You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.44 AVERAGE
3.44 AVERAGE
Okay, first of all, this book contains a lot of rape and incest and pedophilia for titillation. That's not a review, it's just an advisory label. I have strongly held convictions on the subject of labeling and honesty and I don't think there's any level of merit that changes that; if it would warrant a label on AO3, then it would warrant a label on a popular book of literary erotica. Them's the breaks.
That being said, if there were any level of merit that mattered here--and again, there isn't--Delta of Venus really wouldn't meet it. It's basically porn one-shots for the extremely image-conscious.
I feel bad ragging on a work of taboo erotica, essentially, because it's such low-hanging fruit. The maxim "the more people like it, the fewer people love it" applies to sex and sex-related things even more than storytelling in general, I think. To create porn that nobody could point at and be either aghast or mockingly scornful is to create porn that nobody really wants to read, either. Essentially there's no social ritual more smug and safe than disapproving of what other people get off on in written fiction, so I feel a little uneasy taking part in it.
It's not really disapproval, though, so much as noting that the whole idea of there being "objectively more interesting/artistic erotica" in a cultural sense is both dumb and probably a pretty good sign that whoever's saying it is lying. In this case, Anais Nin's reputation kind of owes to her cult icon as being a woman who was intellectual and artsy but also sexually voracious, which appeals to a lot of people, obviously, as an identity to adopt. So Delta of Venus is like a collection of moderately messed-up (I only say moderately because of the bottomless depravity of the human imagination plummeting a lot further than this; obviously if these were IRL acts they would be a hell of a lot more than that) fantasies that might appeal to a bisexual woman with an interest in world travel and beautiful perversions.
That's kind of the default profile of "erotica" as a word, though--woman-centric, mostly heterosexual, some bisexuality, some voyeuristic interest in gay male sex, violent in a coercion/ravishment sense but not in a graphically injurious one. (I feel like "porn" as a word on the other hand conjures heterosexual men as an audience, and lowbrowness.) Cultural stuff, I guess.
I could sort of feel this whole collection trying to awaken the dark psychosexual corners of the womanhood I do not possess. I could also sort of feel the presence of Electric Lit, Instagram, and the neighborhood of Williamsburg at all times, which I suppose isn't Anais Nin's particular fault, but being able to imagine the thinkpiece on how important something is and why you shouldn't criticize it is probably the unsexiest thing that can happen to a piece of pornography. Aside from featuring a ton of tits, I guess! I shouldn't be intellectually dishonest about my ability to rate porn with women in it; I have literally no interest in tits or vagina in the tangible or intangible spheres, so perhaps I should've just left this unrated with a label saying "Too Gay For This Book, Don't Know Why I Tried." I guess there was one bit that was gay-looking, but as I also have literally no interest in envisioning the sexual lives of anyone under 22 years old, I skipped it.
But honestly, the whole thing is just not that great if you aren't into the specific cross-section of things Anais Nin was into, and it's a little hard to determine externally whether you are. This strikes me as an aspirational book, for people who want to feel both literary and edgy at the same time, like Tampa, although I will go back on what I said earlier and admit that I would probably put anyone who is too ardently into Tampa on a watchlist. Anyway, the other thing it is is an object of curiosity. If so, get it from the library. I did! Now I am giving it back.
That being said, if there were any level of merit that mattered here--and again, there isn't--Delta of Venus really wouldn't meet it. It's basically porn one-shots for the extremely image-conscious.
I feel bad ragging on a work of taboo erotica, essentially, because it's such low-hanging fruit. The maxim "the more people like it, the fewer people love it" applies to sex and sex-related things even more than storytelling in general, I think. To create porn that nobody could point at and be either aghast or mockingly scornful is to create porn that nobody really wants to read, either. Essentially there's no social ritual more smug and safe than disapproving of what other people get off on in written fiction, so I feel a little uneasy taking part in it.
It's not really disapproval, though, so much as noting that the whole idea of there being "objectively more interesting/artistic erotica" in a cultural sense is both dumb and probably a pretty good sign that whoever's saying it is lying. In this case, Anais Nin's reputation kind of owes to her cult icon as being a woman who was intellectual and artsy but also sexually voracious, which appeals to a lot of people, obviously, as an identity to adopt. So Delta of Venus is like a collection of moderately messed-up (I only say moderately because of the bottomless depravity of the human imagination plummeting a lot further than this; obviously if these were IRL acts they would be a hell of a lot more than that) fantasies that might appeal to a bisexual woman with an interest in world travel and beautiful perversions.
That's kind of the default profile of "erotica" as a word, though--woman-centric, mostly heterosexual, some bisexuality, some voyeuristic interest in gay male sex, violent in a coercion/ravishment sense but not in a graphically injurious one. (I feel like "porn" as a word on the other hand conjures heterosexual men as an audience, and lowbrowness.) Cultural stuff, I guess.
I could sort of feel this whole collection trying to awaken the dark psychosexual corners of the womanhood I do not possess. I could also sort of feel the presence of Electric Lit, Instagram, and the neighborhood of Williamsburg at all times, which I suppose isn't Anais Nin's particular fault, but being able to imagine the thinkpiece on how important something is and why you shouldn't criticize it is probably the unsexiest thing that can happen to a piece of pornography. Aside from featuring a ton of tits, I guess! I shouldn't be intellectually dishonest about my ability to rate porn with women in it; I have literally no interest in tits or vagina in the tangible or intangible spheres, so perhaps I should've just left this unrated with a label saying "Too Gay For This Book, Don't Know Why I Tried." I guess there was one bit that was gay-looking, but as I also have literally no interest in envisioning the sexual lives of anyone under 22 years old, I skipped it.
But honestly, the whole thing is just not that great if you aren't into the specific cross-section of things Anais Nin was into, and it's a little hard to determine externally whether you are. This strikes me as an aspirational book, for people who want to feel both literary and edgy at the same time, like Tampa, although I will go back on what I said earlier and admit that I would probably put anyone who is too ardently into Tampa on a watchlist. Anyway, the other thing it is is an object of curiosity. If so, get it from the library. I did! Now I am giving it back.
adventurous
challenging
dark
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
what the hell did i just read
Content Warnings
Graphic: Adult/minor relationship, Incest, Sexism, Sexual assault, Sexual content, Sexual violence, Toxic relationship, Sexual harassment
Moderate: Homophobia
adventurous
challenging
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
N/A
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
N/A
I read most of it. It wasn't bad, but a little pretentious. I really enjoyed her introduction.
medium-paced
dark
emotional
mysterious
relaxing
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
challenging
dark
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
funny
lighthearted
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
N/A
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
I have to give this book credit considering how radical it would have been for a female writer in the 40s to even write this stuff but I’m not sure it’s super enjoyable outside of this context, especially since some of the short stories haven’t aged very well.
adventurous
dark
emotional
informative
lighthearted
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
N/A
Strong character development:
N/A
Loveable characters:
N/A
Diverse cast of characters:
N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus:
N/A
Remembering that Nin hated the fact she had to write these.
You know that desk job you do cause you need money to live. That is what these little works were for her.
I found a few of them questionable. I was more shocked and didn't enjoy the writing story.
You know that desk job you do cause you need money to live. That is what these little works were for her.
I found a few of them questionable. I was more shocked and didn't enjoy the writing story.