Take a photo of a barcode or cover
2.95 AVERAGE
2.95 AVERAGE
funny
medium-paced
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
I knew that pre-Victorian literature was not as conservative but my oh my does this give modern smut a run for its money 😂😂 According to one review:
If you've heard one euphemism for penis, you...well, you haven't heard them all. Once you finish this book, then you'll have heard them all.
This is bad but comically so, hence the higher rating
Dear John...let me introduce you to the period.
I know this is an old book, but wow. Every sentence is a run-on, and it's exhausting to read. I'm skipping ahead to the naughty bits as though I'm a virgin schoolchild.
I know this is an old book, but wow. Every sentence is a run-on, and it's exhausting to read. I'm skipping ahead to the naughty bits as though I'm a virgin schoolchild.
I saw a quite of few review say this is just porn and I have to disagree to that. The book is divided in 2 sections which are both letters to the reader. The first is the tale of how she got into the life of a "woman of pleasure". They didnt describe each act of sex but more the highlights and important moments that bring her to the life.
In part 2, she joins a group of woman and we learn about each of the girls and their first moments. Each descriptive encounter makes sense and again play importance in her life.
This is the oldest book I have read being written in 1748. Much of it was quite difficult to follow (for me) and at times I found myself saying "huh" a lot. The descriptive way of talking about the actions and body parts were quite interesting. I think there was much that could have been cut down due to repeativeness. But overall, it was decent. Beware of very long sentences that today would have broken up into like 10 or more.
In part 2, she joins a group of woman and we learn about each of the girls and their first moments. Each descriptive encounter makes sense and again play importance in her life.
This is the oldest book I have read being written in 1748. Much of it was quite difficult to follow (for me) and at times I found myself saying "huh" a lot. The descriptive way of talking about the actions and body parts were quite interesting. I think there was much that could have been cut down due to repeativeness. But overall, it was decent. Beware of very long sentences that today would have broken up into like 10 or more.
I wasn't that surprised or shocked by the content of Fanny Hill. Neither was I shocked by the time period in which it was written. It is after all centered on the oldest profession in the world. However, I was surprised to discover that the author felt the need to end things with a tribute to love and virtue.
It was free on Gutenberg and seventeen year old Anya wanted some sexy fun times. Unfortunately, this book was pure porn with no sexy fun times to be had. Seventeen year old Anya was very disappointed. :c
The following gets a little explicit. If you're not cool with that, best skip it.
I can mostly briefly sum this one up by saying that it reminded me quite a bit of Roxana, but a good deal less whiny and much more explicit. Fortunately, despite the explicitness, I didn't find it particularly sexy, or it would have become rather awkward to read it on the bus. I will say that it's super obvious that this was written by a man, for two reasons. (1) Very few women are as obsessed with cocks — and their size — as men are. Seriously, with one exception every one she encountered was of a prodigious size, and somehow bigger than the last, and, naturally, they were all magnificent. And (2) Allowing for some leeway due to the era in which it was written, only a dude would be so apparently committed to the idea that Tab A into Slot B is all that's required for overwhelming ecstasy to ensue. On the other hand, at least he acknowledges that sex actually can be fun for women, so that's something.
Furthermore, allow me to point out two things for the benefit of any virgins who might be reading, and who will be subject to what passes for sexual education in many places. (1) As implied above, if Tab A into Slot B isn't enough to send you off into the heights of whatever, that is not an indication that anything is wrong with you. (2) The loss of your virginity, while it may being some discomfort and a little blood, should not be as physically difficult as presented here, and it should not be so painful and damaging to your insides that you're out of commission for days afterwards. If it is, there is something wrong, and you should get that checked out.
OK, PSA over.
I can mostly briefly sum this one up by saying that it reminded me quite a bit of Roxana, but a good deal less whiny and much more explicit. Fortunately, despite the explicitness, I didn't find it particularly sexy, or it would have become rather awkward to read it on the bus. I will say that it's super obvious that this was written by a man, for two reasons. (1) Very few women are as obsessed with cocks — and their size — as men are. Seriously, with one exception every one she encountered was of a prodigious size, and somehow bigger than the last, and, naturally, they were all magnificent. And (2) Allowing for some leeway due to the era in which it was written, only a dude would be so apparently committed to the idea that Tab A into Slot B is all that's required for overwhelming ecstasy to ensue. On the other hand, at least he acknowledges that sex actually can be fun for women, so that's something.
Furthermore, allow me to point out two things for the benefit of any virgins who might be reading, and who will be subject to what passes for sexual education in many places. (1) As implied above, if Tab A into Slot B isn't enough to send you off into the heights of whatever, that is not an indication that anything is wrong with you. (2) The loss of your virginity, while it may being some discomfort and a little blood, should not be as physically difficult as presented here, and it should not be so painful and damaging to your insides that you're out of commission for days afterwards. If it is, there is something wrong, and you should get that checked out.
OK, PSA over.
I have to acknowledge that this has been written in the 18th century, thus, bearing that in mind, this is a great piece of work! Although it is today quite controversial and I did cringe while reading some passages (since the descriptions are not very accurate and relevant), the author was daring and shaped the start of erotic novels. Bravo.
Purple prose from the mid-eighteenth century:
"Lifted then to the utmost pitch of joy that human life can bear, undestroyed by excess, I touched that sweetly critical point, when, scarce prevented by the spermatic injection from my partner spurting liquid fire up to my vitals, I dissolved, and breaking out into a deep drawn sigh, sent my whole sensitive soul down to that passage where escape was denied it, by its being so deliciously plugged and choked up."
"Oh Sir! - Good Sir! - pray do not spare me! ah! ah! - I can no more."
"Lifted then to the utmost pitch of joy that human life can bear, undestroyed by excess, I touched that sweetly critical point, when, scarce prevented by the spermatic injection from my partner spurting liquid fire up to my vitals, I dissolved, and breaking out into a deep drawn sigh, sent my whole sensitive soul down to that passage where escape was denied it, by its being so deliciously plugged and choked up."
"Oh Sir! - Good Sir! - pray do not spare me! ah! ah! - I can no more."
Free download available at Project Gutenberg.
Opening lines:
I sit down to give you an undeniable proof of my considering your desires as indispensable orders. Ungracious then as the task may be, I shall recall to view those scandalous stages of my life, out of which I emerged, at length, to the enjoyment of every blessing in the power of love, health and fortune to bestow; whilst yet in the flower of youth, and not too late to employ the leisure afforded me by great ease and affluence, to cultivate an understanding, naturally not a despicable one, and which had, even amidst the whirl of loose pleasures I had been tossed in, exerted more observation on the characters and manners of the world than what is common to those of my unhappy profession, who, looking on all though or reflection as their capital enemy, keep it at as great a distance as they can, or destroy it without mercy.
I wonder why this book was considered as a banned book. Just found out at Wikipedia:
In the 19th century, copies of the book were sold "underground." The book eventually made its way to the United States, where in 1821 it was banned for obscenity. It was not until 1963, after the failure of the British obscenity trial of Lady Chatterley's Lover in 1960 that Mayflower Books, run by Gareth Powell, published an unexpurgated paperback version of Fanny Hill. The police became aware of the 1963 edition a few days before publication, after spotting a sign in the window of the Magic Shop in Tottenham Court Road in London, run by Ralph Gold. An officer went to the shop and bought a copy and delivered it to the Bow Street magistrate Sir Robert Blundell, who issued a search warrant. At the same time, two officers from the vice squad visited Mayflower Books in Vauxhall Bridge Road to determine if quantities of the book were kept on the premises. They interviewed the publisher, Gareth Powell, and took away the only five copies there. The police returned to the Magic Shop and seized 171 copies of the book, and in December Ralph Gold was summonsed under section 3 of the Obscenity Act. By then, Mayflower had distributed 82,000 copies of the book, but it was Gold rather than Mayflower or Fanny Hill who was being tried, although Mayflower covered the legal costs. The trial took place in February 1964. The defence argued that Fanny Hill was a historical source book and that it was a joyful celebration of normal non-perverted sex—bawdy rather than pornographic. The prosecution countered by stressing one atypical scene involving flagellation, and won. Mayflower decided not to appeal. However the case had highlighted the growing disconnect between the obscenity laws and the social realities of late 1960s Britain, and was instrumental in shifting views to the point where in 1970 an unexpurgated version of Fanny Hill was once again published in Britain.
Overdrafts of Pleasure - The Paris Review
Opening lines:
I sit down to give you an undeniable proof of my considering your desires as indispensable orders. Ungracious then as the task may be, I shall recall to view those scandalous stages of my life, out of which I emerged, at length, to the enjoyment of every blessing in the power of love, health and fortune to bestow; whilst yet in the flower of youth, and not too late to employ the leisure afforded me by great ease and affluence, to cultivate an understanding, naturally not a despicable one, and which had, even amidst the whirl of loose pleasures I had been tossed in, exerted more observation on the characters and manners of the world than what is common to those of my unhappy profession, who, looking on all though or reflection as their capital enemy, keep it at as great a distance as they can, or destroy it without mercy.
I wonder why this book was considered as a banned book. Just found out at Wikipedia:
In the 19th century, copies of the book were sold "underground." The book eventually made its way to the United States, where in 1821 it was banned for obscenity. It was not until 1963, after the failure of the British obscenity trial of Lady Chatterley's Lover in 1960 that Mayflower Books, run by Gareth Powell, published an unexpurgated paperback version of Fanny Hill. The police became aware of the 1963 edition a few days before publication, after spotting a sign in the window of the Magic Shop in Tottenham Court Road in London, run by Ralph Gold. An officer went to the shop and bought a copy and delivered it to the Bow Street magistrate Sir Robert Blundell, who issued a search warrant. At the same time, two officers from the vice squad visited Mayflower Books in Vauxhall Bridge Road to determine if quantities of the book were kept on the premises. They interviewed the publisher, Gareth Powell, and took away the only five copies there. The police returned to the Magic Shop and seized 171 copies of the book, and in December Ralph Gold was summonsed under section 3 of the Obscenity Act. By then, Mayflower had distributed 82,000 copies of the book, but it was Gold rather than Mayflower or Fanny Hill who was being tried, although Mayflower covered the legal costs. The trial took place in February 1964. The defence argued that Fanny Hill was a historical source book and that it was a joyful celebration of normal non-perverted sex—bawdy rather than pornographic. The prosecution countered by stressing one atypical scene involving flagellation, and won. Mayflower decided not to appeal. However the case had highlighted the growing disconnect between the obscenity laws and the social realities of late 1960s Britain, and was instrumental in shifting views to the point where in 1970 an unexpurgated version of Fanny Hill was once again published in Britain.
Overdrafts of Pleasure - The Paris Review