SMUT Erotic Books

We are proud to announce that The SMUT Project has opened a virtual bookstore!

In continued pursuit of our mission, “to elevate erotic expression in the literary and artistic worlds and to connect the curious to quality works that inspire, delight, and enrich,” we have begun seeking out (and establishing the means to distribute) quality works of scholarship and creativity.

We believe the best solutions to today’s sex-related problems, as well as the best methods for enhancing our sexual lives and experiences, are education and curiosity, and we’re hoping that this new venture will be a way of promoting that.

At the moment we have over 80 titles listed, including:

  • Vintage Pulps
  • Guides & Handbooks
  • Erotica
  • History
  • Science
  • Poetry
  • Literature
  • Biography & Memoir
  • Art & Photography
  • Humor

…and more!

So if you’re a Sexual Intellectual and you’re looking to get your sexy read on, please visit the SMUT Erotic Books eBay store and see what we have available!

As with the rest of the project, we are kink, fetish, and LGBT friendly.

NEW STORY! – Busted by Brenda

This story is NOW AVAILABLE for FREE on SMUTProject.com. Click here to read the whole thing!


Synopsis: A willing slave takes some harsh but sensual treatment from his Mistress, and succumbs to her vicious control.

This F (Femdom) story features:
Ballbusting, Footdom, and Cum Play.


“P-please,” I stammered, my lip trembling, just at the last moment, feeling her hand on the back of my neck. “Please. Be gentle.”

She looked into my eyes softly, kindly, and clicked her tongue. “Aw,” she said. “Of course I will.” And she snapped her knee into my crotch.

The shock hit me instantly and I flinched hard, and I felt my face screw up, felt my balls retract and the ache flow into my guts, but I was actually surprised that it wasn’t worse. I felt an odd delight in knowing I could take another, and I could feel this mixing in with the bleak, submissive blend of comfort and fear as she squeezed my hip with her other hand. My fingers gripped against each other, interlocked behind her waist, and I put my head against hers as I braced myself again.

(…)


© 2018

Look for this story soon on Amazon, Smashwords, and Goodreads!


Click here for more sexy short stories from
SMUT Project Press!

Was Gustave Courbet the First Modern Pornographer?

L’Origine du monde (1866)

I had been familiar with the famed L’Origine du monde (above) long before I first laid eyes on it at the Musée d’Orsay in Paris in the spring of 2013, as a provocative work that shocked and challenged the art and cultural establishment at a time of prudishness and reserve, and upon viewing it in person I remember thinking three things; 1) that I was surprised (as I often am) by the meager dimensions of the actual work as compared with its reproductions, 2) that I was surprised to find the inclusion of shutters on the frame, which could artificially introduce some modesty to the creator’s work should the owner or exhibitor require it, and 3) I remember remarking to my companion that the only thing I found offensive about the work was what it failed to show (the model’s face, her expression, her response emotionally to being so depicted, and so on) rather than what it did show.

Any student of the arts in society, or any student of the period, is bound to know L’Origine du monde, by sight and by reputation if not by name and by artist, and it is one of two by which they might probably know the painter, Gustave Courbet (1819-1877). (The second work is Le Sommeil, 1866, pictured below.)

Courbet was a Frenchman, born in Ornans in 1819, and by 1850 he was creating scandals in the artistic world of the time by pioneering and pursuing the school of Realism, itself a reaction to the Romanticism and Neoclassicism of the time, which rejected the idea that life needed to be glamorized or embellished for the sake of art, and asserting instead that, to quote from Courbet’s 1855 Realist Manifesto, “To know in order to do, that was my idea. To be in a position to translate the customs, the ideas, the appearance of my time, according to my own estimation; to be not only a painter, but a man as well; in short, to create living art – this is my goal.”

In short, for Courbet, along with Jean-François Millet, Honoré Daumier, and the other Realists, there was no distinction between art and life. They painted normal, everyday people doing normal, everyday things, and they found beauty and majesty and importance in those elements of the mundane. This was a significant departure in thinking from the art of the previous century, and even from contemporary movements of the time, which saw the artist as one who introduces themselves artificially into the translation of the real into the glorified and the majestic and, for reasons that were as political as they were aesthetic, the work of the Realists was controversial and even decried in its time.

Realism said, to a world for which art in large part only included royalty, nobility, the religious, and the classical, that not only were regular people and regular things worth looking at with an artistic lense, so too were were regular people doing regular things worthy of being treated in an artistic way. The street ran both ways; it behooved those taking stock of the world in an artistic way to pay some attention to the little people, and it gave the little people the credit and grandeur that had previously been reserved for things that were a step removed from pure magic.

The work of the Realists in many ways would foreshadow what would come with the invention of photography at around the same time, and would inspire the younger generation of artists for whom Paris was the center of the artistic world at the time, a group which included the Impressionists, of whom one salient example is Édouard Manet, who painted both the Déjeuner sur l’herbe and Olympia, paintings both depicting prostitutes, in 1863 (see below).

Another, slightly earlier, influence on Courbet and his milieu was Francisco Goya‘s work La Maja Desnuda, painted somewhere between 1797 and 1800. The model’s direct and unashamed gaze in conjunction with her nudity were a cause of major fuss and fervor, and the story of that work in itself is worth knowing.

This, like the Manet works, depicts a frank and personal appraisal of nudity, one that is connected more with the model herself than it is with the subject of the work, and one which feels truer to life than the vast majority of what preceded it.

But compare these with Courbet’s Femme nue couchée (below), painted in 1862:

Now I can’t imagine it’s just me, but isn’t that image just pulsing with a sexuality and a vitality that the others just don’t possess? There’s a drama and an expressiveness to both her form and the projection of her presence that is rivaled, to this point, only by depictions of literal gods and goddesses or allegorical personifications (see Hygeia (anything of Rubens’ really) and Time Saving Truth from Falsehood and Envy). And she’s just a woman. Just a regular, sexual woman.

This painting, I think, marks a significant turning point, not only in art but in the mass human appraisal of sexuality, in which it was clear that the normal, regular expression of the erotic could be, as I said above, both noteworthy to the artist and worthy of elevation and celebration in and of itself.

Erotic imagery (if defined simply as depictions of sex acts) goes back at least as far as the Ancient Romans, but Courbet seems to be the first to train his gaze upon that which truly inspired him; not just the physicality and abstractly conceptualized nudity of his models, but also their genuine and incredible human essence, their souls. In all his nudes, such as La Femme au parroquet (1866, below), his models positively glow, in a way that assures the viewer, “It doesn’t matter who she is, even if she’s nobody to you. She is amazing, and she is special.”

The same can be said of Le Sommeil (above), in which the two subjects are shown in obviously post-coital bliss, and in that painting as well as others, Courbet seems to have painted not the nude, but her sexuality itself. And this approach, this gaze, is not necessarily without the explicitly prurient interest. Indeed, consider La Femme à la vague (1868, below), in which the light specifically favors the model’s most conspicuous anatomy:

And, less subtly, La Femme aux bas blancs (1864), which is, I think the earliest purely pornographic work I have seen, in that it taunts and entices the viewer in a way that is not only suggestive, but direct, and which depicts an act and a posture that is frequently adopted in modern pornography over 150 years later:

All of this can be said of Courbet’s work without reference at all to L’Origine du monde, but I learned something very interesting about L’Origine while in the process of researching this article:

Unlike most of the works referenced here, L’Origine du monde was not a piece created for public display. While most of the other pieces vied for space in the prestigious and exclusive Paris salons, L’Origine was painted specifically for the erotic collection of Ottoman diplomat and art collector Khalil Bey, which means that one of the crown jewels of the d’Orsay, arguably one of the most important paintings in Western history, was commissioned, conceived, and created for the sole purpose of the client’s private stimulation. It wasn’t even publicly exhibited until 1988.

What I think this means, in summation, is that Courbet could, in many ways, be considered the first creator to authentically and concertedly focus his robust artistic talents on the celebration and exploration of female sexuality, which set a precedent for pornography in a way that nothing else quite did.

You have to imagine that there is a kind of inevitability with photography; given the ability to capture the world around us at will and with fidelity, it’s only a matter of time before we put sexuality in front of that lense. But in a vastly different context, with shades of great social and political importance, Courbet did what it would take more than a century to achieve in any other media. He captured and glorified not just the bodies but the erotic spirit of these women, and he immortalized their essential lascivious humanity.

We may have come a long way since Courbet, and we may have gone a long way away from what he accomplished. But in the modern age where pornography has the ability to be authentic and honest, made by passionate people who care about what they do and what they make, it seems like we’re finally circling around, and maybe if we look with the right eyes we can see what he wanted to show us.


© 2018

Click here for more insightful essays from The SMUT Project! For more erotic fine art from our gallery, click here!

 

 

Play Time: On BDSM as Theatre

It is often something you hear about kink, that it’s all just make believe. That it’s roleplay. And for some people, I’m sure that’s what it is.

I’m sure a lot of people, from those who just picked up 50 Shades and want to experiment with a spanking or two to those who caricaturize the Dominatrix and sub personas and want to live in their own fantasies, do think of kink and of D/s relationship dynamics, at some level or another, as pretending.

But to some of us it’s a lot more than that.

Now, of course, those who want to participate in their kinks full time are few, and there aren’t a great number of people who want what they construct in the bedroom to influence their lives in a particularly significant way. In many ways it’s like yoga, which for most is just another form of exercise and which has its own modern commercial culture, but then there are people who specifically believe that certain poses and postures open you up to different personal states and enable you to access different features of consciousness. For some it’s a diversion, for some it’s an element of religion, and there are a lot of ways to be involved without necessarily being a devotee. With kink, too, you choose your own level of involvement, or perhaps your own level of involvement chooses you.

In the same way, though, that these things exist separately from their cultural or personal application, they also exist with or without a degree of artfulness and artistry, and it is that condition which can dictate an awful lot about the character of kinky play.

For all of us, I think, or at least for those of us who take it seriously, there is an element in kink of trying to get in touch with the truth of a kinky interaction, whether or not that interaction is “real”. To whatever extent a person wants their torment or subjugation at the hands of their partner to be legitimate and immovable, to whatever extent they want their play to have veracity, there is always the desire for it to have verisimilitude. In other words, whether or not these things are actually real, we certainly want them to feel real.

With this, of course, there is a spectrum. Some people only want to get in touch with the truth of that feeling on the grounds that it is absolutely real, and others, just as seriously, want to experience that truth only in complete opposition to reality, and there are many points of compromise in between. Whatever our position on this spectrum, we all seem to agree that kink takes place within an artificial construct, where we determine boundaries and consent, and then we decide, according to our preference, how we want that play to be characterized.

For me, there’s no better cultural parallel for this than the theatre. There are some who want to see Shakespeare at The Globe, with Elizabethan elocution and costume design, and there are some who want it reinterpreted in a modern setting. There are serious people who forgo Shakespeare entirely and look for fresh new approaches to the form of theatre itself. There are moody, minimalistic plays that focus entirely on dialogue and eschew action and setting, and there are snazzy, bombastic musicals and grand, dramatic operas. There are comedies, there are tragedies. There is modernism and post-modernism. In short, there is a whole, dynamic world of what can take place on the stage, in which there is an incredible variety to suit a range of tastes and preferences.

What are we to make, then, of the sets and the scripts and the props and the beats? Obviously, as anyone who has ever staged a production of anything will know, these are entirely up to the creative persuasion and means of those who produce the play, and there’s another world of style and sensibility that determines how what will be done will be done. What the script looks like to one person will not be what it looks like to another, and what comes from their collaboration determines how the content of that script will be interpreted and expressed.

But what of the players? Are they all such puppets locked in rote execution of a spectacular scene? This, I think too, misses the point. Not only does an actor want to find the “truth” I was talking about in what they put into their performance, but that relationship to that particular truth is not a fixed and arbitrary thing. It may change, subtly or otherwise, from night to night over a series of performances and how they get there each time relies very much on what they are able to get from night to night from the other people in the scene. Ask an actor how many times they’ve been surprised by what unfolded onstage, in spite of all the planning, all the intentions, all the rehearsal. Human interactions, even staged ones, can be marvelously unpredictable.

Which is to say nothing of ad libs, or improv. There can be amazing things that happen in a world where skilled and creative actors either take or are given liberties to make it up as they go along. Do the parameters that govern these constructions dilute or diminish them because they are artificial? On the contrary, they allow a freedom and fluidity that creates space in which things can happen, they transport that creativity to a territory in which new things can be explored.

But let’s take it back down to the core of the question, that of the distinction between the person and the persona. I, for one, am the first to be in favor of people finding common personal ground with what their sexuality involves, at whatever level that makes sense for them, but with this, again, there is a spectrum. For some people, there should be no distinction, they want those roles to really be who those people are, and for others it is the height of roleplay, in which the fantasy is pure and under which circumstances they can allow themselves to be and say and do things because that’s what their character can do. These are attitudes about a their own relationship to the truth, in addition to the relationship they prefer the scenario to have.

It’s hard to call any of these approaches more valid than the others because their goals and aims are different. They both attempt and achieve different things. One is more vaudeville, one is more opera. One is more classical, one is more modern. And there is good and bad in all of these things. We all have our own preferences and some things mean more to us than others, but we should try to appreciate them all. Because everyone who participates gives something of themselves to these things, whether it’s exactly like them or just like the best them or very much like a different them entirely. We each have a range, we each have a certain range of talents, and we each have desires and aspirations for who, what, and how we want to play. It’s only the snobs that stratify them too strictly.

What it means to be a kinky person, as someone who is involved earnestly in kinky practice and the craft of it all in addition to the spectacle, is the same thing it means to be an actor. If you’re any good at it, and if you belong with it as it belongs in you, what’s important is how well you do whatever it is that you do, and how meaningful and special you make it by being the one to do it.


© 2018

Click here for more insightful essays from The SMUT Project!

Our Fine Art Gallery is up!

We’ve been working on a fine art gallery of vintage and historical works that feature kink and fetish themes, and we’re proud to say that it is finally up on the site!

To quote from the page, “The goal of this collection is to establish and recognize the historical continuity of things that are commonly expressed today through the practice of BDSM.”

Hope you’ll enjoy checking it out!

PUBLIC PREVIEW – Crossing Kim (Our Neighbor, Part II)

This story is NOW AVAILABLE to backers on Patreon who subscribe at the $10/month level or higher.  Current subscribers can click here to read the whole thing!


Part II in The Domme Next Door series!

Synopsis: Annie and her boyfriend make the mistake of breaking Kim’s rules, and have to suffer the consequences for their indiscretion.

This F/L (Couples’ Femdom) story features:

Punishment, Edging, Cuntbusting, Cum Play, Erotic Humiliation, Orgasm Control, Sock Fetish, Strapon Play, Dildo Play, and Chastity.


[THIS STORY IS SO NAUGHTY THAT WE COULD ONLY FIND THIS TINY LITTLE EXCERPT THAT WAS SAFE FOR A PREVIEW! ENJOY!]

…loud enough that we hadn’t heard her until she was right outside our door. It was hearing her keys that snapped us out of it. I stopped suddenly as my stomach tumbled, and Annie heard it too and snapped her head around to look behind us. “Oh my god,” she whispered. “I think we’re in trouble.” I could see the shadow of her heels in the space beneath the door, and I shuddered as she stood there for a moment before continuing on to her apartment.

Annie stood up and pushed me back, listening, and then she reached back and pulled me out as she turned around. Suddenly, her phone buzzed on the counter and mine did in my pocket, and when we checked them we each turned them around to show what the other one said too:

Come.

Then, a moment later:

As you are. Now.

“Shit!” Annie said in an emphatic whisper. “She knows!”

(…)


© 2018

Look for this story soon on Amazon, Smashwords, and Goodreads!
SUBSCRIBE NOW ON PATREON for FREE ACCESS to this story and much, much more.


Click here for more sexy short stories from
SMUT Project Press!