I'm curious on the general opinion of popping, but permanent popping in particular.
Popping for me is the primary reason why I enjoy inflation. Any work not involving popping often feels rambling to me, it can be very good and definitely enjoyable, but it's the pop that I find thrilling. I know not everyone feels the same way, and I understand and respect that.
That said, I wonder why "Pop" is so exciting for me. Especially given my favourite are the ones that are clearly "the end" of the character. Regeneration is a huge "turn off" for me and feels like a cop out, unless it's foreshadowed. I suppose the discussion on if popping is "snuff" is already a sensitive and complicated discussion, one based on what people want, like, and tolerate.
The permanence is what I find exciting, that is truly is the end of the character. Whether this is played for drama, humour, sexuality, horror, or any other reason it's exciting if that's it. The end. But it's not just reading about women blowing to pieces that I find exciting, it's also imagining myself blowing up like that. And that I have no idea how to explain. It's the context of fantasy I guess, that in fantasy there are no limits and that includes things that would be and are horrible in real life. So the "end" of a character through popping is okay if it's for the fantasy. Or am I just rambling?
I suppose at the very least to me, popping is a sadistic thing. It's the end of a character, and how they react to it is very exciting. How I think I would react or reading about it, seeing it in drawings.
So, I'm wondering what all the rest of you have to say about "permanent pops." If it's not your thing then feel free to say so or just move on.
I pretty much agree with all of that. It's hard to say why in a way that people will understand, it's easy to compare the explosion with orgasm, and the fear leading up to it is really sadomasochism, and I think there's something hot in the inflatee's destructive power when she goes off, like she might be helpless but she's also dangerous. To some people though, it will always mean death too and it's hard to explain why I don't like the 'and then she reappeared and was OK after all' ending without sounding like I'm into snuff It always sounds a bit earnest, like it was put in there to make sure nobody can think she is dead. Maybe someone will correct me and say that to them the reformation is a part of their fetish, but it doesn't seem it when I read it.
I think it goes back to cartoon violence, there are two kinds of 'gone' there is death, which I don't like, and never mention in my stories, and there is obliteration, which I like, and is similar to how in many cartoons, characters are obliterated. It's just that this other non-death, kind of gone hasn't remained rooted in cartoons, it can be conceived of in sexual fantasies. Not dead, just gone. I mean the character is just a character and was never alive in the first place right? It can be tricky to explain to people though who have no frame of reference for obliteration and keep using logic in a situation where the rules if logic can be broken, and insisting it's death.
Anyway, thanks for posting.