What do you think is the place of romance and sex in serious

>>9541459
A novel that does not address romantic or erotic love in some form will never be truly great.

>>9541464
Then you don't read many novels.

>>9541474
When I read, if a character never has any mention of a romance or carnal desire, they just feel fake. Love and sex is kind of intertwined with being human.

>>9541478
you seem like one of those old women who complain that "they only hold hands in pride and prejudice"
there's so much in a human being, yet you arbitrarily choose its sexual impulses as its main trait -- the will to power, for example, is kind of interwined with being human, does it mean that you only enjoy ambitious characters?
you are boring, read more before posting

The only good sex is offscreen sex.

>>9541507
i am not that other guy but i just had to comment that you sound awful. You acussig hime of being an old woman is just really stupid. He is not talking about sex but love and realations with women. Every great book needs to make a character real and sincere, and since "love" has an important place in everyones lives, a character wont be well build if the book doesnt mentions it. For example this shitty character in GOT, Gordon Ramsey, he wanted power but it looks anooying and its fucking hard to read because its just portaid as a machine, it could be a rock, thats not a human being. you look like those atheist neets that like science fiction and put humans rationality in a pedestal.

>>9541536
>needs to mention game of thrones to make his point
I'm laughing

>>9541558
what other book could i use as common ground? what other book so you know?

Romance and sex are parts of the oldest stories known to mankind. One of literatures greatest strengths is exploring human relationships in a condensed format. Humanity interacts using romance and sex, therefore, they have a place in literature. Stories don't necessarily have to cover the subject, but covering the subject can make a story great. Talking about adversion to sex and romance can also be interesting.

While not /lit/, Hollywood producers have a tendency to just tack a romance theme onto a story to increase ticket sales among women. Hollywood also likes throwing in an "x-rated": scene to increase interest among teenage boys. There is also a lot of low brow erotic fiction. Writers generally are also usually not the best with the opposite sex and thus often write about this subject clumsily. Nonetheless, regardless of how frequently depictions of sex and romance are bad, such depictions can be done well.

>>9541588
>Writers generally are also usually not the best with the opposite sex and thus often write about this subject clumsily
speak for yourself, faggot

I think as long as sex is something we desire and also feel completely weird about, it's always going to have a place in literature.

>>9541474

Like what?

>>9541625
Good question

>>9541459
To give me the urge to masturbate in an inappropriate place (i.e. hipster coffee shop bathrooms).

>>9541514
bump. sex is perfectly fine in a novel, but literature is a shit medium to go into detail about it

>>9541588
Very well put. Something may be said to the fact that I feel the need to validate wanting small amounts of romance in the novels I read. As a guy I feel like I'm not allowed to want the characters to fall in love/fuck like crazy.

I have yet to come across a novel that handles romance the way I want it. I'm assuming that there is no "perfect" amount, as opinions vary, but I find myself thinking about this topic a lot lately.

>>9541837
Off-page is really the best way to handle it. If you need it described to you then you have no imagination.

>>9541507
>choose it's sexual impulses as it's main trait
Funny I don't remember writing that...

>>9541459
You can always tell a hellavualot about a chick from the way she handles a length

>>9541854
If you need someone else to tell you a story at all, then you *clearly* have no imagination either.

>>9541459
I don't think graphic descriptions of sex have any place in serious novels, but leading up to the act of sex and talking about it afterwards, tastefully, do.

File: serveimage.jpg (3MB, 1568x2328px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1568x2328px

>>9542278

>>9541459
you might as well replace 'novel' with 'life'.

File: a e s t h e t i c.png (1MB, 710x831px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 710x831px

>>9541536
>"love" has an important place in everyones [sic] lives

Romance and sex? Not so much. Love? Very much so.
It's like every novel has it's main theme. Sex can be one of them, like within the human desires.
But you do not build the world for it to be dispelled by sex. Sex is basic, it takes away more than it gives. It's a rush. The leading to it may be interesting, same as the aftermath, but the act is simply an act.

>>9542658
What would you say is the difference between romance and love? I always thought that romance was the pursuit/application of love within a novel.

>>9541478
That's stupid af. What about Moby Dick? Yes, haha, you could say Queequeg and Ishmael have a bromance, but the novel is pretty much sexless and romanceless; it's an entirely male-dominated novel, but Ishmael, Ahab, Queequeg, and Starbuck all become incredibly real characters to the reader by the end of the story.

What's important is love. Love has no preference towards sex. You can love a man or a child just as well as you can love a woman. Every great book has love in it, not necessarily romance. Sometimes, if the love is between a woman and a man/people with sexual attraction towards each other, you can bring sex into it. But the idea that when we say "love" it's "penis in vagina", or romance, has tritened the idea of love. Not only that, but sometimes sex is clearly loveless. Sometimes it's just looking at a woman's ass as she passes by. In that case, it's almost no deeper than being hungry while you pass by a bakery.

t. prude

>>9542820
>Sometimes it's just looking at a woman's ass as she passes by
(which isn't sex of course, but sexual attraction or the feeling of carnal desire which you say is important to make a character human)

File: long john strut.jpg (53KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 600x600px

Terrible, it will always feel forced. At worst: indulgent and fetishised.

>>9542820
I hadn't thought about it that way, you're right.

I guess this board (or literature enthusiasts in general) have a distinction between love and romance that I never really grasped.

>>9542721
Love is not bound by sexual relation, love is far more. Be it towards a pet, a relative, a partner.
The understanding of who a person is, loving them past your own ego. It can change oneself on a fundamental level.
Romance is only the first effort, a blissfull state of mind. A romantic gesture. The love for a small portion of what makes another person.
Romance can't be the main point of a novel, though it can transcend to love. Or to understanding what love is.
Romance is ya stuff, love is literature.

>>9541459
I was reading Big Bad Love by Larry Brown and most of the explicit sex scenes in the stories were necessary imo, especially in the titular Big Bad Love. As opposed to Houellebecq where it seemed more masturbatory.

>>9541459
Is there a serious novel that's ~not~ about romance and sex?

The place of romance and sex, in novels as well as in real life, is in the trash.

>>9543298
T. Baased source. Has most likely had intercourse.