If you mean the relationship contract, that's near the beginning somewhere. A few chapters in as I recall.
Fifty Shades is very vanilla, did I mention that before? Very vanilla. Like a cone of ice cream.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Fifty Shades of Grey
- Thread starter eternlgladiator
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you mean the relationship contract, that's near the beginning somewhere. A few chapters in as I recall.
Fifty Shades is very vanilla, did I mention that before? Very vanilla. Like a cone of ice cream.
I can see why some people like the sex aspect of the books. Despite it's talk of BDSM, it's quite vanilla and Ana rarely leaves an encounter...unfulfilled. It's shallow to just say it's a weak alternative to porn. How often does internet porn cater to the woman like this book does?
Also while Christian is a dick at times, it's clear he worships Ana.
But yeah, the "dark" cover loses it's edge quickly and it becomes a run of the mill melodrama.
I've deliberately avoided talking about the weak writing to try and put a different slant on this book. I'm not a fan, I just picked this up because it's super cheap on the Kindle store and I wanted to see what the fuss was about.
Also while Christian is a dick at times, it's clear he worships Ana.
But yeah, the "dark" cover loses it's edge quickly and it becomes a run of the mill melodrama.
I've deliberately avoided talking about the weak writing to try and put a different slant on this book. I'm not a fan, I just picked this up because it's super cheap on the Kindle store and I wanted to see what the fuss was about.
If everyone (or almost everyone, excluding the vast numbers of [probably, women] who went out and bought it and read it) is agreed that this is a dreadful book, why the real note of annoyance on this thread? What is the problem? Why waste time venting?
Is the issue the fact that it is a dreadful book? Well, put it down, donate it to your local charity shop, move on. It's a book, nothing more. There are many, many other dreadful books written: (Dan Brown's atrocious 'Da Vinci Code' comes to mind - pure drivel, with a stupefyingly clichéd, unspeakably vapid hero, banal unoriginal plot, tedious pacing, doubtful history......)
Is it that it is a dreadful book written by a woman? Again, many other dreadful books fail to generate the same heat, or feeling. (I'm an historian by profession, and so, to me, Dan Brown's book is insultingly stupid......but, it sold well, indeed, very well, in fact, superbly well). Capitalism teaches us that the market is rarely wrong, after all.
Is it that this dreadful book written by a woman was aimed at women, and (apparently) bought by them (in what are clearly, vast numbers)?
Or, is it that this dreadful book, written by a woman, aimed at a female market, sold vast. vast volumes? Why the bile, and again, why the barely concealed contempt towards female choices, if trashy, and tasteless?
Seriously, though, women have a right to buy trash, and not to be despised for it. And if this type of trashy pseudo porn appeals, it is possibly because best selling porn from a female perspective has not been widely available (yes, online but not on bookshelves of bookshops) to date.
I have not read the book, because I suspect that it is pretty grim, and that the reviews are right, but then, I never finished the Da Vinci Code either, which I thought utter time-wasting tosh.
What bothers me about this thread is not the bile directed at the book itself, per se, (which is probably richly merited) but the casual contempt directed at the women who are despised for buying (and liking) it. To talk of 'neglected housewives'; come on, guys, this the ultimate clichéd insult. I'm struck by how often the terms 'bored housewife' and 'neglected housewife' are used, the vocabulary of casual contempt; rarely does one hear of 'challenged housewife', 'empowered housewife' or 'thoughtful, intelligent housewife'.
Indeed, I'm also struck by the effortless (and obviously, erroneous) assumption made here, repeatedly, that all women are, by definition, identical, almost cloned, a sort of Stepford wife idea, (whereas all men, needless to say, are each as unique as a single human fingerprint).
So, to sum up: Yes, it's probably a dreadful book. So what?
It's written by a woman, and bought (mostly) by women. So what? While I deplore poor literature (no matter who writes it), really, I do think that women have a right to write trash, and an inalienable to read it. Personally, (partly because I'm a bit of an academic snob not to mention a literary snob), I'd as soon prefer that they read - to take a classy modern female writer - Hilary Mantel instead, but, if they choose to read trash, who are we to gainsay that?
Is the issue the fact that it is a dreadful book? Well, put it down, donate it to your local charity shop, move on. It's a book, nothing more. There are many, many other dreadful books written: (Dan Brown's atrocious 'Da Vinci Code' comes to mind - pure drivel, with a stupefyingly clichéd, unspeakably vapid hero, banal unoriginal plot, tedious pacing, doubtful history......)
Is it that it is a dreadful book written by a woman? Again, many other dreadful books fail to generate the same heat, or feeling. (I'm an historian by profession, and so, to me, Dan Brown's book is insultingly stupid......but, it sold well, indeed, very well, in fact, superbly well). Capitalism teaches us that the market is rarely wrong, after all.
Is it that this dreadful book written by a woman was aimed at women, and (apparently) bought by them (in what are clearly, vast numbers)?
Or, is it that this dreadful book, written by a woman, aimed at a female market, sold vast. vast volumes? Why the bile, and again, why the barely concealed contempt towards female choices, if trashy, and tasteless?
Seriously, though, women have a right to buy trash, and not to be despised for it. And if this type of trashy pseudo porn appeals, it is possibly because best selling porn from a female perspective has not been widely available (yes, online but not on bookshelves of bookshops) to date.
I have not read the book, because I suspect that it is pretty grim, and that the reviews are right, but then, I never finished the Da Vinci Code either, which I thought utter time-wasting tosh.
What bothers me about this thread is not the bile directed at the book itself, per se, (which is probably richly merited) but the casual contempt directed at the women who are despised for buying (and liking) it. To talk of 'neglected housewives'; come on, guys, this the ultimate clichéd insult. I'm struck by how often the terms 'bored housewife' and 'neglected housewife' are used, the vocabulary of casual contempt; rarely does one hear of 'challenged housewife', 'empowered housewife' or 'thoughtful, intelligent housewife'.
Indeed, I'm also struck by the effortless (and obviously, erroneous) assumption made here, repeatedly, that all women are, by definition, identical, almost cloned, a sort of Stepford wife idea, (whereas all men, needless to say, are each as unique as a single human fingerprint).
So, to sum up: Yes, it's probably a dreadful book. So what?
It's written by a woman, and bought (mostly) by women. So what? While I deplore poor literature (no matter who writes it), really, I do think that women have a right to write trash, and an inalienable to read it. Personally, (partly because I'm a bit of an academic snob not to mention a literary snob), I'd as soon prefer that they read - to take a classy modern female writer - Hilary Mantel instead, but, if they choose to read trash, who are we to gainsay that?
Last edited:
I don't care about poorly written popular books. There are many of those and there will be many more.
What I care about, as a member of the BDSM community, is the fact that this book is the first introduction to BDSM for a lot of its readers yet it doesn't depict BDSM, it depicts abuse. Ana enters into the relationship because she's lured in by expensive toys and an extravagant lifestyle. She's scared of Christian and dislikes much of the actual BDSM - she actually says she enters the relationship in spite of the BDSM aspect, it's treated as something she has to put up with rather than something she enjoys, which isn't right. Not only that, but Christian is a ****ing nutter who stalks her, spies on her, and threatens her.
The fact that people are reading this book, thinking "this is what BDSM is" and trying to emulate it is the big issue here. Honestly, go to any munch, talk to anyone who's actually involved in BDSM, and you will hear only bad things. I have never heard anyone who's into BDSM say one good thing about this book.
I can handle bad writing but I hate seeing something as beautiful as BDSM be misrepresented and displayed as something only sick people with abusive childhoods and psychopathic tendencies enjoy, especially when it's already a subject that's so misunderstood.
50 Shades Movie
Matt Bomer would have been the best actor to play Christian Grey in the 50 Shades movie. He really looks hot. He looks good paired with Alexis Bledel, in case she'll be chosen to play Anastasia Steele.
Matt Bomer would have been the best actor to play Christian Grey in the 50 Shades movie. He really looks hot. He looks good paired with Alexis Bledel, in case she'll be chosen to play Anastasia Steele.
Are you people crazy...these 3 books are the best books I have ever read! It was sexy and funny and sad at some parts, but all in all the best books. Don't knock it till you read all of them. The 3rd book was so good, it was a love story and I don't like twilight I in fact hate twilight.
