Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



because grub butt is a justice ʘ‿ʘ ([info]tez) wrote in [info]fandom_wank,
@ 2011-02-05 18:45:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:books/authors, community: weepingcock, elitism, flouncing, mom the other kids aren't playing right!, persecution, porn

Henry Miller has a fandom...and it's pretty damn vocal.
Sex scenes can be really funny. Badly-written sex scenes can be absolutely hilarious. Since there are a lot of badly-written sex scenes in the world, the denizens of LJ's [info]weepingcock take it upon themselves to select the best of the worst and laugh uproariously at it. Or cringe. Or possibly laugh uproariously in a cringing fashion. It depends on the excerpt.

Anyhow, [info]pirsquar posts this amazing excerpt, for the enjoyment of the entire community.


"At night when I look at Boris' goatee lying on the pillow I get hysterical. O Tania, where now is that warm cunt of yours, those fat, heavy garters, those soft, bulging thighs? There is a bone in my prick six inches long. I will ream out every wrinkle in your cunt, Tania, big with seed. I will send you home to your Sylvester with an ache in your belly and your womb turned inside out. Your Sylvester! Yes, he knows how to build a fire, but I know how to inflame a cunt. I shoot hot bolts into you, Tania, I make your ovaries incandescent. Your Sylvester is a little jealous now? He feels something, does he? He feels the remnants of my big prick. I have set the shores a little wider. I have ironed out the wrinkles. After me you can take on stallions, bulls, rams, drakes, St. Bernards. You can stuff toads, bats, lizards up your rectum. You can shit arpeggios if you like, or string a zither across your navel. I am fucking you, Tania, so that you'll stay fucked. And if you are afraid of being fucked publicly I will fuck you privately. I will tear off a few hairs from your cunt and paste them on Boris' chin. I will bite into your clitoris and spit out two franc pieces…"


The reaction is a standard mix of 'lol', 'wtf', and 'OW'...

...at least, until Loyal Defender Of The Literary Mighty [info]deborahkla charges in to express her displeasure with the mere posting of this blurb.

Why?

Because it was written by Henry Miller.

Apparently, if you are a Noted Figure Of Literature, you are incapable of writing bad porn, regardless of what our eyes might be telling us. She makes sure to inform us of this. She even did it twice, in the exact same wording.


Wait a minute, folks! This is HENRY MILLER!!! I remember when his books were banned! You have to remember that all his books - including Tropic of Cancer, considered his finest work - were originally published in the 1920s when words like "prick" and "cunt" and "fuck" were never, EVER spoken aloud outside a brothel--and certainly not by regular folks, in bed or out.

I have to disagree wholeheartedly on this entry in weepingcock. It may sound funny to all of you now, but in the 1920s it was downright revolutionary, and it continued to be until the books were finally published in the mid-sixties, almost 40 years after they were banned. Henry Miller was a true poet, the James Joyce of obscenity and smut, and those of us who write both owe him a debt of gratitude for bringing the wild and woolly and truly passionate side of sex out into the open.



Despite the condescending tone, the [info]weepingcock natives are actually quite reasonable in pointing out that funny sex is not discriminating, and 'great authors' are not immune to mockery if they write and publish something weepingcock-worthy. For [info]deborahkla, however, 'reasonable disagreement' translates into 'OMFG EVERYONE'S ATTACKING ME'. So she attacks back...despite not being attacked in the first place. (She has mastered the use of the c&p comment, for sure -- there are several in there that she copies verbatim into multiple threads.)

She also flounces out of the community.

The only problem there is that she keeps right on posting answers to comments, actively telling people that 'she's out of the community now'. Her logic flaw is pointed out to her numerous times.

She reacts, naturally, by doing the most reasonable, mature thing possible.

She messages the mods.


To both the moderators at weepingcock

Dear moderators,

I disagreed with a posting at weepingcock that did not identify a quote from Henry Miller and was attacked for it. When I reacted defensively, I continued to be attacked. Finally, cwitch pointed out that everyone was fair game, and I agreed with her, but this wasn't enough for everyone. They continued to attack me and I continued to attempt to deflect their attacks. When it became clear that no one was ever going to forgive me for having had a difference of opinion, I left the community. Two hours after I had left the community yet ANOTHER person came along and attacked me with yet another nasty, uncalled for comment.

I am hereby asking your permission to delete all my comments in the post in question so that I may no longer receive nasty comments from people. Please let me know if I have permission to do so. Thank you.

Yours sincerely,

DeborahKLA


(Of course just turning off comment notifications wouldn't be good enough -- the comments would still be there for people to make nasty, uncalled-for responses to, and she'd be obliged to go LOOK to see what those responses are, and then she'd have to respond, and...)

When she doesn't receive an answer in a timely fashion, she messages again:

Dear Moderators of weepingcock,

People continue to harass me with comments. Please give me permission to delete all the comments I made in the posting I referenced in my previous message so that people will leave me alone. Thank you.

Yours sincerely,

DeborahKLA


When she again doesn't receive a reply in a timely fashion, she assumes that silence means assent and begins deleting all her comments anyway.

It is, however, worth noting that the first message was received at 5:33am Pacific time.

The second one?

5:42am.

(I have already spoken with the mods, and they are very ashamed about their slothfulness leading to such a mishap. They promise that in the future they will be awake 24/7 to handle inquiries and will respond to all messages within a matter of seconds, even if that message requires a large multi-paragraph answer.)

One of the mods did respond, though, and she was kind enough to bestow a reply on us.

Oh, and those deleted comments? Can't escape the screencaps.


I don't know about all of you, but I definitely feel my ovaries incandescing right now.



(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]issendai
2011-02-06 05:57 pm UTC (link)
originally published in the 1920s when words like "prick" and "cunt" and "fuck" were never, EVER spoken aloud outside a brothel--and certainly not by regular folks, in bed or out.

I--I just... What?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]life_on_mars
2011-02-06 05:59 pm UTC (link)
There was also something where she said that respectable women didn't go into pubs, or women weren't allowed into pubs, or something. I don't know, I was too busy being impressed by her great learnings.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]issendai
2011-02-06 06:11 pm UTC (link)
Speakeasies: Filled with wanton trollops!

Someone needs to tell her that Babbitt wasn't, strictly speaking, a documentary.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


ealusaid
2011-02-09 02:22 am UTC (link)
I know where I live (Canada) it was illegal for women to be in bars until the 1970s, but they could be in nightclubs and cabarets. But I don't know that was true of 1920s/30s Paris.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]arionhunter
2011-02-06 06:11 pm UTC (link)
Somebody' never read Victorian smut.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]veleda_k
2011-02-07 06:32 am UTC (link)
She claims that Victorain smut was "lovely and airy and rather sweet."

Never in the world was there so much delicious frigging done at one time by an equal number of persons*. Never were there so many beautiful cunts to be seen so gorged and stuffed and so well fucked by so many noble pricks. Never did woman receive such a shower of sperm as drenched them from all quarters.

*The Editor of The Pearl thinks that the author of this tale must have forgotten Belshazzer's Feast, photographs of which can be had, price £1 1s each.


That was published in 1880 in "The Pearl," a magazine which I luckily have in book form. I think the footnote is my favorite part.

Granted there aren't any clits being bitten in two, but personally I consider that a feature, not a bug.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]ashes
2011-02-07 06:37 am UTC (link)
Um, taking this moment to love on your icon.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]veleda_k
2011-02-08 12:40 am UTC (link)
It goes so well with the subject matter.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]beejium
2011-02-08 04:32 am UTC (link)
Now there's some porn you can feel classy reading. Think I need to get out my monocle for that one.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]toxictattoo
2011-02-11 01:43 pm UTC (link)
I have that book!

[goes to dig it out and read it again]

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]issendai
2011-02-11 02:13 pm UTC (link)
Coming back late to say: So which part was the sweetest, the part where they liked writing about cornering underaged girls into sex, or the part where they liked their virgins in their defloration-rape scenes to cry really hard? My favorite is how they depicted rape scenes uncomfortably realistically, then tagged on a little "...but that was awesome! Do it again!" realization to make the scene hot.

I love certain aspects of Victorian porn, but they were NOT into "lovely and airy and rather sweet." They made Hustler look enlightened.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]phosfate
2011-02-06 06:27 pm UTC (link)
"Regular folks" = White American middle class straight women, and their husbands when they were in the room. You know, to prevent the constant fainting.

Much in the same way Entertainment Weekly's inability to print the word "ass" is an accurate reflection of the surrounding culture.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]solelyfictional
2011-02-06 07:08 pm UTC (link)
I wondered about that, but I couldn't remember when they renamed all the Grope Cunt Lanes and Shit Streets across the UK.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]phosfate
2011-02-06 10:33 pm UTC (link)
I need to crack open Rude Britain again.

Hee. Crack.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]queencallipygos
2011-02-06 07:29 pm UTC (link)
She's....not COMPLETELY out of it with this one. People did cuss, but it was indeed more scandalous in the 1920's than it was today.

However, not to the degree that SHE is implying it is.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]issendai
2011-02-07 12:49 am UTC (link)
*nod* The really groundbreaking part was that Mailer was trying to publish a story filled with people cussing and having sex. (And even then it was groundbreaking only because it was vaguely realistic and aspired to literary respect. Porn's been with us forever.) The actual cussing and having sex? Situation normal for most of humanity, though not quite as public as it is today.

Am still boggled that she got this far without any idea what the actual early 20th century was like.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]librarianmouse
2011-02-07 01:25 am UTC (link)
What are you talking about? The early 20th century was exactly like all those black and white movies I netflixed.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]rosehiptea
2011-02-07 04:53 am UTC (link)
My dad grew up in the forties, not the twenties, but I think this woman's idea that Henry Miller was practically the first one to cuss would send him into hysterical laughter.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]silrana
2011-02-07 05:16 am UTC (link)
I'm wondering who she thought was reading all those Tijuana bibles in the 20's.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]lydiabell
2011-02-07 06:10 am UTC (link)
What the hell kind of SEO is Laura Hale doing that the Fanhistory Wiki shows up second in a Google search for "Tijuana bible"???

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]darksumomo
2011-02-07 09:01 am UTC (link)
*blink*

Why, so it is. I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

(no subject) - [info]felinephoenix, 2011-02-07 09:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mindset, 2011-02-07 10:00 pm UTC

[info]tehrin
2011-02-06 09:02 pm UTC (link)
According to Wiki it was published in 1934. She didn't even get that right.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]caffeine_fairy
2011-02-07 12:15 am UTC (link)
Crowning moment of funneh.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]the_sun_is_up
2011-02-07 03:31 am UTC (link)
Oh god, that's beautiful.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]bubosquared
2011-02-07 10:22 am UTC (link)
But ... surely if that were true, that would almost have been its own defense, right there? I mean:

"OMG you can't publish that, those words are only used by whores!"

"Really? And how would sir be aware of them, then? *eyebrow*"

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Read comments) -

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map