While reading some publisher's submission guide lines I have often seen "we do not accept manuscripts with gratuitous sex or violence". My question is where is such a line drawn? It is an awfully arbitrary judgement baring the obvious - porn and cover to cover descriptions of pointless, grossly overblown violence. Is there such a thing as an "industry norm" for this tenuous line?
Where does "gratuitous" begin?
- Thread starter Perihelion
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2005
- Messages
- 1,064
- Reaction score
- 165
IMO a story can have as much sex and violence as it wants - as long as there is a fully recognisable reason for it. I think that's what they mean by gratuitous. If there's violence, but with reason, it cannot be classified as such.
A guideline I was once given on 'gratuituous' was -
If you remove the (sex/fight/fluff) scene, does it leave plot or characterisation unexplained? If not, then it's gratuitous - simply plonked into the middle of an otherwise unrelated plot.
However, I'd imagine these guidelines are also refering to how explicit a scene can be, which seems to be genre dependent.
If you remove the (sex/fight/fluff) scene, does it leave plot or characterisation unexplained? If not, then it's gratuitous - simply plonked into the middle of an otherwise unrelated plot.
However, I'd imagine these guidelines are also refering to how explicit a scene can be, which seems to be genre dependent.
I agree. If it's integral to the story, it's not gratuitous. "Gratuitous" isn't about the amount or the kind; it's about the pointlessness of it.loquax said:
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,907
- Reaction score
- 1,835
- Location
- Hiding in my writing cave
- Website
- www.cathyclamp.com
It's the equivalent of a mugging victim who is hurt and tired and needs to get to the police station to report the crime, who decides to grab the nearest hooker and have a cheap roll in the hay on the way to the cops. It doesn't have anything to do with anything. It also doesn't make sense where in the plot it happens. It's just filler.
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2005
- Messages
- 43,746
- Reaction score
- 8,654
- Location
- Los Angeles
- Website
- www.amazon.com
Well, not just that. Even if the sex scene is crucial to the plot or character development, is it written in a gratuitous, excessive way, borderline porn?
Nothing else that's gratuitous should be there, either. No gratuitous sex, no gratuitous violence, no gratuitous toothbrushing.
One romance writer suggested that if you could remove the description of the sex scene, substitute "And then they had sex," and not significantly change the story, the scene was gratuitous.maestrowork said:
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2005
- Messages
- 6,326
- Reaction score
- 856
Maestro and aconite have it.
Even if your character is a sadistic pedophile, we don't need to see him acting his on his vulgar impulses to feel revulsion. As a matter of fact, it would be more suspenseful to witness his internal struggle than to witness his perversion in great detail.
Even if your character is a sadistic pedophile, we don't need to see him acting his on his vulgar impulses to feel revulsion. As a matter of fact, it would be more suspenseful to witness his internal struggle than to witness his perversion in great detail.
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,907
- Reaction score
- 1,835
- Location
- Hiding in my writing cave
- Website
- www.cathyclamp.com
I don't know that I agree that the level, or the explicitness of the sex can make it gratuitous by itself. I think it depends more on whether the plot moves forward BECAUSE of the sex or violence (or toothbrushing! 
Every plot's better with clean teeth...)
I consider it gratuitous when the plot doesn't require it, or the character development doesn't require it. If the story stands without the drop-in elements, then leave them out. But I don't agree that just the ability to remove the detail can turn a scene into an unnecessary one. If there's a reason for it, it should stand, regardless of the level of sex or violence (or excessive application of floss).
Every plot's better with clean teeth...) I consider it gratuitous when the plot doesn't require it, or the character development doesn't require it. If the story stands without the drop-in elements, then leave them out. But I don't agree that just the ability to remove the detail can turn a scene into an unnecessary one. If there's a reason for it, it should stand, regardless of the level of sex or violence (or excessive application of floss).
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2005
- Messages
- 23,708
- Reaction score
- 10,661
- Location
- In a world of my own making
- Website
- shadowferret.wordpress.com
Cathy C said:
Not to pick nits, although that's what I live for, what if the point of the above scene is to develop the character's flaw as a sex addict? Wouldn't it then NOT be gratuitous? It indicates the severity of his problem.
I would also add that "gratuitous" is a subjective word and probably more important than the definition is the source which is saying it. For example, "No gratuitous sex" in the Catholic Sun means NO sex...not even a hint of skin. While "BloodRipSuck Magazine" saying the same would be much, much different...
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2005
- Messages
- 470
- Reaction score
- 53
It's been said here but can be repeated, if it doesn't move the story it is gratuitous, it's filler. If a publisher is stating this upfront they are probably saying, don't try to use obvious sensationalized devices to try to be more marketable as a substitute for good writing.
Explicitness is bupkes. Nothing. It's subjective. Literary Guild slapped a "Warning: Explicit Sexual Content" on one of my books that Romance readers complained would have been better if it had had some real steamy scenes in it, they dubbed it "warm" not hot. What can I say? the scene had cake, it had bodies, it had emotional risk and cost, it did not have detailed instructions. I wasn't writing an instruction book.
I know a historical writer (not Romance if that matters) that had a villain do terrible things to a cat. It was part of the fabric of the story. The editor didn't say take it out - she said "make it a human so we won't get letters."
annie
Heathen Girls (available now)
Explicitness is bupkes. Nothing. It's subjective. Literary Guild slapped a "Warning: Explicit Sexual Content" on one of my books that Romance readers complained would have been better if it had had some real steamy scenes in it, they dubbed it "warm" not hot. What can I say? the scene had cake, it had bodies, it had emotional risk and cost, it did not have detailed instructions. I wasn't writing an instruction book.
I know a historical writer (not Romance if that matters) that had a villain do terrible things to a cat. It was part of the fabric of the story. The editor didn't say take it out - she said "make it a human so we won't get letters."
annie
Heathen Girls (available now)
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2005
- Messages
- 6,326
- Reaction score
- 856
Doing anything cruel to an animal is almost the definition of gratuitous. Regardless of letters, many writers try to think of the msot shocking thing to show just how EEEeeeevvvilll a villain is, and instead of making it something clever yet necessary, they opt for shocking and arbitrary.L.Jones said:
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,907
- Reaction score
- 1,835
- Location
- Hiding in my writing cave
- Website
- www.cathyclamp.com
Shadow_Ferret said:Not to pick nits, although that's what I live for, what if the point of the above scene is to develop the character's flaw as a sex addict? Wouldn't it then NOT be gratuitous? It indicates the severity of his problem.
Heh. Sure, but that wasn't part of the scenario I gave for the scene. You're adding nits, not picking them...
I agree with annie that it's subjective. Doubleday slapped an "excessive violence" on our last book. I didn't think it was NEARLY as violent as the first one, which didn't get the label.
It's back to the standing rules: Read what the publication/publisher produces. You'll then understand the guidelines.
End Of Alice?
Are any of you familiar with A. M. Homes?
Would you say her novel "End Of Alice" is gratuitous in its descriptions? For those aren't who familiar (or can't remember):
http://www.theedge.abelgratis.co.uk/bookseh/endofalice.htm
http://www.powells.com/authors/homes.html
Given the definitions posted above, it seems this novel could have survived being stripped of some of its more extensive descriptions of scab eating and inappropriate sex, but it definately would not have been as visceral, which was one of its defining elements.
Are any of you familiar with A. M. Homes?
Would you say her novel "End Of Alice" is gratuitous in its descriptions? For those aren't who familiar (or can't remember):
http://www.theedge.abelgratis.co.uk/bookseh/endofalice.htm
http://www.powells.com/authors/homes.html
Given the definitions posted above, it seems this novel could have survived being stripped of some of its more extensive descriptions of scab eating and inappropriate sex, but it definately would not have been as visceral, which was one of its defining elements.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,907
- Reaction score
- 1,835
- Location
- Hiding in my writing cave
- Website
- www.cathyclamp.com
My new screen saver! 
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2006
- Messages
- 133
- Reaction score
- 2
- Location
- Gettin' lucky in Kentucky...
- Website
- www.brandirhoades.com
L.Jones said:
Didn't that make you proud? I remember reading that Judy Blume said she always wanted to be "Banned in Boston" because that was such an honor. I feel the same as a reader. If a book has too much sex, violence, witchcraft, or other items generally offensive to the Christian Coalition crowd, I have to get it. I can't help it.
I don't think this is the type of thing you can measure out of context. Not just sex and violence, but EVERYTHING, IMO, needs to grow out of the context and from the characters. If your bad guy has wiped out your MC's family and they've been chasing them for 400 pages, you better show me one hell of a logical extension of that. Same goes for sex. If you've shown me building kinetic sexual tension, I better see a bottle rocket go off. With that said, if your characters are nuns, don't make me sick, either.
If you pay attention to your story arcs and to the growth of your characters, you'll know what's gratuitous and what isn't.
If you pay attention to your story arcs and to the growth of your characters, you'll know what's gratuitous and what isn't.
Remember that "gratuitous" is not the same thing as "excessive." "Excessive" is degree; "gratuitous" is type.
- Status