My understanding is that E.L James is fascinated by the idea of "dominants," but has no actual, personal interest in BDSM. The book portrays an abuse dynamic in such perfect detail, that it's hard for me to see it as a flawed book about BDSM, so much as a kidnapping/abuse/rape fantasy that's been marketed to a mainstream audience.ShaneDevante wrote:I read the books to understand the hype and outrage surrounding the books, because I'm a firm believer in hate/love it for the right reason. I'm not going to lie. I was rather appalled at Fifty Shades of Grey being considered a best seller considering the severe lack of research on the part of the author, the awful spelling and grammar, and the weak characterization. The book didn't reflect BDSM at all, and it had far too many unfortunate implications and subtext which left a nasty taste in my mouth.
The movie improved on these considerably, because they removed a large chunk of what made the books intolerable. The movie, for its focus on sex, actually made them appear somewhat normal, sane people who enjoyed safe, sane, and consensual kinks as opposed to the unfortunate implications in the books wherein the subtext read as a manipulative sociopath of a man taking advantage of a weak, naive woman. So, I do think the movie was better as a whole.
And honestly, if the marketing was different...I'd kinda be ok with that. There's nothing wrong with abuse fantasies, so long as you don't call them "romance."