Celestial Reviews 34 - Nov 4, 1995

Note:  I sincerely appreciate the e-mail I receive from readers.  
Please understand that I would like to respond individually and in 
detail to everyone who writes to me, but my time limitations often 
prohibit this.  I hope you will accept my column as my response to your 
communications.  It seems to me that people are enjoying my writing, 
and that makes me feel good.

   - Celeste

      "Door" by Deirdre (spanking) 5
      "Doctor" by Deirdre (bondage & doctors) 7
      "Drawer" by Deirdre (female dominance & slavery) 9
      "Cindy" by Dave Schulte (e-mail & office romance) 7
      "The Wolf and the Seven Little She-Goats" by Anonymous 
            (fractured fairy tale) 5
      "For Celeste" by Delta (mock epic poetry) 10
      "Ode to a New Car Shoulder Belt" by Jackie (light verse) 9
      *"The Classified Ad" by Ann Douglas (hot ff sex) 10

* = Repost of a previous review (because the story has recently 
     been reposted.

"Door" by Deirdre (an65862@anon.penet.fi).  This story is stylistically 
well written, but I didn't enjoy it.  I'm not into the spanking scene; 
but I'm usually not interested in actually doing what happens in *most* 
of Deirdre's stories.  Nonetheless I usually do find the stories 
interesting.  She has the ability to make even very weird things sound 
interesting.  But this one missed the mark with me.  It's about a girl 
who goes out with a friend, who gets spanked for her birthday; then 
they masturbate. That's it.  Maybe spanking enthusiasts will enjoy it 
more than I did.  (Rating: 5)

"Doctor" by Deirdre (an65862@anon.penet.fi).   If you've always 
suspected that doctors and nurses were really sex perverts, this story 
will confirm your suspicions.  The woman in this story is bound and 
manipulated in various ways to satisfy her own lust and that of the 
medical personnel whom she encounters.  This is another one of 
Deirdre's "Twilight Zone" stories.  (Rating: 7)

"Drawer" by Deirdre (an65862@anon.penet.fi).   People who are into 
domination and submission with the woman doing the dominating will 
enjoy this story.  From what I've learned in recent months, this story 
seems to be a short version of how to whip the guys into line.  
Although in my real life I enjoy reciprocally flirting with and 
seducing my husband on a regular basis, a story like this has a certain 
earie appeal.  Why not just keep the guys around sixty-nining one 
another until we women need someone to pamper us - and then we just 
pull one off the rack or head over to the sanctuary to pick up some 
sex.  Maybe it would be even easier to have someone else control the 
men for us.  Yeah, that's it!  Maybe we can find a sport and a 
beverage, and the guys could sit around on couches or stools and just 
stare mindlessly at the sport on television while they guzzle the 
beverage; and whenever we need them to service us, we could snap our 
fingers or turn off the TV and they'd come running.  (Rating: 9)

"Cindy" by Dave Schulte (SchulteD@aol.com).  What would happen if a guy 
were carrying on a hot flirtation with an anonymous woman through 
cyberspace and he suddenly found out his e-mail partner was a co-
worker?  What if he found out it was a guy - oops! That's the wrong 
story!  What if he found out it was a woman whom he already found to be 
attractive?  This story has a potentially interesting plot line; but I 
can't help thinking that it could have been improved with a little more 
refining.  For example, one more proofreading of the grammar would have 
made this story a lot easier to read; and a few ideas need development 
or clarification.  Maybe those things will happen before Dave reposts 
this story.  (Rating: 7)

"The Wolf and the Seven Little She-Goats" by Anonymous submitted by 
Frank McCoy (mccoyf@millcomm.com).  As you can easily imagine, the 
teachers' lounge in most American schools is a vibrant place, where 
enthusiastic, scholarly young pedagogues gather to rejuvenate 
themselves over a chilled container of fruit juice while they discuss 
with their colleagues innovative ideas to further the enlightenment of 
the young people committed to their care.  Not so our school's lounge!  
It is a dismal place, reminiscent of the Dickensian hulks, where burnt-
out, senile or senescent grouches gather not to discuss Hubble's 
constant but rather to commiserate about their arthritis and to vent 
their spleen with regard to the degenerate assholes entrusted to their 
care.  I normally stay away from that cesspool of iniquity; I spend any 
free time I may have in my classroom at my computer, where passers-by 
think I am "doing grades," but where I am more likely perusing 
alt.sex.stories, where the level of conversation is at least slightly 
more uplifting than would be likely in the Lounge.

About two weeks ago my own computer was down, and so I had to use the 
one in the Lounge.  Mr. Snotfart was waxing eloquent to a group of his 
colleagues.  He pounded the table and concluded emphatically, "That's 
what's wrong with these fucking kids!"  Just then Marian the Gym 
Teacher came through the door.  (Actually, it would be a better 
anecdote if she were a librarian; but I've already lied about Mr. 
Snotfart's name, and I don't want to stretch your credulity.)  She 
stopped, appeared startled, and said to me, "Oh my!  What's he talking 
about?" This lady almost never speaks to me, and so she had taken me by 
surprise.  I didn't want her to see what was on my screen, and so I 
shrugged and replied, "Something about goats having trouble propagating 
their species."  "Oh!" she said; and then she turned and walked out of 
the room.

Such a great line for such a small reaction!  But that's what this 
story is about: fucking kids!  Literally.  I mean, it's about goats 
having sex.  Fucking kids!  Maybe you had to be there....

I usually don't enjoy pedophilia or bestiality; but when you put them 
together, the negatives seem to cancel out.  I mean, a 10-year-old goat 
(like the protagonist in this story) would actually be about 54 in 
human years.  And a 45-year old wolf screwing a 5-year-old kid changes 
from a repulsive activity to a gerontological phenomenon that would 
possibly be of interest to Guiness.  However, the ages of the kids in 
this story were a little confusing: They all sounded pre-menopausal to 
me.  In addition, they were extremely anthropomorphic.

The tale begins with Momma Goat leaving the kids Home Alone.  They 
joyfully masturbate and play with the Family Dildo.  (This is a German 
fairytale.  Hence the capital letters for nouns and the ceremonial 
sharing of the dildo - a custom perhaps unfamiliar to American kids.  
However, I don't write German too well.  Hence the lower case letters 
for other nouns.)  Then an Intruder enters the peaceful house.  It's 
not clear whether his name is Wolf or Smith.  Since this is a German 
fairytale, we'll assume his name is Wolfgang von Smith.  Instead of 
eating them up, Smitty pretends to be asleep while the kids play with 
his Cock.  After a little while Smitty fucks the oldest kid.  When all 
the other kids cry "Me too," Smitty realizes he may have bitten off 
more than he can chew.  However, he dutifully boinks all seven of them 
- much to their delight; and when Momma Goat returns home the happy 
kids tell her that the Big Bad Wolf may be big but he isn't so bad 
after all.  The End.

The sexual activity in this story is somewhat bloody (perhaps denoting 
a British influence).   For sports enthusiasts, there are subtle but 
unmistakable allusions to British soccer fans.  For example, the author 
refers to "the jerks of the narrow channel that milk his prick"; and 
the kids who are not being fucked by Smitty at any given time make 
themselves useful by cheering and licking up any fluids they can find. 

This story raises some unresolved questions about the mongrelization of 
the species; therefore, it should not be used by nannies or governesses 
as bedtime reading for children whose parents are Racial Purists.  (I 
myself cannot really comment on relationships between goats and wolves 
are likely to be successful when they are based so heavily on sex 
rather than common literary or political interests.)

Grammatically, the story sucks (an American - possibly California - 
influence); but the tale would probably lose some of its childish Charm 
if the coma splices and dangling modifiers were removed.  The story 
possesses what the Separatists in Quebec might refer to as a certain je 
ne sais quoi, and their English speaking confreres as nonsense.  What I 
find truly amazing is that the phrase "je ne sais quoi" is actually in 
my unabridged dictionary, right before Jenghis Kahn and directly 
opposite the word jerkinhead, which is right below a picture of a 
jerkin.  This can't all be mere coincidence.  I'm going to stop writing 
this review and go out and buy a lottery ticket. Am I glad I read this 
story?  You bet your sweet jerkinhead! (Rating: 5)

"For Celeste" by Delta (an248969@anon.penet.fi).  It may be true that 
everyone gets fifteen minutes of fame in his or her lifetime; but few 
people get an epic poem dedicated to them.  I have now received that 
honor, even if it is a short epic.  I admit that I had a conflict of 
interest reviewing this poem; and my dilemma was heightened by the fact 
that the United States does not have a poet laureate for us taxpayers 
to consult.  Therefore, I contacted the poet laureate of England, more 
commonly known on the Internet as SirBigStick, who verified the 
validity of this review and also offered to dub me his understudy.

To be enjoyed to its fullest, this story has to be read out loud.  
Actually, to be enjoyed to its absolute fullest, it should be read out 
loud while one is eating one's favorite food and doing one's favorite 
thing.  Perhaps being covered with warm chocolate syrup would help too. 
My point is that many of us in Western society have lost the ability to 
communicate in heroic verse, and this story should do as much as 
anything to restore that talent to our culture.

In addition to its obvious metric qualities and excellent use of 
metaphor, this story/poem effectively uses understatement to describe 
the sexual activity between a goddess and her demigod lover in terms 
that can be understood by mere mortals.

I showed this story to my husband, and he was at first upset.  But then 
he realized that the line "shriveled mightily" did not refer to him, 
but was actually "shivered mightily" with reference to me.

I enjoyed this story; and I think those of you about whom it's not will 
also enjoy it.  It's a very clever piece of writing.  It really is a 
good parody of Homeric verse as that form was often imitated in 
Elizabethan times.  Or, as SirBigStick put it: "Delta!  A Poet?  I 
didn't know it!"  (Rating: 10)

"Ode to a New Car Shoulder Belt" by Jackie (an338903@anon.penet.fi).  Since 
poetry got in by the back door in the preceding review, I might as well review 
this poem now.  It's a meditation on a woman's breasts from the perspective of 
her car's seatbelt.  The poem presents light-hearted refreshing insights as 
the woman progresses through the various stages of her life.  The difference 
between this and the previous poem is that whereas Delta actually parodies a 
classical style, this author merely uses rhyme to chain together some pleasant 
ideas.  That's not a problem - just a comment.  I enjoyed this poem.  (Rating: 
9)

"The Classified Ad" by Ann Douglas (an309642@anon.penet.fi).  Because 
she is frustrated by her husband's lack of interest in her life, a 
woman posts a classified ad on a BBS.  In it she expresses a need to 
meet with another woman to explore her own sexuality.  A female doctor 
responds, and the two of them hit it off very well together.  By the 
end of the story the woman's self concept and lifestyle have taken a 
radical shift. While this is an excellent short story in its own right, 
it could also be considered an essay entitled "Lesbians Are Normal 
People."

My only problem with this otherwise excellent story is that I had 
impression is that the author rushed it to press.  Near the end there 
are several passages where  the punctuation disintegrates badly - for 
example, quotation marks and apostrophes disappear almost completely; 
and the author selects wrong words (e.g., sign for sigh).  At first I 
thought the author was omitting the punctuation to achieve a purpose; 
but then the story reverted to good punctuation again.  I'm convinced 
that the author simply wrote these parts last and did not proofread 
them carefully.  However, in spite of this annoyance, I truly enjoyed 
this story.  (Rating: 10)

TIP OF THE WEEK:  In each issue of Celestial Reviews I present one of 
the guidelines from Celestial Grammar, which I have posted on alt 
sex.stories.d. and which I'll continue to develop and revise from time 
to time.  My theory is that if all of these tips were followed, about 
95% of the really distracting errors in a.s.s. stories would be 
eliminated.  (The other 5% will eventually be covered in Advanced 
Celestial Grammar.)  I was going to name this part of the column TIP OF 
THE {something sexual}, but I thought the innuendo might detract from 
the sober serious business at hand.  Here is this week's Tip:

WHO and WHOM (also WHOEVER and WHOMEVER)

Technically, who and whom are either relative or interrogative 
pronouns.  That doesn't matter for now.  The rules for using relative 
and interrogative pronouns are identical.  

The main rule is that the way the word is used in its clause determines 
the form to use.  In general, if it's a subject (nominative case) use 
WHO (or WHOEVER).  If it's an object of a verb or of a preposition 
(objective case), use WHOM (or WHOMEVER).

If you are uncertain how to apply this rule, you can do it by ear.  
Simply replace WHO by HE (or SHE) and WHOM by HIM (or HER), and see if 
the sentence sounds right.

      That is the man WHOM I plan to seduce tonight.  (WHOM is 
            the object of seduce.  I plan to seduce HIM tonight.  "I 
            plan to seduce he tonight" sounds absurd.)

      That is the woman WHO will seduce me tonight.  (WHO is 
            the subject of will seduce.  SHE will seduce me tonight.  
            HER will seduce me tonight sounds absurd.)

      WHOM do you plan to seduce tonight?  (Just answer the 
            question: I plan to seduce HIM (not HE) tonight.)

      WHO will seduce you tonight? (Just answer the question: 
            SHE (not HER) will me tonight.)

In America, correct grammar is often viewed with suspicion.  Therefore, 
some people use WHO almost all the time, especially when it occurs at 
the beginning of a sentence.  Therefore, intelligent people may say the 
following, even though they know each sentence is incorrect:

      WHO did you fuck last night?  (This should be "WHOM did
            you fuck last night?"  If you say it correctly, the person
            to whom you are speaking will know you're either an
            English teacher or a narc.)

      WHO do you want to sleep with tonight?  (This should be 
           "With WHOM do you want to sleep tonight?"  However,
            guys to whom this would be said would suspect that
            they were in for an expensive and perhaps boring     
            evening with a girl who would say this correctly.  It's
            just not cool.)

My impression is that in written speech, almost anyone can feel 
comfortable using the proper word.  I guess maybe the ordinary person 
thinks if you have time to revise, then it's OK to use WHOM.

Sometimes confusion arises from the fact that WHO/WHOM appears to be 
part of a different clause.  However, as long as you put the word in 
the right clause and follow the preceding guidelines, you will not make 
mistakes.  Here are some more difficult examples:

     I know WHO will seduce me tonight.  (Some people think
            that WHO is the object of "know."  This is not accurate. 
            WHO is the subject of "seduce."  The whole clause "who 
            will seduce me tonight" is the object of "know." You can 
            solve the problem by inserting HE/HIM.  HE will 
            seduce me.)

     I know WHOM I plan to seduce tonight.  (Some people think
            that WHOM is the object of "know."  This is not accurate. 
            WHOM is the object of "seduce."  The whole clause 
            "whom I plan to seduce tonight" is the object of "know."
            You can solve the problem by  inserting HE/HIM.  I
            plan to seduce HIM.)

The issue is sometimes more difficult with WHOEVER.  This is because 
many people who can distinguish WHO and WHOM by ear get confused by the 
longer word.

      I'd like to have sex again with WHOEVER seduced me last 
            night.  (Many people incorrectly say WHOMEVER, 
            because they think the word is the object of the
            preposition "with."  This is incorrect; it is the subject 
of 
            "seduced."  Again, you can solve the problem by
            inserting HE/HIM.  HE seduced me last night.)

      I'd like to have sex again with WHOMEVER I seduced last
            night.  (Many people correctly say WHOMEVER, but 
            they do this because they think the word is the object 
            of the preposition "with."  This is incorrect; it is the 
            object of "seduced."  Again, you can solve the problem 
            by  inserting HE/HIM.  I seduced HIM last night.)

That's all there is to it.
