circletpress:
Like a Trip Through the Mirror: Alternate Reality Erotica
Deadline:July 15, 2012
Ever wondered what’s on the other side of the mirror? From Alice stepping through the looking glass to Mirror Universes, exploring other versions of reality can show us the weird, the wonderful, and the strange twists on the things most familiar to us, especially when it comes to sex and sexuality. Step through the right dimensional door, and there is a universe where your particular kink is commonplace or your ex-lover finds you irresistible. Do you know someone who has created a fantasy world, where she has her own harem of sexy studs? Let’s hear all about it! We want to see accidents of magic and fate that lead us to a sexy new world, experiments in physics that open new doors to places with erotic potential, and technology that takes us into worlds of our secret imaginations. Anything that takes us outside reality as we know it is fair game as long as it turns us on!
All sexualities and gender expressions are welcomed.
LIKE A TRIP THROUGH THE MIRROR will be edited by Kathleen Tudor.
For more details on how to submit, keep reading:
Length: Our preferred length is approximately 3500 to 7500 words, but we will consider the range from 2000 to 10,000 words.
How to Submit: All submissions must be made via email to Kathleen Tudor, editor, at the following address: polykathleen@gmail.com
Submissions sent to other addresses/other editors at Circlet Press will not be considered. Standard manuscript formatting rules apply even though sending as an attachment (MS Word .doc or .rtf preferred). Please note that this means your name, address, and email contact must appear on the manuscript itself and not simply in your email message. (If you’re not sure what standard short story submission format should look like, Google is your friend.)
No simultaneous submissions (that is, don’t also send your story elsewhere at the same time, and don’t send it to multiple Circlet editors, either), and no multiple submissions to the same book. One story per author per anthology, thanks.
All stories must include explicit sexuality and erotic focus. Romantic content is welcome, but in a short story remember to keep the details on the action and its effects on the main character’s internal point of view. We favor a strong, singular narrative voice (no ‘head hopping’). For more details on our editorial preferences, see the general submission guidelines on circlet.com. We highly recommend reading the guidelines, especially the “do not send” list, to increase your chances of sending us something we’ll love. Try to avoid cliches. Fresh and direct language is preferred to overly euphemistic. Sex-positive, please, no rape/nonconsensuality/necrophilia or other purposefully gross topics. We do not publish horror.
Originals only, no reprints. We purchase first rights for inclusion in the ebook anthology for $25, with the additional rights to a print edition later which would also be paid $25 if a print edition happens. Authors retain the rights to the individual stories; Circlet exercises rights to the anthology as a whole.
http://www.circlet.com/?p=4065
I miiiiight have some ideas for this one. Hmmmm.
So I’ve decided, for reasons, to make a page on my site where I will list romances that feature main characters with disabilities. By which I mean romances where at least one protagonist has a disability that is portrayed in a largely realistic and respectful way, ie none of this “the heroine is deaf in one ear which has no bearing on the plot or characterization until a very convenient moment at the end,”* or “the hero can’t move his arm until he is HEALED BY LOVE,” or “the heroine has a disability solely so that she can overcome it dramatically and be an example to us all,” or “the hero is disabled except when the writer forgets” stuff. I have actually read several good stories that will fit comfortably on this list! But I know there must be more. Thus, this post. If you know of any, please reblog with your additions, or email me at elizabeth at elizabethreeve.com, or send me an @ on Twitter (elizareeve), or otherwise let me know? Any kind of disability, and any subgenre of romance (or even if the story isn’t really marketed as romance, but you think it really pretty much is) is great. Thank you!
Here’s the list so far:
Historical Romances:
One Dance With a Duke, by Tessa Dare.
Three Nights With a Scoundrel, by Tessa Dare.
Trial by Desire, by Courtney Milan.
Unraveled, by Courtney Milan.
Unveiled, by Courtney Milan.
Paranormal Romance:
Wolf Signs, by Vivian Arend.
Sci-fi Romance:
A Civil Campaign, by Lois McMaster Bujold. (This is in the “not marketed as romance but I think it pretty much is” type of entry.)
* I’m okay with “the heroine has a disability which has no real impact on the plot at all but is just a part of her life, much like being a brunette” or something, though - I just object to the deus ex machina-style disability.
I’m in a meme-y mood, so here’s this one:
1. Go to page 7 of your most recent WiP
2. Count seven lines down
3. Copy and paste the next seven lines of text
Except I’m going with the next seven paragraphs because that’s a little more fun! This is from the sequel to “A Woman of Uncommon Accomplishment.”
She called another fire into her hand, and spoke at random. “Well, yes. But I’m much smaller than you are.”
Drawing attention to this disparity was, perhaps, a mistake.
The barghest howled again, and charged toward her. Mary threw her second ball of flame - a little wide of the mark, this time, though it did singe along the demon’s flank - and then scrabbled backward, knowing that it was too late to run even before she felt solid brick at her back. The barghest’s jaws were opened wide, and Mary covered her face and hoped the end wouldn’t hurt too terribly.
She felt the demon close its jaws around her body, from hip to shoulder. Distantly, she heard Nick shouting. There was a sharp pain along her arm as one fang sliced through her cloak and sleeve to the flesh beneath, and then—
The barghest released her. Mary peeked out between her fingers to see it turn, roaring, back toward Nick. But it was too late - it was already dissolving into mist, entirely insubstantial in comparison to the cloud form it had taken earlier.
“I’ll find you!” it cried. “Some day, I’ll make you pay!”
“Fiddlestick,” said Mary to its vanishing form. And then she sat down hard upon the ground, feeling quite faint.
(This is a mirror of a post I just made on my site.)
I read a couple of essays today that really resonated with me.
Link time! First up is “All About Pleasure: The Politics of Arousal,” by Donna George Storey on the Erotica Readers and Writers Association blog. Storey talks about the recent PayPal censorship issue, and points out that fiction is generally meant to arouse somethingin the reader:
The truth is people read all fiction to be aroused. Erotica is assumed to focus only on sexual arousal. Literary and mainstream fiction are supposed to stay above the waist to arouse love and hate, our sense of justice and morality, and an identification with the fate of the characters. I can’t count how many times I’ve read advice for literary writers to give your poor protagonist as many trials and conflicts as possible, the better to create a sense of pleasurable release when she prevails. Eroticists are accused of manipulating their readers for a low purpose in that perhaps—or even hopefully [gasp]—the story will lead to what has traditionally been referred to as “self-abuse.”
Storey goes on to point out how frequently child abuse or childrens’ deaths crop up in more literary fiction, seemingly as an authorial shortcut to stirring the reader’s emotions. Which is kind of gross, right? I mean, that makes me a lot more uncomfortable than the vast majority of erotica does.
Link number two is “Romance, Arousal, and Condescension,” by SB Sarah over at Smart Bitches, Trashy Books. I’ve seen people who care a lot about pointing out that romance writing is legitimate writingsay “romance is not porn for women” many times, and it usually makes me wince a little, because I feel like there’s an invisible “because porn is inherently bad and romance is not!” tacked on, or maybe some icky evolutionary psychology bullshit about how women and men have totally different, hardwired arousal responses and whatnot. So when I see that phrase, I tend to go read something else. Sarah caught my attention with it this time, though, because she added in the same bold print:
Porn is porn for women.
There is nothing wrong with either one.
And whatever a woman employs to satisfy her own sexual curiosity and hornypants is her business, not yours.
She then writes about how hard it is to actually define stuff like porn and erotica (no kidding!), but what I really liked about the blog post is her discussion of how condescension and discomfort surrounding women reading romance is largely condescension and discomfort surrounding women being sexual. Which is kind of a big thing at the moment here in my country…as well as almost everywhere and everywhen else. Very thought-provoking stuff. Go! Read!
Also, I promise you this is the last time I will beg for votes (well, for this, at least), but Cecilia Tan extended the deadline for voting on the poll at Circlet Press for the upcoming print anthology, so: If you happen to read this before March 19th, and you want to make me really happy, go here and vote for “A Woman of Uncommon Accomplishment” by Elizabeth Reeve (Sense and Sensuality), please!
