harold Ramis. I still love Egon Spengler. But yes. And I was wondering why. I don't actually know why. I had to do it in the Jeeves and Wooster fic I wrote over a year ago because Bertie had to reinvent the kiss, and I'm thinking maybe I just became fond of the method after that. I expect I just like obliqueness; or I'm scared of being blatant and obvious (not that I've ever read 'He kissed him' and thought 'Oh, that's just too straightforward') and melodramatic (with crying, I think that is). I don't know. Or self-indulgent. I like having a get-out clause and being able to say that you don't know for sure that's what I meant. And - this is why I'm not massively bothered about correcting it - it means people can assume I meant kissing when I meant nothing of the sort, and then they get to read more kissing. I'm not into authorial authority.

Yes. That's about that.

Comments

I hope this icon isn't too anti-erotic for you

[girlofprey.livejournal.com]

I get the whole I-will-be-accused-of-being-too-obvious-and-melodramatic thing. Though obviously it doesn't come up hugely often for me. I mostly like the part about how you can assume ANYTHING IS KISSING. And frankly, anything that shies away from "The crystal droplets slid down his pale face" is alright by me.

in the Jeeves and Wooster fic I wrote over a year ago because Bertie had to reinvent the kiss

??

Re: I hope this icon isn't too anti-erotic for you

[whatho.livejournal.com]

Probably when it comes down to it I'm just being squeamish, but it is pretty much the case that if there's a way of neither naming nor describing the act, that's what I'll go with. It's not even a kink because I've no objection to reading it in other people's work if it's well done, and if there's a single verb for a thing that's often the way to go. But yes. Mostly I think I just like vagueness because it gives the reader more to do.

Jeeves & Wooster fic. (http://whatho.livejournal.com/118440.html)

Re: I hope this icon isn't too anti-erotic for you

[tiniago.livejournal.com]

I love that fic, by the way. I love that he dreams of Jeeves reading to him. I love that Jeeves touches his spine. I love Jeeves running a gloved wrist across his mouth. I love that Honoria is lovely and non-judgey and lovely. I LOVE THE OBLIQUE KISSING OH MY GOD. *heart*

Re: I hope this icon isn't too anti-erotic for you

[whatho.livejournal.com]

EEEEEEEE. THANK YOU! Does Jeeves touch his spine? Is that a thing that I wrote? Should I maybe read my fic again?

[tiniago.livejournal.com]

Does this mean I get to assume ANYTHING YOU WRITE is kissing, whatho?

Does this mean I get to assume YOU ARE KISSING ME RIGHT NOW?

[whatho.livejournal.com]

Roland Barthes says so, and I'm basically with him. I'LL NOT CONTRADICT YOU.