While I’m over at MURDER SHE WRITES guest blogging today, I thought I would copy a comment Justin made last week and post it here to stand on it’s own as a guest blog. Some of you may have missed it. I found it profound enough to warrant a repeat here. Having the male point of view when it comes to sex in literature is interesting, especially when the man is as eloquent as Justin. Here’s what he had to say:

I think I’ve let slip that my secret alter ego’s an erotica author from some years past. As you’re entering my territory here, let me offer a few thoughts on sex in literature.

The key mistake I’ve seen made, time and time again, is to treat sex as a bottle of Tabasco sauce at tableside, as opposed to an airtight bag of dried chile peppers in one’s spice rack. The very question of “how much sex?” leads us down the path of thinking of literary sex in the former sense, as something added to an otherwise fully-fleshed-out story outline to make it “spicy.” Put bluntly, this doesn’t encourage the sex to serve any narrative purpose, and leads the author pondering this question to treat sex as a distraction, a sideshow, to stitch together awkward transitions in a story, or to provide a suitably explosive quality to an otherwise slightly tepid coda. Sex here masks bland narrative, distracts from awkward stitching of scenes, serves as the magician’s colorful silk scarf, distracting the audience from what the other hand might be doing.

It’s little wonder that sex in literature receives little (and grudging) respect, used in this way so often. While the other story elements — the characters, the setting, the plot, the pacing, the specific nuances of the struggle that creates the piece’s literary tension — are carefully weighed and balanced to create a single coherent “flavor” during early sketching of the piece as such, this approach treats sex as a sort of sprayed-on chrome and bolt-on trim package, something added as an afterthought, something there to be flashy and pretty and candy-like to the reader.

Why do we do this? I think, deep down, we’re all uncomfortable with the idea of exposing ourselves as sexual beings, even though the imagined obscuring lens of a fictional third party. I think, truth be told, we feel naked and judged on a deep, perhaps largely subconscious level, to show the outside world even a hint of our — pardon the sudden crass and juvenile word choice, it’s deliberate — “O-face.” When we treat sex like Tabasco sauce, we can pretend it’s not personal, it’s not some facet of ourselves, our feelings, shining through. It’s just something we slather onto an already largely complete story to “make it yummy” for readers who fancy it.

The question we should be asking instead, at the time of early outlining of the story, is how much of a role sex plays in the narrative, and to what narrative purpose it serves. We groom our dialogue, pruning exchanges that add nothing to the story, sometimes removing entire scenes that don’t serve to further the story effectively. We prune characters that aren’t necessary, review any subplots with a critical eye for fear they might muddle the piece’s flow. Likewise, we should approach the question of sex at this time, too, and regard sex as simply one more form of narrative, one more literary tool with which to tell the reader about the characters, the situation, or the world.

Sexual narrative, when used in this way, serves a literary purpose. A sex scene can tell us more about the characters, revealing nuances of their minds and hearts that cannot be explored through dialogue in a natural way, and that might require situations that aren’t convenient to the narrative to explore otherwise. They can introduce the characters to one another in new ways, and can be conversations in themselves — I’ve written sex scenes that were arguments without words, admissions of fear, admissions of need, disconnects, reconnects, new connections, power struggles, power surrenders, queries, answers, hopes fulfilled, hopes dashed, and even ones in which the characters remained in separate “worlds” while their bodies shared personal space. Want to show the reader how the favored dancer is the true power behind the throne? Set her in the Emir’s lap and let the “camera” linger there. Show the old man’s stumpy, graceless fingers tremble as the follow the light gloss of clean perfumed sweat that shimmers on her heaving belly in the flickering amber and umber hues of the lamplight. Show us the way his breath chuffs, short, urgent and canine, in time with the dry porcelain rattle of beaded strands from her shirt across his chest. Allow her smile to blossom, but don’t tip that hand too quickly. Draw it out. He doesn’t get that smile until he’s past shame, past reserve, and fully in her thrall. Is she enjoying his surrender to her, or merely her own masterful artfulness? Is she fond of him, or merely in love with her own prowess in controlling him, or even simply with the beauty of her own dance?

Rather than ask how much sex is necessary, perhaps we should be asking what we wish to say in a given scene, and whether sex is the language best suited to its expression. The difference between literarily relevant sex and gratuitous sex is not the “volume” of the sexual content, but its relationship to the story in which it happens, and its purpose as a part of that story. Story-interrupting sex may serve a literary purpose too — to give hope to a disheartened reader that the HEA is not impossible, to give the reader a rest between strident and draining chapters, or to renew the characters’ interest in one another, for example — but again, in these cases, the scene is set into the piece with purpose beyond reader titillation. The decision of “how much” is a simple one, in all of these cases. Would adding more (intensity, graphic exposition, length) better serve the scene’s purpose, or would it detract from that purpose?

I would argue that entire stories can be told *as* sexual narratives; some of my best short stories spanned a sex scene in their entirety, but told the reader everything he or she needed to know about the characters in the space of that sex scene, and flowed with a clear beginning, middle, and end in a literarily satisfying way. If this is true, then sex, really, is no different from any other literary vehicle, and doesn’t require any special consideration as such a vehicle. How much sex? I don’t know. How much dialogue? How much scenery? How much flirtation? How much plot?

How much does the story demand? That’s the question.

Hi there, it’s me again. That is the question, isn’t it? And people think I love Justin just for his tech savvy!

Given the prevalence of Twitter among the readership here, I’ve added an easy way to retweet articles here. Check out the new Retweet button at the upper right corner of each article. Is it helpful? Cluttered? You tell me.

EDIT: Thank you all for your most kind birthday wishes!

A quick note to those of you who visit Penumbra on your smartphones, particularly the iPhone and Google Android users in the audience — check out the brand new mobile site facelift! I hope you’ll find this new layout much easier to browse and read, and most of all, to reply to while on the go. It’s a much more feature-rich interface, designed to take better advantage of today’s extremely powerful phones.

Comment threading for the mobile site is in the works, but as of today, it still uses a purely chronological display order. Threads are in the works.

Enjoy the new mobile site!

– Justin

My post, The Art of Compromise, resulted in a great many comments. One of the last ones came from Justin, tech guru extraordinaire, brilliant musician, best friend, and a major part of my “heart family.” Some of you might not have gone back to the post and therefore may have missed his insight. I think he presents some amazingly valid points from the other side of the coin and I’m sure we’ll all recognize where he’s coming from as we wrestle with the same things ourselves.

I suppose I’m somewhat biased on this matter, having alienated my two stepdaughters from my first marriage because I expected them to “understand” that Dad needed to build his career now instead of spending their key at-home years making time for them, cue “Cat’s In The Cradle” and the violins — so I’ll try to step out of my own shoes and say simply that human beings tend to do what they find most interesting…and it’s hard to remember, where there are conflicting obligations, that the less shiny and attractive ones are just as important as they used to be. I have the same problem when I’m composing, or coding, or researching something; I want to achieve just one more milestone, and soon, my wife’s feeling cast aside and clingy because it’s been a week (or two) and I’ve barked at every attempt to interrupt me with “I’M BUSY, LATER.” There comes a point when these people — people we love, people who are ultimately justified in their frustration — say “NOT LATER, DAMN IT — NOW!”

You and I both have extremely demanding muses. When I wake up at three in the morning and know exactly how a difficult transition from the middle eight to the chorus needs to play out, I have to jump up, grab my guitar, and DO it, right then, lay the track, roll the virtual “tape,” and get it captured before it “cools” and I lose it. But if I let my muse do that every night, I’d never sleep, and be even more of a crabby, obstinate ass than I already am. There are times you simply have to tell your muse “Don’t call me during family time” — and when it pests and taps at the window, teasing you with the great ideas it has, you have to draw the curtains. Yes, I’m sure Iffy will rant and fume and refuse to tell you later in spite — and you smile, nod, say “Okay then, watch me get it wrong, then!” and eventually the little sprite will become so frustrated with your attempts that she’ll spill it just to regain control of the story.

(Muse Social Engineering 101.)

It isn’t easy. It really isn’t. But like any ego-driven demanding child (and muses surely are such), no, you *can’t* just cater to it and make excuses for it indefinitely. We’d all love to exist in a bubble free of outside demands, expecting the bills to pay themselves, the family to silently maintain the house, friends to wait to be spoken to or speak. We can’t. That’s not fair to them. We have to accept that we may be Superman (or Wonder Woman) creatively, but that doesn’t excuse Clark Kent or Diana Prince from their day jobs.

Your work is your day job, yes, as others have pointed out. It’s important, it’s critical, and there certainly needs to be a block of time daily to tend to it. But if you catch yourself “multitasking” and others complaining that you’re not really “there” during family time, you’re not being fair to your family. Make a time budget. Draw lines. And you’ll just have to teach Iffy that she doesn’t get to interrupt you during off-call hours.

Folks have been extremely supportive, and their messages are just as important as this one, but forgive me if I felt that I couldn’t leave this unsaid. There’s a flip side to the “your work is important” coin, and it’s “family, friends, and other obligations aren’t any less important.” Balancing them *isn’t* easy, especially when you work in a self-paced-self-managed manner. I wish you the best in finding the right balance.

– Justin, ever the devil’s advocate

And that’s what it all comes down to–finding the balance. I’m still on that rocky slope and I appreciate family and friends giving me the chance to catch myself and get established on the middle ground. In the long run, I need to remember that for every *up* on one side, there’s a *down* on the other and I need to find ways to compensate so even if there are peaks and valleys, they stay even. Thanks, Justin, for the reminder. And have I mentioned lately how important you are in my world? You are.

Don’t forget to stop by tomorrow to meet my guest blogger, Emma Lai! I’m also doing my monthly guest blog at HAPPY ENDINGS today. Stop by to say hi as I revisit an older topic here – The Write Space.

It’s Thursday. There I was paddling through the swamp up to my @$$ in alligators when I suddenly realized I needed a subject for today.

First, I heard back from the Black Rose editor my proposal was assigned to at Wild Rose. She requested the full. I’m madly reading through it and fixing some things: “He began to…” “He decided to…” And we won’t talk about the POV shifts. Luckily, those are mostly few and far between. However, I need to get cracking! I now have two editors waiting for two manuscripts. ACK! When it rains it pours. But I’m liking this flood. It means, however, that I really need to wean from the ‘net for a couple of days. I have furniture rearranging this weekend so I need to get cracking on the manuscripts and get them shipped out ASAP.

In a comment to yesterday’s post, ban was asking about Justin’s music. I’m going to repost the link here. This is a temporary ZIP file, if you want to hear some of the things he’s been doing. While he is an amazing guitarist, most of the instruments you hear are ones he’s recreated digitally. Most of the clips are covers, some are original, some are just “noodling” around with musical lines, all are damned impressive if you ask me. Justin’s Music Sampler.

To those of you whose blogs I normally drop by and visit, I’ll get around at some point today. And now, for the BIG ANNOUNCEMENT! *cues virtual trumpets and drum fanfare* The winner of the JUNE BRIDE CONTEST is….JEN LYON! Woohoo! And what does Jen win? Her very own copy of BEYOND HEAVING BOSOMS! Jen, we’ll talk. If you’d like a signed copy, I will grab one during RWA and will ship it out to you the end of the month. If you don’t want to wait, I’ll get an unsigned one shipped to you.

What’s July’s contest? It’s a RED, WHITE, and BLUE celebration! Check the contest page for details….(psst. Nothing’s posted yet because I haven’t figure out a prize yet. *blush*)

So, today’s topic of comment conversation…Who’s autograph would you most like to get on a book?

I’m the one back here in the basement, thinking about the government. Hello, folks. I’m Justin, Silver’s “tech guru,” self-identified BSAFH, and “man of many hats” behind Penumbra. My job is to bring the amazing mind of this author to as many as you as possible, and to keep the “machine” aspects of the site as subtle and as intuitive as possible.

In my professional days working as a web architect, designer and developer, I built solutions for such clients as Barbra Streisand (whom I fear I angered at first by spelling her name “Barbara”), Hewlett-Packard @Home, Amazon A9, National Genetics Institute, GenSys, Eruptor, DirecTV, DealerCenter, The Business Group (TBG), Official Celebrity, and Clark Information Solutions. I retired from the tech sector in 2005 — what can I say, never did like that whole offices-and-meetings thing — to work on a stable epistemology for mathematics post-quantum physics, and to devote more time to philanthropic projects in the developing-nations IT industry, and in the fields of children’s educational media and wild animal rights. I also pick up a guitar and pretend I can play it, when no one’s looking. Sometimes. I’m married, with no children, and living in rural Florida. My wife is in the financial sector, and yes, we met on the internet.

I was a werewolf at the time. She was an alien. Don’t ask.

Despite numerous attempts to stop developing web sites, I find myself presented with worthy causes, and periodically, I fail to refer them to others. My public relations “hat” would say that it seems a shame to let seventeen years of experience at the cutting edge of the technology wave go to waste. (My retiree “hat” cheerfully thumbs his nose at the sentiment, blows a loud Bronx cheer, and returns to an engaging day of blissfully consuming Coke Zeros and inventorying the bumps on the ceiling. Again.) When Silver had need of a web presence for her work, I was happy to step up and own the project.

There’s so much I’d love to tell you about this site — about the music it makes, its clockwork cogs and gears ticking away in the sort of meticulous orderliness only an obsessive technofanboy could truly appreciate. About the parts you never see, and about the parts that you do, and most of all, about how, exactly, one assembles them into the glorious gestalt automation that is a living web site. But to do so would detract from the primary purpose of my work here: to create a site that just works, and does so intuitively and smoothly, so that the frame doesn’t distract one from the picture it frames. If anything, I hope you notice the site less and less as time goes on, and the content more and more. (Except perhaps the banner. I really enjoyed working on that.)

And so, instead, I’ll poke my nose out of the shadowy liminal border of this site’s periphery now and then to let you know about new features, or changes to the site functionality. Here are the latest front-end changes, in a nice, orderly, bulleted list.

• Might I direct your attention first to the new threaded comment system? You can now reply not only to a post, but to other comments left in posts directly, more like LiveJournal’s comment system. I’ve set it up to support ten levels of nested comments; if we find we’re exceeding that limit regularly, we can look into other threaded discussion options.
• You might also notice that Silver and I have icons on our comments. If you’re interested in having one too, sign up with Gravatar (it’s free!), set up your email address(es) and upload your picture(s), then enter one of your Gravatar-registered email addresses when you leave a comment here. It doesn’t just work with Penumbra — it works with a great many other sites, too.
• There’s a “Subscribe to Penumbra” bar near the bottom. Mouse over it and you’ll be offered a bunch of options, including adding Penumbra to your favorite feed aggregator, as well as options for email- and text-message-based update services. Hopefully, this will make it a little easier to subscribe to the blog and receive updates, for those who read the blog by aggregator.
• For those of you browsing the site with mobile devices — he says, petting his beloved G1 with the glove-leather-and-impact-plastic-wrapped exoskeleton — I’ve set up an alternative mobile view without graphics, for clean, rapid site loading even over legacy wireless networks. (As I mentioned, I live in rural Florida — 3G’s only starting to penetrate my area, so EDGE and earlier network users, I feel your pain and understand!) It’s easy enough to click on the link at the bottom of the ‘lowfat’ site to see the full one again, if you’re so inclined, but the default view for mobile browsers is now emphatically mobile-friendly. (Normal desktop/laptop users will, of course, receive the full monty when visiting the site.)
• Finally, what do you think of the tag cloud? Normally, I’m bitterly opposed to site features that are “flashy” and add time to navigation, but given the ease of searching on a tag in the search field, it seemed a harmless enough bonus for Flash-enabled visitors. Think of it less as a feature and more as a really fun digital cat toy. Yeah. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.

I’ve already gone on for far too many words, so I’ll show myself the door now, and future posts will likely be much more succinct, unless Silver decides to run a workshop on site building for authors. Thank you for taking the time to read this, and humouring my butchery of Dylan lyrics. We now return you to your regularly-scheduled Silver James!