I agree with Sara. And I think what you outlined is very helpful! I've seen similar steam scales online. And use of "sweet," "steamy," and "spicy." Although, it seems like steamy and spicy could be interchangeable and are extremely subjective.
A spelled-out gradient like what you have above helps everyone. Publishers could adopt a scale like that. It wouldn't have to be on the book itself, but maybe on the publisher's or author's (if they wished) websites? (Honestly, I'd love one for gore as that is something I don't handle well.)
I'd have to spend some time pondering how to convey levels of gore without....examples. Like, part of what makes Kate Daniels feel more gorey than, say, Throne of Glass, has to do with realism. Kate Daniels is written by someone who has probably seen real wounds, and it shows. Throne of Glass is sort of generic blood. Homer's The Iliad is clinically detailed about entry and exit wounds, but doesn't get into dangly bits as I recall. But it's been a while. Was that too much detail? How do I even begin to rank that on a 5 scale???
No, you're right! I don't even know how to begin there. I'm sure the movie ratings system (as imperfect as it is) has some detailed lines somewhere. For me, I can usually handle PG-13 violence but not R. (The Patriot, the Passion of the Christ, and the Gladiator were all too much for me.) Sometimes intensity is a factor too, but rarely in books for me--mostly just in movies.
This should definitely be a universally-adopted scale.
My favorite part is all the qualifiers. Because they actually change the meaning quite a bit depending on which you employ.
I agree with Sara. And I think what you outlined is very helpful! I've seen similar steam scales online. And use of "sweet," "steamy," and "spicy." Although, it seems like steamy and spicy could be interchangeable and are extremely subjective.
A spelled-out gradient like what you have above helps everyone. Publishers could adopt a scale like that. It wouldn't have to be on the book itself, but maybe on the publisher's or author's (if they wished) websites? (Honestly, I'd love one for gore as that is something I don't handle well.)
I'd have to spend some time pondering how to convey levels of gore without....examples. Like, part of what makes Kate Daniels feel more gorey than, say, Throne of Glass, has to do with realism. Kate Daniels is written by someone who has probably seen real wounds, and it shows. Throne of Glass is sort of generic blood. Homer's The Iliad is clinically detailed about entry and exit wounds, but doesn't get into dangly bits as I recall. But it's been a while. Was that too much detail? How do I even begin to rank that on a 5 scale???
No, you're right! I don't even know how to begin there. I'm sure the movie ratings system (as imperfect as it is) has some detailed lines somewhere. For me, I can usually handle PG-13 violence but not R. (The Patriot, the Passion of the Christ, and the Gladiator were all too much for me.) Sometimes intensity is a factor too, but rarely in books for me--mostly just in movies.