Staff Writer: Raphiel Diederich
Smut, the unofficial genre. Some of you may have heard about it, and for those who have not, it’s a broad grouping of books with explicit sexual content in them.
While sexually explicit writing has existed for some time, it became popularized through TikTok with the emergence of the group “BookTok”. BookTok is a community of avid fiction readers and writers. While the group is not limited to sexual themed books only, the group did aid in the growth of the style.
The popularity then found its way into bookstores like Barnes and Noble, and BooksAMillion with their own sections for “BookTok favorites”, but with smut’s recent popularity, many people question if it deserves to be counted as a genre.
Some critics argue that smut books don’t have plot, it’s simply book porn. While this may be true for certain books, this argument fails to take into account that a very wide range of books have been labeled as “smut”. This is because the category smut does not require any other qualifications than the fact there’s sexual scenes.
On the other hand, many people believe smut to be a legitimate genre for various reasons. A lot of the books that fall into smut have in-depth character growth, relatable challenges, and conundrums real people face.
One series example is A Court of Thorns and Roses. The main character Feyre faces struggles with PTSD of her past, and as the series progresses, she accepts the fact it’s okay to have peace after struggle. Or the character Nesta and the fact she burns bridges from he rself hatred, alongside struggling with facing the horrors of her father’s death.
Another point to understand is that sex has been in writings since early literature. Are their stories only remembered for how graphic their depictions were? Not really. There were explicit scenes in the stories of Dracula (Brahm Stoker), Gone with the Wind (Margaret Mitchel), The Garden of Eden (Ernest Hemingway).
For example, here is a small piece from Dracula: “I could feel the soft, shivering touch of the lips on the super sensitive skin of my throat”, Gone with the Wind: “only darkness and his lips upon her. She tried to speak and his mouth was over hers again.” and The Garden of Eden: “He had shut his eyes and he could feel the long light weight of her on him and her breasts pressing against him and her lips on his.”
All of these being just a few of the various pieces of romantic behavior in these novels.
Yet, these books are not known for being smut. Instead, they are recognized for their contributions to literature and overall skill. Why should many stories of the same style be lumped into being called “just smut” and not be able to share a similar appreciation? If one wanted to argue about their skill in writing, or abilities to craft characters or morality, that would be a more reasonable debate.
Another concept, and way of telling stories that have been slightly more accepted despite its more explicit nature is music. From the beginning even troubadours existed to tell romantic and passionate love songs, to even now the existence of innumerable artists in present time that use explicit themes to craft their work. But yet, are still counted as skilled works of music.
In conclusion, sex has been an inescapable part of humans and their media since near the beginning. It’s graphic wording and explicitness vs more flowery words and implied through prose has been a ongoing balance through literature and storytelling. It shouldn’t erase the potential of being real literature even in the modern day, and having its actual skill and thought analyzed. Nor should every book with more explicit sex be placed in the same face value category.