Chels

This week’s post has been inspired by the promotional content for the new Dracula Audible Original. Specifically, this clip from the cast recording. I’ve read Dracula. It’s not a particularly erotic book (although I will concede that there’s a lot to discuss about the Victorian aversion to sexuality, particularly that of women, that Stoker explores through vampirism. How, then, did this gothic tale of horror and allure become quite so salacious?

Erotic literature is as old as literature itself, and to recount a full history would be nearly impossible and far too long. Instead, I want to focus on the last 600 years or so, with the introduction of the printing press. Like all literature, erotic literature wasn’t circulated widely prior to the invention of the printing press. Creating manuscripts was costly, and very few were produced – those that were produced were generally limited to wealthy readers and exclusive groups. Once printing became cheaper and easier, the market for literature increased, but with it came censorship and restriction. Works deemed to be ‘obscene’ were taboo, and often had to continue to be printed and distributed secretly.

The 17th century saw plenty of erotic poetry published, some of which was more accepted than others. Aphra Behn may not have been incredibly popular during her lifetime, but it meant that her works also tended not to be censored. She was known for her rebelliousness, and her works criticised the roles that women were often subjected to, but she was also unafraid to write poetry, plays, and novels that focused on sex and sexuality. Erotic, or obscene (as they were then often known) poetry was largely a male space, but Behn used her poetry to interrogate gender roles while still playing with libertine attitudes towards desire. Her most well-known poem, The Disappointment, ends

He Curst his Birth, his Fate, his Stars,

But more the Shapherdesses Charms;

Whose soft bewitching influence,

Had Damn’d him to the Hell of Impotence.

Behn’s contemporary, John Wilmot, is considerably more well known – usually by his title the Earl of Rochester. Personally, I much prefer Behn’s works, but it wouldn’t do to only include the writers I enjoy. Behn’s The Disappointment worked in dialogue with Rochester’s Imperfect Enjoyment, which begins

Naked she lay, clasped in my longing arms,

I filled with love, and she all over charms;

Both equally inspired with eager fire,

Melting through kindness, flaming in desire.

With arms,legs,lips close clinging to embrace,

She clips me to her breast, and sucks me to her face.

Rochester’s works were focused on debauchery and decadence, and where Behn sought to examine gender and sexuality, Rochester appeared threatened by it, especially female sexuality.

The problem with discussing long-dead poets, and with a history of erotic literature in general, is that we have a much different vocabulary to describe our ideas and actions than Rochester and his contemporaries did. These days, we understand Rochester to have been bisexual, and some argue that he somewhat desired to be a woman. It was well known that Rochester had relationships with both men and women, but during his lifetime, his bisexuality was not the cause for his scandal, rather, it was the overconsumption of sex that was seen as the issue. Prior to the 18th century, ideas around sexuality were much different than we assume of the past. In the same way, early Modern literature allowed portrayals of women as sexually aggressive or insatiable, but Victorian sensibilities completely shifted this view.

As sensibilities changed, so did literature. Of course, erotic literature existed in the 18th and 19th centuries, but much less of it is known today. Aside from some poetry collections, there’s very little work of note. It’s very likely that erotic literature was distributed secretly during the period. That’s not to say that Victorian literature didn’t explore sex and sexuality. Dracula was published towards the end of the Victorian era, and while it’s not explicitly erotic, it can certainly be interpreted that way. A lot of gothic and horror literature can be examined as critiques of societal expectations, and while Gothic Romances aren’t sexually explicit, novels like Frankenstein and Wuthering Heights have been examined as stories of female sexuality (and, more recently, adapted through an erotic lens).

With the turn of the century came the Modernists, who had much more liberal sensibilities. Most notably was DH Lawrence, whose novel Lady Chatterley’s Lover initially couldn’t be published in the UK due to its explicit nature. The novel was even the subject of what is considered a groundbreaking court case. In short, there was an attempt to prevent the publication of the novel in the UK on the grounds of obscenity, but Penguin was able to argue the merits and value of the novel, ultimately winning the court case. The trial reflected changing attitudes in the UK during the sexual revolution.

Despite this, for some reason we seem incapable of speaking openly about the novel. My edition features an introduction which celebrates the novel’s use of ‘previously unpublishable four letter words’. I’m no good with idioms; I tend to take things literally, so when I read this, I assumed it was perhaps related to a revolution in printing, similar to the suggestion that Shakespeare’s name became Shakespeare from Shakspere for clearer printing. Even in celebrating the explicit nature of the book, we are somehow incapable of speaking plainly.

Around the same time that Lady Chatterley’s Lover was resisting censorship, the publishing company Mills & Boon were turning their attention to the romance genre. Even if you’re unfamiliar with Mills & Boon, you’ll be aware of their reputation. Romance novels have tended to be mocked and discounted as poor quality or not worthwhile literature. Of course, the reason for this is clear – romance novels have a predominantly female audience, and as a whole, we seem completely unable to treat women’s interests with any respect. Even the more valid criticisms of mass-produced romance novels become invalid when put into perspective – there’s a belief that since multiple stories are released each month, that no effort has been put into writing them. A lot of this comes from the misconception that there aren’t at least dozens of writers contributing novels to the Mills & Boon imprint, but it also doesn’t hold up in comparison – there are countless authors in more ‘masculine’ genres like crime and thriller that publish multiple novels a year, but they don’t face the same criticism because the goal is to disparage women. 400 years ago erotic poetry was a largely male space, and those early works are taken seriously, but now that the demographic is predominantly female writers and readers, it’s no longer treated with respect.

I think that the huge popularity of the Fifty Shades series was a turning point for erotic literature. The books were so popular among so many women, and of course, they faced a lot of criticism. Was a lot of it deserved? Most likely, but still, other books have become hugely popular with much less friction, and usually, if they’re popular with men, they’re safer from criticism. Much like Lady Chatterley’s Lover, the Fifty Shades series seemingly opened the floodgates for more openness in terms of erotic literature. Without it, I doubt that BookTok would have been able to be so open about smut. Now, smutty romance novels aren’t hidden away in the corner of bookshops, they’re sold with all the other fiction. Even the niche subgenres are more well known and varied than the genre as a whole in the past. People are unashamed to read smutty romances on public transport, or in their book clubs, or to recommend them to a friend.

And, to come full circle, we now have Quinn, the audio erotica app. During Dracula promotion, Jonathan Bailey, who plays Dracula, was asked if he’d consider recording an audiobook for Quinn, and his response was yes. So much of the taboo around erotic literature seems to have dissipated in the last few years. Interestingly, though, as attitudes have shifted, the terms we use have become more euphemistic – obscene works were distributed in secret, romance novels were acceptable, but belittled, and now spicy content is celebrated. I do wonder why that’s been the case.