Fifty shades of black and blue and grey?

[Guest]

I had not read Tolkien since high school until a few years ago -- well, actually maybe ten years ago -- when I read the six-book "trilogy" to my children. As a forty-something-year-old, I found his detailed descriptions highly entertaining, even magical, whereas I simply skipped over them, completely unread, as a teen. I suspect many people who remember Tolkien as verbose and meandering might find his prose lovely if they reread it as adults.

 

I reread the book with the first Jackson's LoTR first came out.  I enjoyed the books more as a teen than as an adult (well, I guess the movie affected it).  At least, as a teen, I was more tolerant of allowing Tolkien to build the image of the scene completely in my head.  Whereas, after having seen the movie, I don't have as much patience for it because I can superimpose the movie into my head.

 

Oh, there are also different types of readers... and even one reader can have different moods.  For example - I'm more into character and plot on most things.  But, when I pick up a Star Wars or XMen book, I'm into the world building just as much as the character and plot.  I get obsessive with world-building books... when I re-read Drizzt, for example, I couldn't read anything else until I get all 30+ books re-read.  It's a big time investment.  So when I read these books, I grab every single detail the author hands out.  Salvatore is not as verbose as Tolkien but he can be at times (some of his earlier books were very well developed... there are some later books that he got lazy on).  But, anyway, it is a mood I get into.  Same as reading poetry for me.  I have to be in the mood to have patience with lyrical cadence to get into the story.  Otherwise, it can be just a drag.

 

But most of the time, I just want to know the character and what happens next.  I can tolerate carboard characters if there's one good one I can glom on to.  What I really like about Orson Card - all his characters are individuals.  They speak/act/react completely differently among each other.  Ender, for example, talks and acts completely differently to Valentine than to Petra.  Most writers can't do that.  Nicholas Sparks have one voice for all the main male characters no matter who they are interacting with.  They all sound like what I imagine he sounds like to his wife.

[NightSG]

Now, count how many popular fiction books are out there where the hero saves the day by bringing people to Jesus Christ.

 

Can I count the ones where the hero saves the day by sending bad people to meet Him in person?

[char713]

50 Shades IS a glorified fan fiction that was based on Twilight. This has been proven, she was a popular fan fic author online and was approached by a publisher, she changed a few things to avoid copyright or plagarism issues, and 50 shades is the result. I have not and will not ever read any of E.L. James' books. To my mind, that woman is evil, pure and simple. 

 

Going to back to the discussion that ridiculously compared 50 Shades to the Book of Mormon, there is one important point that I don't think I saw anyone else make. Porn is designed to ensnare and addict, it works on our basest instincts and if we don't actively fight against seeing or reading it, it will cause more and more problems in our lives. It doesn't take any effort, other than basic literacy, to get deeply entrenched within a porn habit, especially the way 50 Shades is purportedly designed to shock, titillate, and arouse. Scripture, as with all things that are righteous and truthful, does take some effort on the part of the reader for it to sink-in and for a testimony to start to grow. Truth is given to us "line upon line" and more is given based on obedience and effort. In short, wickedness is incredibly easy, righteousness is not. 

 

Or in a more light-hearted vein, to quote Tommy Smothers, "I'm an American, I don't have to see somethin' to know its stupid!!"

[Finrock]

Uhm, duh.

 

Now, count how many popular fiction books are out there where the hero saves the day by bringing people to Jesus Christ.

 

I read a lot of Christian fiction... a lot of them are preachy which turns regular readers off.

 

It's not duh because you think I am talking about Christian fiction, etc. The standard is not popularity. The standard is perfection. Its a standard we are all ill equipped to live up to, that is why it is silly to judge others and to think that we can somehow "save" someone through our works and our efforts.

 

The bad book does not qualify as good because it is popular and because it has something good in it. The principles and message in the book ultimately lead a person away from Christ. We cannot lead others to Christ by being preachy and that is why I said that we must do it by persuasion, by long-suffering, (see D&C 121). We don't even have to speak of Jesus Christ necessarily in order to lead others to Christ.

 

-Finrock

[Guest]

It's not duh because you think I am talking about Christian fiction, etc. The standard is not popularity. The standard is perfection. Its a standard we are all ill equipped to live up to, that is why it is silly to judge others and to think that we can somehow "save" someone through our works and our efforts.

 

The bad book does not qualify as good because it is popular and because it has something good in it. The principles and message in the book ultimately lead a person away from Christ. We cannot lead others to Christ by being preachy and that is why I said that we must do it by persuasion, by long-suffering, (see D&C 121). We don't even have to speak of Jesus Christ necessarily in order to lead others to Christ.

 

-Finrock

 

Finrock... love your passion for Christianity.

 

Unfortunately, we are not talking about bringing people to Christ.  We are simply commenting on a facet of the world we live in... specifically a book... and specifically a character in the book whose only relation to anything Christian is his first name.  Can't even tell you if he knows what his name is derived from - the author never mentioned it.

 

Nobody in this thread is saying that the book is good.  We are simply.. or at least I was simply telling y'all what the book actually has in it to correct some misconceptions on what the book is about.

Edited February 17, 2015 by anatess

[Suzie]

 It's a book for entertainment.  Not a scholastic textbook.

 

But that's just me.

 

 

 

 

 

I would agree with you generally speaking but the huge elephant in the middle of the room with this particular book is that it contains porn and we are advised to stay away from porn, we are advised if we are participating in porn we should talk to our Bishop if needed, etc and we were specifically advised against porn in literature:

 

"Pornographic or erotic stories and pictures are worse than filthy or polluted food. The body has defenses to rid itself of unwholesome food. With a few fatal exceptions, bad food will only make you sick but do no permanent harm. In contrast, a person who feasts upon filthy stories or pornographic or erotic pictures and literature records them in this marvelous retrieval system we call a brain. The brain won’t vomit back filth. Once recorded, it will always remain subject to recall, flashing its perverted images across your mind and drawing you away from the wholesome things in life."

Elder Dallin H. Oaks, April 2005 General Conference

 

 Basically, it is not like "Yeah, it contains porn BUT the story REALLY is about something else".

 

It's like a man/woman saying he/she watches porn NOT for the sex but to watch how pretty the naked bodies of human beings truly are or someone who watches porn to study the mindset of why would any man/woman denigrate themselves to that stage. Hence, I stated earlier in the thread that I know a few people who think that reading porn isn't bad (and they wouldn't call it porn but erotica, because porn sounds so "bad" doesn't it?) but you talk to them about watching porn and they are shocked, I really do not know what the shock is about. Porn is porn, in whatever form.

[Finrock]

Finrock... love your passion for Christianity.

 

Unfortunately, we are not talking about bringing people to Christ.  We are simply commenting on a facet of the world we live in... specifically a book... and specifically a character in the book whose only relation to anything Christian is his first name.  Can't even tell you if he knows what his name is derived from - the author never mentioned it.

 

Nobody in this thread is saying that the book is good.  We are simply.. or at least I was simply telling y'all what the book actually has in it to correct some misconceptions on what the book is about.

 

I understand that. Based on what you wrote about the book and based on what I have read from others I am making the claim that the book is actually about leading people away from Jesus Christ and it doesn't have any redeeming qualities. It should be rejected.

 

-Finrock

[Guest]

Lots of people read Playboy for the articles, guys.

[classylady]

I don't mind reading the occasional romance novel.  But, I'm careful in which authors I read.  Some are too explicit, and those are the ones I avoid.

[Guest]

I would agree with you generally speaking but the huge elephant in the middle of the room with this particular book is that it contains porn and we are advised to stay away from porn, we are advised if we are participating in porn we should talk to our Bishop if needed, etc and we were specifically advised against porn in literature:

 

 

 

 

 Basically, it is not like "Yeah, it contains porn BUT the story REALLY is about something else".

 

It's like a man/woman saying he/she watches porn NOT for the sex but to watch how pretty the naked bodies of human beings truly are or someone who watches porn to study the mindset of why would any man/woman denigrate themselves to that stage. Hence, I stated earlier in the thread that I know a few people who think that reading porn isn't bad (and they wouldn't call it porn but erotica, because porn sounds so "bad" doesn't it?) but you talk to them about watching porn and they are shocked, I really do not know what the shock is about. Porn is porn, in whatever form.

 

 

 

Agreed.  And I've stated this in my very first post.  Don't read the book nor watch the movie.  It is Pornographic.

[skalenfehl]

Wow, so if anybody read my previous post about Isaiah's archetypes, I found this video on Youtube. It's a trailer for a series called Galavant:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPNVhGbw_Sg

 

It reminds me of the Disney stories and fairy tales with the symbolism found in Isaiah, the which has been used in many stories, movies, etc, the noble hero always getting the girl, the evil king is defeated and the kingdom is saved. Jesus Christ, the bridegroom puts all enemies under His feet, Babylon is destroyed and Zion is redeemed. Interestingly, in the video, Galavant is rejected by the maiden, his true love who was kidnapped by the evil king and seduced with fame and fortune, winning her over.

 

What an interesting and unprecedented plot, which I have never before seen in a fairy tale. But looking at life around me, it seems quite an accurate assessment and a clear parody of life. The Lord's covenant people, represented by the maiden Zion, as I have observed, are quite infatuated with Mammon and Babylon today. I watched a couple episodes online out of curiosity and I will say that network TV has become blatantly sexualized since a number of years ago when I stopped watching TV. There just isn't any subtlety. It's all in your face sex. And violence. No thanks. 

 

Oh, and having read through the replies since my last post...the guy's name in 50 shades is Christian!? How ironic. And is Anastasia a Grand Duchess? Does she "Steele" herself against the abuse she received. Anyway, I digress. 

[Latter Days Guy]

Lots of people read Playboy for the articles, guys.

 

What, there are articles in Playboy!!!  Thought it was all nekkid ladies and pin ups! (Yes I've never looked at a copy of Playboy!)

[Latter Days Guy]

I must admit I have read an exert from one of the books, don't know which one.  It was so incoherent I thought if this is what the rest of the books are like how did it get so popular?  The wife has of course read all three and seen the movie and she thinks they're great 

[Latter Days Guy]

I reread the book with the first Jackson's LoTR first came out.  I enjoyed the books more as a teen than as an adult (well, I guess the movie affected it).  At least, as a teen, I was more tolerant of allowing Tolkien to build the image of the scene completely in my head.  Whereas, after having seen the movie, I don't have as much patience for it because I can superimpose the movie into my head.

 

Oh, there are also different types of readers... and even one reader can have different moods.  For example - I'm more into character and plot on most things.  But, when I pick up a Star Wars or XMen book, I'm into the world building just as much as the character and plot.  I get obsessive with world-building books... when I re-read Drizzt, for example, I couldn't read anything else until I get all 30+ books re-read.  It's a big time investment.  So when I read these books, I grab every single detail the author hands out.  Salvatore is not as verbose as Tolkien but he can be at times (some of his earlier books were very well developed... there are some later books that he got lazy on).  But, anyway, it is a mood I get into.  Same as reading poetry for me.  I have to be in the mood to have patience with lyrical cadence to get into the story.  Otherwise, it can be just a drag.

 

But most of the time, I just want to know the character and what happens next.  I can tolerate carboard characters if there's one good one I can glom on to.  What I really like about Orson Card - all his characters are individuals.  They speak/act/react completely differently among each other.  Ender, for example, talks and acts completely differently to Valentine than to Petra.  Most writers can't do that.  Nicholas Sparks have one voice for all the main male characters no matter who they are interacting with.  They all sound like what I imagine he sounds like to his wife.

 

Love the Drizzt books I've read, but didn't know that there was 30!  I really liked the Dragonlance books, think I've read most of them, Raistilin is my favourite character in those books!  My favourite fantasy author though has to be Feist, I don't know how many times I've read through the Riftwar books! 

[Guest]

Love the Drizzt books I've read, but didn't know that there was 30!  I really liked the Dragonlance books, think I've read most of them, Raistilin is my favourite character in those books!  My favourite fantasy author though has to be Feist, I don't know how many times I've read through the Riftwar books! 

 

Hmm... I have not read Dragonlance... looking it up now.  I'll let you know what I think of it.

 

There's technically only 26 Legend of Drizzt ones (plus 1 coming out later this year).  The Sellswords series is considered more Entreri's books than Drizzt's.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

Here's a new article that gave me chills... the author has read the books and seen the movie.

 

50 Shades of Grey: Pedophilia Hiding in Plain Sight

http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/2013/03/50_shades_of_gr.html

 

Here's an excerpt--the author of the article who has a PhD, is quoting a fellow PhD friend...(I edited a rather graphic part at the end of the quote.)

 

"Sexual predators are cons.  They almost always have a cover.  It's that cover which allows them access.  50 Shades of Grey is a con.  It now has access to millions of readers.  It is a story about abuse from beginning to end.  And it's not just the abuse of a man and a woman - it's the abuse of a man and a girl.

 

When you read it, look for the signs.  They are all there.

 

The female character has no sexual experience.  None.  She is given the age of 21, but that age is itself a cover.  Her true emotional age is much-much younger.  She has never even masturbated.  She has never even experienced an orgasm.  That alone is one of the greatest attractions to the pedophile.  That is the psychology of that kind of act.  You get off on taking purity.

 

But move from the fact the girl has no sexual experience whatsoever.  Now pay attention to her narrative dialogue.  Really listen to how she talks.  Again, she's not talking like a young woman, she's talking like a girl.  She talks about cartwheels, and skipping, over and over again it is the language and the imagery of a girl.

 

After that this girl has her innocence taken from her.  The abuser, the older man, makes her think its her choice.  Again, you and I both know that is one of the primary tools of the pedophile.  They create an environment where the child feels it's their idea.  It's what they want. But what happens after that innocence is taken away?  Then the abuser becomes more openly abusive. Controlling.  In this story he tells the little girl how to speak.  What to wear.  What to eat.  He is Daddy and she is daughter.  When you read it read it like a mother who is also a woman who is experienced with the real life tragedy of abuse.

And there is many more themes about that abuse in this book.  There is spanking and the use of Baby oil.  Why baby oil?  Think about it.  The girl wears pigtails.  She complains that he is treating her like a child.  He says she acts like a child.  There is even a scene where the abuser creates a situation to take her innocence from her again.  . . . ."

 

She went on to say there are women now defending the book, and she understands that, but it concerns her.  A great deal, because she is absolutely convinced the book is purposely advocating the raping of a child and attempting to normalize that atrocity

[Latter Days Guy]

Here's a new article that gave me chills... the author has read the books and seen the movie.

 

50 Shades of Grey: Pedophilia Hiding in Plain Sight

http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/2013/03/50_shades_of_gr.html

 

Here's an excerpt--the author of the article who has a PhD, is quoting a fellow PhD friend...(I edited a rather graphic part at the end of the quote.)

 

"Sexual predators are cons.  They almost always have a cover.  It's that cover which allows them access.  50 Shades of Grey is a con.  It now has access to millions of readers.  It is a story about abuse from beginning to end.  And it's not just the abuse of a man and a woman - it's the abuse of a man and a girl.

 

When you read it, look for the signs.  They are all there.

 

The female character has no sexual experience.  None.  She is given the age of 21, but that age is itself a cover.  Her true emotional age is much-much younger.  She has never even masturbated.  She has never even experienced an orgasm.  That alone is one of the greatest attractions to the pedophile.  That is the psychology of that kind of act.  You get off on taking purity.

 

But move from the fact the girl has no sexual experience whatsoever.  Now pay attention to her narrative dialogue.  Really listen to how she talks.  Again, she's not talking like a young woman, she's talking like a girl.  She talks about cartwheels, and skipping, over and over again it is the language and the imagery of a girl.

 

After that this girl has her innocence taken from her.  The abuser, the older man, makes her think its her choice.  Again, you and I both know that is one of the primary tools of the pedophile.  They create an environment where the child feels it's their idea.  It's what they want. But what happens after that innocence is taken away?  Then the abuser becomes more openly abusive. Controlling.  In this story he tells the little girl how to speak.  What to wear.  What to eat.  He is Daddy and she is daughter.  When you read it read it like a mother who is also a woman who is experienced with the real life tragedy of abuse.

And there is many more themes about that abuse in this book.  There is spanking and the use of Baby oil.  Why baby oil?  Think about it.  The girl wears pigtails.  She complains that he is treating her like a child.  He says she acts like a child.  There is even a scene where the abuser creates a situation to take her innocence from her again.  . . . ."

 

She went on to say there are women now defending the book, and she understands that, but it concerns her.  A great deal, because she is absolutely convinced the book is purposely advocating the raping of a child and attempting to normalize that atrocity

 

What utter rubbish!  Its a book about BDSM, its going to have spanking, and controlling etc as that is what its all about!  And why baby oil? Really, you need to ask?  The books were originally fan fiction based on Twilight but updated to a more adult theme, its obviously not been done to a good standard as it would seem they've just changed the names and characters ages!  But if you think its all a cover for some pedo fantasy story I think you're reading far too much into it!

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

What utter rubbish! Its a book about BDSM, its going to have spanking, and controlling etc as that is what its all about! And why baby oil? Really, you need to ask? The books were originally fan fiction based on Twilight but updated to a more adult theme, its obviously not been done to a good standard as it would seem they've just changed the names and characters ages! But if you think its all a cover for some pedo fantasy story I think you're reading far too much into it!

Or perhaps YOU are not seeing clearly enough. Can you defend your position with logic instead of insults?

[skalenfehl]

Theme elements can easily be twisted with new elements into corrupt themes. I have clearly demonstrated this with my previous posts. Only those with eyes see and ears hear, both good and evil. 

[Latter Days Guy]

Or perhaps YOU are not seeing clearly enough. Can you defend your position with logic instead of insults?

 

Insults? Obviously insults means something different in the US as nothing I said has insulted anyone.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

So you don't want to discuss the article with logic and reason?  Because you still haven't given any logical reasons to refute the article.  

Edited February 20, 2015 by LiterateParakeet

[Latter Days Guy]

So you don't want to discuss the article with logic and reason?  Because you still haven't given any logical reasons to refute the article.  

 

So the article is basically saying that female author of the story has written it because she wants to appeal to a male paedophile audience?  You did know it was written by a woman don't you?  

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

Abusers can be women, it's rare, but it does happen.

 

So how do you explain the female protagonist who is said to be 21, but in all other ways appears to be 12 or 13?

 

How do you explain the steps that Grey took which mirror those of a pedophile?

 

The author of the article, who holds a PhD, made some great arguments that can't be just waved away by saying "hogwash" or "but the author is a woman."  

Edited February 20, 2015 by LiterateParakeet

[Guest]

Here's a new article that gave me chills... the author has read the books and seen the movie.

 

50 Shades of Grey: Pedophilia Hiding in Plain Sight

http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/2013/03/50_shades_of_gr.html

 

Here's an excerpt--the author of the article who has a PhD, is quoting a fellow PhD friend...(I edited a rather graphic part at the end of the quote.)

 

"Sexual predators are cons.  They almost always have a cover.  It's that cover which allows them access.  50 Shades of Grey is a con.  It now has access to millions of readers.  It is a story about abuse from beginning to end.  And it's not just the abuse of a man and a woman - it's the abuse of a man and a girl.

 

When you read it, look for the signs.  They are all there.

 

The female character has no sexual experience.  None.  She is given the age of 21, but that age is itself a cover.  Her true emotional age is much-much younger.  She has never even masturbated.  She has never even experienced an orgasm.  That alone is one of the greatest attractions to the pedophile.  That is the psychology of that kind of act.  You get off on taking purity.

 

But move from the fact the girl has no sexual experience whatsoever.  Now pay attention to her narrative dialogue.  Really listen to how she talks.  Again, she's not talking like a young woman, she's talking like a girl.  She talks about cartwheels, and skipping, over and over again it is the language and the imagery of a girl.

 

After that this girl has her innocence taken from her.  The abuser, the older man, makes her think its her choice.  Again, you and I both know that is one of the primary tools of the pedophile.  They create an environment where the child feels it's their idea.  It's what they want. But what happens after that innocence is taken away?  Then the abuser becomes more openly abusive. Controlling.  In this story he tells the little girl how to speak.  What to wear.  What to eat.  He is Daddy and she is daughter.  When you read it read it like a mother who is also a woman who is experienced with the real life tragedy of abuse.

And there is many more themes about that abuse in this book.  There is spanking and the use of Baby oil.  Why baby oil?  Think about it.  The girl wears pigtails.  She complains that he is treating her like a child.  He says she acts like a child.  There is even a scene where the abuser creates a situation to take her innocence from her again.  . . . ."

 

She went on to say there are women now defending the book, and she understands that, but it concerns her.  A great deal, because she is absolutely convinced the book is purposely advocating the raping of a child and attempting to normalize that atrocity

 

 

LP, with all due respect, this article goes in the same vein as that Mormon blogger (was it Well-Behaved Mormon Woman?) who slammed Frozen as purposely advocating the Gay Agenda.

 

Like all interpretative works of art - Fictional narratives, paintings, etc. - what you glean from it depicts more of what your interests are rather than what the artist's are...  as aptly pointed out by that Gay Mormon dude who is married to a woman... can't remember his name either... who responded to that Frozen article.

[Latter Days Guy]

I've been hearing about 50 Shades on writers forums since it was still fan fiction.  I know the author is supposed to be a woman.  I also know that most authors who write erotica use pseudonyms.

 

So how do you explain the female protagonist who is said to be 21, but in all other ways appears to be 12 or 13?

 

How do you explain the steps that Grey took which mirror those of a pedophile?

 

No the author is a woman, there is no if or buts about it.  Also if the book says she's 21 I would assume that that is her age, if you or the author of the article read into it something else then I think its you who has the problem not the author of the book.  I asked my wife about this last night (she has read all three books and seen the film), if she thought that Ana's character in the book was written to be a lot younger than portrayed?  She laughed and said no, she's just  very inexperienced and a bit naive to start. 

Also its not paedophiles its hebephiles who are interested in 12/13 year olds.  Does Gray mirror those steps or is the author of the article just seeing what they want to see to promote their own agenda and garner some publicity of the back of someone else's success?  The thing is we can read what we want to see into anything we read if we want to find something wrong with it.