So I finally finished reading the "Fifty Shades of Grey" trilogy and
liked the story. Honestly, I never would have read it were it not for the controversy and curiosity surrounding it. Though the story was quite graphic and talked about an "alternate" lifestyle I did not know much about, the core plot is essentially a love story where Anastasia Steele - a young uninitiated girl - falls head over heels in love with Christian Grey - a troubled and of course very handsome billionaire.
Anna is a senior at a university who is a last-minute substitute for her roommate on the interview of a lifetime. Her roommate Katherine Kavanagh is sick and is unable to make a meeting with Christian, CEO of his own company, and a big donor to the university, richer than all the really wealthy people rather unreachable for interviews with college students. Christian is instantly taken with Anna, and though he warns her away from him, she's fascinated with him.
The difference in age and finance and place in life is one thing, but as Anna and Christian become closer, she learns that he is a dominant, and his relationships are all dominant/submissive. Ultimately he overcomes his hesitation about getting involved with her, and invites her to participate after many email messages, a very specific contract negotiation, and much rumination on the part of Anna.
What ensues is a romantic journey, where both Anna and Christian discover aspect of their own and each other’s lives that takes up most of the plot, with of course the very descriptive details of their chosen sexual lifestyle.
In less than six months, E.L. James' trilogy has made the hyper-jump from the little pond of books to the global ocean of pop culture. It made it to the cover of Newsweek with the title “Why surrender is a feminist dream” and talks are already underway for a film and the trilogy has done its rounds on 4, CNN and parodied on “Saturday Night Live.”
I concur with the criticism that the storyline is very far-fetched, but I understand that some people like fantasy and don’t expect everything to be realistic. Agreed that it’s very unrealistic and very Mills n Boonish at its heart, but to me what worked is the fact that the story actually ended quite logically given the circumstances of its unreal plot.
And I have a few theories as to why this book is popular. The main one being it has a secrecy element, similar to some paranormal romances. Here, one should also note that “50 Shades” and “Twilight” share a few plot themes and the alpha male who is opulently, ridiculously wealthy. Plus, Edward, and Christian are both very much old-school-style romance heroes and both books ate also told from the heroine's point of view, a very deep, first person, detail-heavy point of view, and the narrative is also akin to reading a diary, adding to that sense of
illicit secrecy.
But the point of divergence between them is that secret. In “Twilight,” the secret world and the key to entry is the knowledge that Edward is a vampire, knowledge only Bella, and by extension the readers, initially share. In “50 Shades,” the secret world focuses on sex, specifically Christian's secret playroom – dubbed by Anna as the “red room of pain” - and his sexual expression through BDSM. Sex, in many senses, is the initial conflict of the book, and is the obstacle between the characters initially as well, and thus becomes a focus. So the secrecy is layered and complex.
There are a lot of people who have read the series, just like me out of curiosity, and there are several more that are shying away from it because of its subject matter. And there are also many who couldn't go past a few pages of the first book as they either did not subscribe to the idea or as a dear friend put it "were grossed out" or thought the book to be very amateurish.
Maybe part of the problem lies in the fact that people do not particularly appreciate or understand or agree with Christian’s fetish or feel that sex is a personal thing and shouldn't be discussed like this in open. But the bottom line is the “50 Shades” isn't really that kinky. There are BDSM romances that not only portray the BDSM elements in a more accurate and explicit manner, but also portray it as something that doesn't need to be "cured." And according to several critics, the sexual play that is present in this book barely scratches the surface of what's explored in other BDSM romances.
But at the same time one cannot deny that women are turned on by this book - and are talking about it because of that fact, and because they couldn't put it down. According to several discussions that the book brought out, one of the most interesting was about the avenues it gave women speak freely about their fetishes and sexuality – something which according to them is still a very male dominated society.
In a her blog in Huffington Post, psychologist Lisa Firestone, expressed concern of whether the popularity the books reflected a more pressing psychological matter regarding sexuality. Does it really reconnect readers with their desire to be physically intimate, she wonders. Or does it merely point out how easy it can be for us to lose touch with our own sexuality?
However valid her reasoning maybe, I feel, as a regular reader, why can’t I have the pleasure of reading a book, erotic or otherwise, just for some guilty pleasure. Or do I have to be bogged down by the various conflicting opinions that it brings out?
