
www.Usenet.com
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
Justin wrote: > Based on Bujold's past writing, I also rather suspect she avoids explicit > description of genital manipulation and intercourse. In MIRROR DANCE, for > example, she includes the anal rape and genital torture of one of her main > characters. She achieves a very *graphic* result -- leaving an indelible > impression upon your mind -- but she does not do so by *explicitly* > describing the rape or torture. > > Frankly, I find Bujold's approach more effective for the same reason I > find the shower scene in PSYCHO more effective than a slasher flick. I've not read the Bujold in question, but my general impression of her as an author concurs. As for the general principle behind this, it's something Scott Card says in 'Chracter and Viewpoint': if you put too much onto the page, you absolve the reader from having to construct it in his own head _and react to it_. Telling the reader 'laugh now' is nowhere near as amusing as a joke or amusing anecdote. I dare say the same applies to 'be aroused now'. Psycho, yes, a masterpiece. First time I saw it was more or less back to back with some big thriller or other (Earthquake?) and it seemed pale, tame. Second time around I saw it on its own, could appreciate the slow, innocuous, gentle leading up to tension better, and when the curtain fell, although I *knew*, it was one of those moments that burnt itself into the retina. Catja
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |