READERS' ROOM: SMUT VS LITERATURE -

READERS’ ROOM: LET’S TALK

Smut vs. Literature

So, if there is smut, and smut can be present in a book, how do you know whether it’s literature, smut, or – shock horror – erotica you’re reading? I think we can all agree that there are some differences, but the lines between them are so blurry it can be hard to say.

The main distinction people tend to make is between literature and smut, as if smut is inherently bad. Of poor quality. This idea doesn’t sit well with me as a smut writer. First of all, because there’s a lot of literature out there that is extremely vulgar and obscene. Some of it lauded as fine literature and added to the classics canon as must-reads for the sophisticated reader of impeccable taste lah-dee-dah. The irony here is that you can find examples of both brilliant prose and bloody abysmal writing on both sides of the line. Wherever you draw it.

I would argue that the only useful distinction, if we must have one, rides on the purpose and function of the text.

To be crude, the purpose of erotica is to get you off. The primary function of the story, is to stimulate certain areas to make other areas react in a certain way. Swish and flick, as it were. The purpose of literature, if I may be so bold, is to explore the human condition and experience. To tell us something about ourselves and the world we live in.

And here’s the reason why I believe the only real distinction lies between erotica and other literature. Erotica can venture deep into the human experience, but it’s limited by the necessary focus on reaching a climax. Money talks, and people want what they want. Meanwhile, literature can, and often does, use smut as a plot device to help the characters explore themes like identity, relationships, and culture.

In What Is Smut above, we established that smut is considered vulgar or obscene. That it’s even illegal in some countries. Recently we have seen a lot of (in my view) sad reactionary waves from the United States where book banning is becoming more common again. And the lists of books they want to ban include many of the most loved titles from some of the masters of fiction.

Don’t quote me on this (ask our QM if you want to know for sure), but from what I understand the US Supreme Court has ruled that obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment. However, I can’t find a USSC definition of what constitutes obscenity. Maybe that’s why they are trying to argue that it’s all about child protection now. It’s obviously ludicrous, but who knows.

My point is that if authors like James Joyce, Ernest Hemingway, Anais Nin, Gustave Flaubert, Pauline Réage, John Steinbeck, Alice Walker, Joyce Carol Oates, and Neil flippin’ Gaiman to name but a few, wrote/have written smut, you can’t argue that smut per definition equals poor writing. Perhaps, then, the only real difference is one of genre. Maybe it is fair to say that smut is more like fantasy and sci-fi. It gives you an opportunity to explore more and reach wider than you can in much of traditional fiction. And don’t forget, there are some people who look down their nose on fantasy too.

There may have been good reason back in the day to keep the number of categories and genres down, but we live in a time where audio- and ebooks outsell print copies now. We don’t need to consider shelf space, so we could easily just agree to let all literature be literature and move on. Wouldn’t it be nice if we could discuss what makes a book within a certain genre better or worse? But to do that, we would have to agree that smut is not dirty or bad, and I’m not so sure we will get over that hurdle in my lifetime.

Here on the Resilience, I made a decision from the start to draw a line between erotica and all other fiction. My reasoning was simple: some of us write for children, and some readers and writers do not want to touch or be exposed to erotica. That’s fine. I don’t want anything to do with horror, but that doesn’t mean I believe horror to be an inferior, exceptionally poorly-written genre. Or that I’d be ashamed to be seen reading Stephen King.

If you are a reader who likes all sorts of fiction I’m certain we have a book or two for you. If you also like – or prefer – something hot, sweet and spicy we have that too. Just not in the same place. If smut is your thing, you will probably enjoy our HOLIHELL site and the HOLIHELL HEADLINES.

I have two tips for you. First and foremost: Read (and write) what you enjoy! Don’t let anyone tell you what you should do or like. It’s your life and we only get one. And second, go check out SIR BEAR’S HOT LITERATURE VIDEOS, five examples of smut in general fiction. Then come tell me that smut is bad or shameful if you can.

PLEASE NOTE

This site is supported by our readers, and the content may contain affiliate links. If you choose to buy something through an affiliate link, we may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you.

ABOUT LINNEA LUCIFER

Linnea Lucifer is the Captain of the imaginary, yet very real, pirate ship Resilience and her merry crew of indie authors. But that is not all – amateur liar, weaver of stories, peddler of merch, lifelong spoonie, ancient dragon lady and Maddox Rhinehart’s irreverent pet are a few more words often used to describe the bearer of many names.

The Captain, who was named after a delicate little flower that grows in mossy, Swedish pine forests, and a certain fiery fallen angel, spends most of her days daydreaming and writing fantasy, smut and painfully crappy poems. She takes great pleasure in everything that tickles the senses and adds a sprinkle of magic and spice to our world.

Linnea writes fantasy rooted in Norse mythology and Scandinavian folklore under the pen name Saga Linnea Söderberg. She writes sweet’n’spicy spoonie smut together with Leto Armitage under the joint pen name Linn Rhinehart. As Evalena Styf, she’s known as a knowsy roll model and prolific content creator. She’s also a retired writing coach, editor and graphic designer.