Fifty Shades of Grey
discussion
dont like it ..dont read it
Katrina wrote: "This made me laugh so hardReally, Aliki, are you trying to kill me with hypocrisy and illogical rambling? Because you're succeeding....."
What is wrong with you people?! It’s one thing to have a civil discussion about why we love/hate the books. It’s another to disrespect and make fun of people. If you haven’t noticed, Aliki is Greek.
Stephanie wrote: "Katrina wrote: "This made me laugh so hardReally, Aliki, are you trying to kill me with hypocrisy and illogical rambling? Because you're succeeding....."
What is wrong with you people?! It’s one..."
I think it is great that Aliki is practicing her English by reading English books and participating in discussions in English. But, if I were going to conduct online discussions in a language not my own, I would very carefully check and recheck my translations and be sure not to write half of my discussions in a different language from the language I was addressing before posting. That way, I would be certain my points and intentions were correctly expressed. I think the frustraion of the previous poster was over the posts and partial posts written in Greek which the majority of us on this English-speaking forum do not speak.
Christine wrote: "...50 Shades again stands out because its more 40% sex,60% story..."
50 Shades had a story? That's news to me.
Did you read the book?
Everyone knows it is a sex book series. Don't read them if you're a prude. Plus, Grey is not a jerk- he's 'damaged' (tongue-in-cheek).
So, out of curiousity? What do you think a story is?LOL! Of course back in the 1930s no one thought there was any story in James Joyce's Ulysess either - it was banned in the US for being, ahem risque. The book took place in the space of 1 day. And then there's people who insist there's a story in Ayn Rand's Atlas Gault - I suppose, but 90% of it is Ayn Rand's philosophy. Or how about Elizabeth Gilbert's Eat Pray Love - which is basically just a rich woman traveling the globe getting over a divorce. I suppose you could say Story of O has no story either...the woman in that book, she has no name, is lead by her lover to a BDSM club where she is beaten and raped and taught how to be a sex slave, at the end of the book she falls in love with the new Master, wears a mask always, and has no identity, she's just a body to have sex.
I was comparing 50 Shades to that The Story of O.
Definition of story is not, suffice it to say, reserved for the latest best-sellling thriller of the week. I know, shocking, but there it is.
Sherri wrote: "Christine wrote: "...50 Shades again stands out because its more 40% sex,60% story..."
50 Shades had a story? That's news to me."
Yes it did have a story. You may not have cared for the story, but it was certainly there. Most erotica has very little storyline or even character development. That is one of the reasons I do not read much of it. I personally prefer a story. There are erotic authors out there who are good writers however. E.L. James is not a good writer, but her underlying story has some merit and there was character development. Many may not have liked how she developed them, but it was there. The whole book could have benefited from a very heavy editing pen. The biggest flaw in my opinion was redundancy. Several hundred pages could have been trimmed off the final three books. I think she has the potential to be a better writer with some guidance.
Mary wrote: "Sherri wrote: "Christine wrote: "...50 Shades again stands out because its more 40% sex,60% story..."
50 Shades had a story? That's news to me."
Yes it did have a story. You may not have cared ..."
Thanks for that poignant response. I did like the story, but you are right in the sense that E L James could have used a good editor. It was after all her first book/books, and she was not a trained writer. Under the circumstances, I thought she did quite well with the books.
Maybe I should have added a sarcasm tag to my original post?Sorry, I meant to say that 50 Shades of Grey is clearly the greatest love story of our or any time.
Karen wrote: "Thanks for that poignant response. I did like the story, but you are right in the sense that E L James could have used a good editor. It was after all her first book/books, and she was not a trained writer. Under the circumstances, I thought she did quite well with the books. "I almost did not finish the first book because it took me so long to care even a little about the characters. I usually read a book straight through and typically read on average a book per day. It took me several starts to get into the first book. However, by the time I was about 2/3 of the way through the first one, I was interested enough to see how she resolved everything. The 2nd and 3rd books were much better (still in need of heavy editing, but better). I think the 2nd and 3rd books showed improvement in her writing skills. Most of the time I do not obsess on grammar, vocabulary or punctuation. The story is always primary for me. When the writing jars one out of the story, that can become a problem, but a great story can compensate for mediocre writing. Case in point: the Harry Potter books. J.K. Rowling is not a GREAT writer. She is a good writer who has occasional redundancies in vocabulary choice. She IS however, a GREAT storyteller. A great storyteller can overcome bad writing, in my opinion and competent writing can be learned. Faulkner was an atrocious writer in terms of grammatical structure. Run-on sentences that go for paragraphs are every editor's nightmare. However...he was a GREAT storyteller. E.L. James is not a great storyteller at this juncture in her career. However, the development she showed in the second and third books showed ME that she does have promise for the future.
Excellent point Mary.
Sherri wrote: "Maybe I should have added a sarcasm tag to my original post?Sorry, I meant to say that 50 Shades of Grey is clearly the greatest love story of our or any time."
No, let's see...
"Love Story" is the Greatest Love Story of our time, no wait it's Gone with the Wind (but that's the 1930s so maybe not), oh, I know it's Twilight trilogy? No can't be that one...maybe it's Outlander? Or Flowers from the Storm?
[I don't remember saying it was a great story or the greatest love story of our time. Just that it had more story than most of the erotica novels that I'd read.
Which isn't quite the same thing.]
Personally, I think Pride and Prejudice, Rosemary Rodgers' The Wildest Heart, The Thorn Birds, Laurie McBain's Moonstruck Madness, and Bride of the McHugh were more memorable. Or for that matter Anne McCaffrey's books. In recent fiction? I'd give the greatest love story of our time award to John Green's The Fault in Our Stars - now that is an excellent read.
Your mileage may vary of course.
50 Shades is just a bit of fun. I thought it was hilariously funny in places - I mean come on, the negotiation over email regarding his BDSM contract - which he wants to keep private? Or the fact that he saves her from getting killed by a...cyclist. You didn't find that funny?? Lighten up.
I can't remember half of it. But it was a lot of fun to read. LOL!
Mary wrote: "Karen wrote: "Thanks for that poignant response. I did like the story, but you are right in the sense that E L James could have used a good editor. It was after all her first book/books, and she wa..."Faulkner was actually an amazing writer. The run-on sentences were deliberate. He knew the rules and broke them. It is specific style of writing - "stream of consciousness" and not everyone's cup of tea. James Joyce did it first. And of course there's Gaberial Garcia Marquez. This style, stream of consciousness writing, is used to convey how the character is thinking. It takes you deeper into the character. It's another way of telling a story.
What I liked about EL James is she also broke rules - with the BDSM contract and the text messaging, where she makes fun of people text messaging each other.
A lot of people think you can only write one way, play with narrative one way, and dismiss everything else as bad writing. It's not true.
While I'd certainly never put EL James in the same category as Faulkner or JK Rowling, she is a lot of fun to read. And quite witty in places. And part of that is in how she broke the rules. She does in various places in the book.
Stephanie wrote: "Katrina wrote: "This made me laugh so hardReally, Aliki, are you trying to kill me with hypocrisy and illogical rambling? Because you're succeeding....."
What is wrong with you people?! It’s one..."
Are you trying to say foreigners can't be logical or recognize hypocrisy?
Amy wrote: "Stephanie wrote: "Katrina wrote: "This made me laugh so hardReally, Aliki, are you trying to kill me with hypocrisy and illogical rambling? Because you're succeeding....."
What is wrong with you..."
Honestly, her tentative grasp of English wasn't my problem at all. It was the fact that she's being completely hypocritical. She plainly stated people shouldn't complain about something they don't like while complaining about something she doesn't like.
I never used the word "incoherent", but I think maybe that's what Stephanie thought I was trying to say...? Illogical ramblings and incoherent ramblings are quite different. But then, what else would I expect...
Asha wrote: "Everyone knows it is a sex book series. Don't read them if you're a prude. Plus, Grey is not a jerk- he's 'damaged' (tongue-in-cheek)."Not a prude, and I still loathed the books.
So...what now?
I will remember that damage bit. From now on, whenever someone disrespects me acts like, well, a jerk, I'll be sure to not say anything because hey, they might just be damaged.
Christine wrote: "Autumn wrote: "Also this book has a lot of BDSM in it and I have never read any other Erotica books before so I don't know if BDSM is normally in these types of books or not."Having read about 30..."
I have yet to figure out why people are so all-consumed with the sex angle. Yes, it's in the erotica genre. That doesn't mean it should be given a pass for its terrible writing. I mean, I guess if you were to compare it to say, cinematic porn, then yes, the writing can be written off. But what would everyone think if a pornographic film won an academy award? I know I'm taking that to a different level since Fifty Shades has not, to my knowledge, won any literary awards, but I only use it to help highlight my point; there is a place for poorly-written porn. When that place ends up being on the bestseller list while thousands proclaim it to be the best piece of erotic fiction ever written, that's a bit disconcerting. The sex is barely a blip on my radar when discussing the issues I have with this book. My biggest issue is that the main character is abusive as hell, and thousands of women the world over are actually fantasizing about being treated like that. It's almost enough to make me cry...if I weren't so angry about it.
Jane wrote: "There are people going on about how this series is amazing and a beautiful love story. "...and they have the right to their opinion. I absolutely, positively HATED Great Expectations. I could not abide Pip. However, I would never put someone down if they believe that Great Expectations was the best classic ever written. I am not comparing FSoG with Great Expectations or E.L. James with Dickens...but everyone has their own tastes in literature. Most guys do not get Pride and Prejudice. Most girls do not get Dirk Pitt. To each their own, in my opinion.
Christine wrote: "A lot of people think you can only write one way, play with narrative one way, and dismiss everything else as bad writing. It's not true.While I'd certainly never put EL James in the same category as Faulkner or JK Rowling, she is a lot of fun to read. And quite witty in places. And part of that is in how she broke the rules. She does in various places in the book. "
Yes I understand that Faulkner wrote stream of conscious, but there has been MUCH literary criticism of his style of writing over the years. The fact that his works have survived as classics is a testament to his ability to tell a story. The criticism of Jame's writing is not one of being innovative or "breaking the rules." The criticism of her writing is that it is unwieldy, repetitive and the vocabulary is a tad schizophrenic. That is why I stated she could have used a good editor who could have cleaned up the narrative. The basic story was a decent one. She just needs to learn how to structure it better. Again...my opinion. I read all three books. I felt the sex scenes were actually fairly tame compared to some of the erotica out there. Ana's character needed to be flushed out more as she was slightly bordering on caricature, but for a first time author I thought she did OK. I have read MUCH better, but I have certainly read much worse.
Katrina wrote: "When that place ends up being on the bestseller list while thousands proclaim it to be the best piece of erotic fiction ever written, that's a bit disconcerting. The sex is barely a blip on my radar when discussing the issues I have with this book. My biggest issue is that the main character is abusive as hell, and thousands of women the world over are actually fantasizing about being treated like that. It's almost enough to make me cry...if I weren't so angry about it. "Ha..."
I think part of the phenomenon of these books is that many of the readers have never read GOOD erotica. So there is nothing to compare it to. It is kind of like the advent of the hula hoop or the frisbee. Interesting inventions but hardly something to change mankind. I will take issue with your characterization of Christian. He started out abusive but changed through the course of the books. Ana's failure to submit to his dictates opened his eyes in a manner of speaking. So the overall message is not of women being a doormat to a dominant male. One of my favorite books of all time is Pride and Prejudice. I have read it at least 25 times, but I can distinctly remember the very first time I read it. Half way through the book I loathed Darcy. He was arrogant, condescending and I had no idea how anyone could fall in love with him. But when Elizabeth turns down his marriage proposal, he begins the process of self-reflection and out of that self-reflection he changes into a hero we can all admire. If one simply reads the first book in James' trilogy, then they would never witness the transformation.
Sherri wrote: "Maybe I should have added a sarcasm tag to my original post?Sorry, I meant to say that 50 Shades of Grey is clearly the greatest love story of our or any time."
Yes Sherri, I think I missed the part in the book where there was any recognisable love story too.
I am being absolutely truthful when I say that I found "50 shades" so absurd that when I began reading it I found myself wondering if it was written as a tongue-in-cheek comedy. -- Seriously.
As I progressed through the series, I found the writing so awful, the characters so vapid and the plot so thin and uninteresting that I could not finish the series.
I also take exception to the generalisation that people hate it because of the explicit nature of the book. That may be true for some, but certainly not for me. In fact, most of the negative posts and reviews that I have read about this book clearly state that it is not because of the sex scenes that they dislike it.
And, I do not understand the appeal of Christian Grey, is this really what women's fantasy is built on? Where is his depth? I'm sorry, but giving him a background of abuse does not excuse poor character development.
I just loved these books! I read all three and yes, there is a lot of sex, but underneath all of that, I thought it was a true love story.....I really enjoyed the books, but I just love to read!
Katrina wrote: "I have yet to figure out why people are so all-consumed with the sex angle. Yes, it's in the erotica genre. That doesn't mean it should be given a pass for its terrible writing. I mean, I guess if you were to compare it to say, cinematic porn, then yes, the writing can be written off. But what would everyone think if a pornographic film won an academy award?" i agree with what you're saying. it's blowing my mind that a not so great pwp (porn without plot, plot? what plot?) fanfiction is being regarded so highly. i read the first and most of the second before i just couldn't feign interest anymore. i've seen fanfiction transform into published books before (e.g. cassandra clare's mortal instruments books) and i'm not condemning that. the books just could have used a lot more care and editing so that it doesn't read exactly like a story being released chapter by chapter on the internet. i would've also appreciated better editing on all the britishisms because it made me question the setting more than a couple times.
i also agree that it's not the sex in the book that bothers me. besides the frequency of the scenes they're not that smutty.
Mary wrote: "I think part of the phenomenon of these books is that many of the readers have never read GOOD erotica. So there is nothing to compare it to."I have to agree with you there.
Mary wrote: "He started out abusive but changed through the course of the books. Ana's failure to submit to his dictates opened his eyes in a manner of speaking. So the overall message is not of women being a doormat to a dominant male."
That's the overall message? The overall message I got was that, no matter how "damaged" and abusive a man is, if you stick by him, he'll change. That is an irresponsible message to send into the world.
Mary wrote: "If one simply reads the first book in James' trilogy, then they would never witness the transformation."
I read all three books. Never found a single redeeming quality in Christian Grey. Yes, he toned it down some, but in the end, he was still attempting to control Ana. Even if he had changed completely, my problem is still with the overall message of the book; you can't change an abusive individual and it's irresponsible to try and make even one person think differently.
Elizabeth Bennett did not submit and consent to marry Mr. Darcy until after she'd seen for herself that he wasn't the horrible man she'd originally believed. She rejected him completely and irrevocably and stood by her decision. I don't think anyone likes Mr. Darcy much in the first half of Pride and Prejudice, and that's somewhat the point. We're treated to a view of the typically arrogant male of the time and the woman no one can believe he loves. Does she cower and do as expected simply because he's handsome and rich? No. She stood her ground and refused to be bullied on any terms.
If we've begun comparing modern day heroes to those of the late 18th century, a time when women were forced by society to obey and submit, then we really are in trouble.
B3cs wrote: "when I began reading it I found myself wondering if it was written as a tongue-in-cheek comedy. -- Seriously.As I progressed through the series, I found the writing so awful, the characters so vapid and the plot so thin and uninteresting that I could not finish the series.
I also take exception to the generalisation that people hate it because of the explicit nature of the book. That may be true for some, but certainly not for me. In fact, most of the negative posts and reviews that I have read about this book clearly state that it is not because of the sex scenes that they dislike it."
You know, there were a couple of times when I stopped and wondered the same thing. She kept talking in the first book about how "ridiculously good-looking" Christian was, and all I could picture was Derek Zoolander. I even put a gif of him in my review. Imagine my confusion then, when James referred to Christian giving Ana his best "blue steel" pose. I was sitting there thinking she must be writing this as a joke.
Whatever the case, we know she laughed all the way to the bank.
The generalization of those of us who dislike the book has become quite tiring. I keep saying it's not the sex, tons of people I know keep saying it's not the sex, yet people keep saying we're prudes who don't like the sex. Oh well, people will believe what they want.
Emily wrote: "Katrina wrote: "i agree with what you're saying. it's blowing my mind that a not so great pwp (porn without plot, plot? what plot?) fanfiction is being regarded so highly. i read the first and most of the second before i just couldn't feign interest anymore. i've seen fanfiction transform into published books before (e.g. cassandra clare's mortal instruments books) and i'm not condemning that. the books just could have used a lot more care and editing so that it doesn't read exactly like a story being released chapter by chapter on the internet. i would've also appreciated better editing on all the britishisms because it made me question the setting more than a couple times.i also agree that it's not the sex in the book that bothers me. besides the frequency of the scenes they're not that smutty."
I have read more explicit sex scenes in non-erotica books, so yeah, the sex scenes didn't bother me. I have very liberal views when it comes to sexuality, and I believe all women should be embracing theirs. If this book helps some women crawl out of the dark ages and into the dawn of sexual enlightenment, then hey, more power to 'em. I'm just disturbed and sickened at the idea that Christian Grey is somehow a desirable individual, or that Ana is a strong female protagonist. Honestly, the very idea astounds me.
For those of you who still insist that the only ones who dislike these books are prudes, try this on for size;http://www.sponsoredlady.com/product-...
So out of curiousity, what inspired you to read all three?For example? I despised Twilight, gave up half way through and chose not to buy it. Why waste my time on something I hate?
And Atlas Shrugged? Bad book. Gave up at the halfway mark.
Also why are you wasting time whining about the books online? Wouldn't you rather talk about something you love? Hate just breeds hate after all.
This is a website where people discuss and review books, both for good and for bad. Just because someone says they did not like a book, or can't understand why it is a success does not make them angry, or breeding hate. They are discussing their opinion of a book, which will vary from individual to individual. In this thread people are discussing things they liked and disliked about the book. As you can gather from my remarks, I disliked the book and I have stated my reasons why. If you agree with me great, I am happy to discuss further. If you disagree with me great, tell me why it is such a good book and I am happy to discuss further. That's what this site is for, and that's why I am here, to hear other's opinions and express my own.
I may not agree with you, but if I don't agree with you it is not a personal attack. And, I do not think you are hating on me because you loved the book and I didn't, it's your opinion. It's an opinion on a book, and that is all it is.
Christine wrote: "So out of curiousity, what inspired you to read all three?For example? I despised Twilight, gave up half way through and chose not to buy it. Why waste my time on something I hate?"
I'm a masochist.
Plus, if I didn't read them all, the fangirls would jump on me, yelling, 'you didn't read it all so you can't even understand how glorious Christian Grey's transformation was ZOMG.'
I think the reason I keep commenting is I am so baffled by this trilogy's success when it is so, so poorly written. I read the series just because I hate to start a series and not finish it through. I did a lot of skimming to make it through the 2nd and 3rd though.
Amy wrote: "I think the reason I keep commenting is I am so baffled by this trilogy's success when it is so, so poorly written. I read the series just because I hate to start a series and not finish it through..."Agreed.
Synesthesia wrote: "I don't care if there's sex in it. I'm more annoyed over bad writing and yet another book encouraging women to run off with jerks.I refuse to read it."
I have to agree with Mary. I barely got to the "sex" parts. I couldn't get past the horrible writing in the first few chapters, I had to put it down.
Katrina wrote: "If we've begun comparing modern day heroes to those of the late 18th century, a time when women were forced by society to obey and submit, then we really are in trouble. "I am not comparing the two books. EL James book is not even in the same atmosphere as Pride and Prejudice. I referenced that book for illustrative purposes.
Katrina wrote: "You know, there were a couple of times when I stopped and wondered the same thing. She kept talking in the first book about how "ridiculously good-looking" Christian was, and all I could picture was Derek Zoolander. I even put a gif of him in my review. Imagine my confusion then, when James referred to Christian giving Ana his best "blue steel" pose. I was sitting there thinking she must be writing this as a joke. ..."
I've just read your review and I loved it! I have tears in my eyes from laughing so hard. You have summed this book up perfectly for me, and I could not agree with you more. This is one of the most absurd books I have ever read!
Some of the comments felt like personal attacks in tone and that the posters were angry at people who enjoyed the books not at the book itself. It is admittedly difficult to be clear.My apologies if I misinterpreted what was being said.
This thread was not about why people disliked the books but why they felt the need to read books they disliked.
Synesthesia wrote: "I don't care if there's sex in it. I'm more annoyed over bad writing and yet another book encouraging women to run off with jerks.I refuse to read it."
Agree 100%
Synesthesia wrote: "I don't care if there's sex in it. I'm more annoyed over bad writing and yet another book encouraging women to run off with jerks.I refuse to read it."
I agree....terrible writing, I won't read the other two. thanks for the post!
The criticism of Jame's writing is not one of being innovative or "breaking the rules." The criticism of her writing is that it is unwieldy, repetitive and the vocabulary is a tad schizophrenic. That is why I stated she could have used a good editor who could have cleaned up the narrative. The basic story was a decent one. She just needs to learn how to structure it better. Again...my opinion. I read all three books. I felt the sex scenes were actually fairly tame compared to some of the erotica out there. Ana's character needed to be flushed out more as she was slightly bordering on caricature, but for a first time author I thought she did OK. I have read MUCH better, but I have certainly read much worse. To clarify? I completely agree with you on EL James.
There's a lot of repetition. The last book drug and you could feel that she was running out of steam.
I give her credit for playing a bit - and not writing paint-by-number formula, which many romance writers do. Inserting the text-messaging and contract were strokes of genuis. She also pokes fun at the story at times. Plus I give her credit for not falling prey to traditional romance tropes - "the two characters never discuss their problems" or "the heroine is raped and saved by the hero".
She's undisciplined and repetitive..but I honestly don't think she's any worse than Charlain Harris (who suffers from the same sins), David Baldacci (oh lord),
Stieg Larrson (highly overrated), Jackie Collins,
or James Patterson..who are all lazy writers in need of a good editor. Let's face it most books on the best-seller lists are poorly edited. I remember putting down one of Anne Rice's later novel's in disgust due to the run-on sentences and horrible over-writing. While her earlier one's are much better.
Regarding Faulkner? Depends on which novel you are discussing? Sound and the Fury - was deliberate, each point of view vastly different than the last. But I do agree, Faulkner can go on a bit. Fitzgerald's later books had similar issues.
I think people are over-reacting to EL James, possibly because of how she got published (she circumvented the traditional publishing route), that it began as fanfic - Twilight fanfic at that, and the media hype. But when I read it - I thought it's not great, but it's better written than the Twilight books (granted not hard to do) and no worse than the latest Danielle Steele bestseller or Charlain Harris.
I thought this book was a good read if you read all 3 of the series you will realise that it is actually a love story. I went through all emotions reading the series i went from thinking the guy was a complete weirdo to feeling sorry for him it also made me laugh and in places cry.
Katrina wrote: That's the overall message? The overall message I got was that, no matter how "damaged" and abusive a man is, if you stick by him, he'll change. That is an irresponsible message to send into the world."I totally agree! This is not a love story, this is not romantic, this is the story of two individuals stuck in a cycle of abusive behaviour and emotional insecurities. And in saying this, I think I am crediting these characters with more depth than they actually deserve.
Whats more, I would like to state that there are many men out there, who love their wives and look after their emotional, intellectual, spiritual and sexual needs. If you havn't found one yet keep looking. Someone in this thread said a friend was trying to seek out their own Christian Grey, tell her not to put herself down! She deserves much better! Every woman deserves better than Christian Grey! ;D
Christine wrote: "I give her credit for playing a bit - and not writing paint-by-number formula, which many romance writers do. Inserting the text-messaging and contract were strokes of genuis. She also pokes fun at the story at times. Plus I give her credit for not falling prey to traditional romance tropes - "the two characters never discuss their problems" or "the heroine is raped and saved by the hero"."
I am going to take a tiny issue here with the "traditional romance trope" idea. I read some of the original "bodice rippers" back in the late 70s and early 80s and the rape of forced seduction was definitely a familiar theme back then. Probably the reason I stopped reading romance for about 30 years. Then I happened upon a Pride and Prejudice sequel and got sucked back into the genre. It is amazing how much romance has changed. That scenario is pretty rare these days and there are many very good writers in the genre. E.L. James would definitely be below average in comparison.
"I think people are over-reacting to EL James, possibly because of how she got published (she circumvented the traditional publishing route), that it began as fanfic - Twilight fanfic at that, and the media hype. But when I read it - I thought it's not great, but it's better written than the Twilight books (granted not hard to do) and no worse than the latest Danielle Steele bestseller or Charlaine Harris."
I agree with you that a large part of the anger at James comes from the route she took and of course the money she has made off of the books. I say more power to her. If I could write a mediocre book and sell over 10 million copies, well then I would have enough money to take a number of writing classes ;0). I will take slight issue with Charlaine Harris though. Her Grave books are better than James' and after the first Southern Vampire book, her writing really improves in that series. Her other series (Aurora Teagarden and Lily Bard are her weakest ones).
Mary wrote: "I do not have any problem with people trashing these books for either their content or writing. However, I DO have a problem with people attacking the intelligence of those who did like the books."Exactly!!
Katrina wrote: "I never used the word "incoherent", but I think maybe that's what Stephanie thought I was trying to say...? Illogical ramblings and incoherent ramblings are quite different. But then, what else would I expect.." i>It just seemed like you were being patronizing and hateful. :)
Christine wrote: "This thread was not about why people disliked the books but why they felt the need to read books they disliked...."Some people just love to dwell on negativity. Yes I have read books I do not like. I give them a bad review and never look back. I just don’t understand why the haters of FSoG or any other book, obsess over it.
Mary wrote: "Christine wrote: "I give her credit for playing a bit - and not writing paint-by-number formula, which many romance writers do. Inserting the text-messaging and contract were strokes of genuis. She..."Mary,
I'm so glad you are part of this discussion. Your comments are very thoughtful and without malice or prejudice. You've restored my faith in humanity!
You sound like the only one here who actually knows what they're talking about. It's much easier to accept criticism when it comes from a knowledgable and respectful person. The rest just seem hateful and sarcastic, they're comments don't hold merit if you ask me.
Thanks again!
I read the book. I didn't want to give up on it. I had high hopes for it. The writing style was immature for my taste. Ana reminded me of a teenager. OMG Christan Grey is blah blah blah. She got on my nerves. I did love how the book ended. I never would have guess she would have grew up. Not going to read anymore of the books.
KarenH wrote: "Mary wrote: "I do not have any problem with people trashing these books for either their content or writing. However, I DO have a problem with people attacking the intelligence of those who did li..."That's my point!
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Darkfever (other topics)
On Dublin Street (other topics)
The Siren (other topics)
Sempre (other topics)
More...
Books mentioned in this topic
On the Island (other topics)Darkfever (other topics)
On Dublin Street (other topics)
The Siren (other topics)
Sempre (other topics)
More...
Having read about 30 erotica novels - it depends.
There are different sub-genres. Most contemporary erotica or non-historical have BDSM.
What is different about 50 Shades and most of the erotica novels out there - is no rape. Most BDSM and erotica do have a "boddice ripper" element to them.
This specific genre is not known for it's great writing or literary prowess.
And in most erotica - it's basically 90% sex, 10% story or what we like to call online "porn with no plot".
50 Shades again stands out because its more 40% sex,
60% story - but people who are used to the writing of Nicholas Sparks, Danielle Steele, Nora Roberts, and Judith McNaught or James Patterson - must think OMG the sex! the sex!
It's not the first erotica novel to take off - that was Story of O - which makes 50 Shades seem down-right literary in comparison. Story of O is 100% sex, and no character development. The lead character doesn't even have a name. This was guilty best seller that women were talking about in 1960s/1970s.
I think to understand the popularity of the book, you have to have read a lot of books in this genre. EL James does things that no one else does, she also pokes fun at things. There's a hilarious negotiation over email regarding a BDSM contract for example.
And the heroine fights off a would-be rapist (not the hero) and saves the hero. She also leaves the hero at the end of the first book (never done in BDSM - usually, she capitulates to him).
You can't compare it to writers like Anne Tyler. But in comparison to Nora Roberts, James Patterson, or Danielle Steele? It's no better or worse. Sort of funny in places actually. EL James has a sense of humor.