Classics Exposed

There is no doubting the fact that the classics remain an inspiration to writers, even today, with many complex and thought-provoking storylines. But if we are honest with ourselves haven’t we heard the same reserved tale told time and time again?

Our collection of Clandestine Classics is about to change that. This is a collection of classics as they have never been seen before.

The old fashioned pleasantries and timidity have all been stripped away, quite literally. You didn’t really think that these much loved characters only held hands and pecked cheeks did you? Come with us, as we embark on a breathtaking experience—behind the closed bedroom doors of our favourite, most-beloved British characters. Learn what Sherlock really thought of Watson, what Mr Darcy really wanted to do to Miss Elizabeth Bennet, and unveil the sexy escapades of Mr Rochester and Jane Eyre. We’ll show you the scenes that you always wanted to see but were never allowed. Come on, you know you can’t the pages and delve inside.


  1. If the news report about this series is accurate, I have to say that what your company is doing is inexcusable and sickening. Just because these books are public domain, this does not give anyone the right to desecrate them in such a crass fashion. I hope this ridiculous marketing gimmick winds up on the ash-heap of pop culture as soon as possible. No one in their right minds would waste their time or money on such a disgusting travesty.

    1. I personally feel as if the press releases stating that this series follows suit of 50 Shades of Garbage is completely inaccurate. The thought for redoing these books was there well before E.L James came out with her poorly written excuse for a trilogy. The books do not take these wonderful strong powerful characters (Watson, Jane Eyre) and turn them into sniveling whining brats such as Bella and Ana. The authors took the original voices and kept the characters true to themselves... without making taking away from THEM.

      Being close to Sierra I know she spent weeks figuring out who "Jane" is, what made her tick, and she embraced Jane for everything she is (AMAZING! Strong, determined, empowered) and kept Janes voice strong.

      There is no "Marketing gimmick" here, and unless you've read many of these wonderful authors stories before (and use books such as 50SOG as reference) I could see where you're coming from and why you're so angry, but believe me, erotica isn't AT ALL about being in an abusive relationship where the man does what he wants and leaves the woman to cry alone in a corner - it is... the exact opposite. Love, devotion, and 100% unwavering trust. Don't you think Miss Eyre deserved that?

  2. Classics are not sacred just because they're old. In many cases the authors themselves altered the stories, suppressed earlier versions and considered their work as living, breathing entities, not dead pieces of prose. There is some evidence (compare the folios) that even Shakespeare altered his work after it appeared on the stage, and for centuries others added and took from his pieces. oh yes, and Shakespeare rewrote classics. Paolo and Francesca became Romeo and Juliet, and Holinshead gave Shakespeare the four plays often known as "The Hollow Crown." He didn't just take stories from Holinshead, he quoted directly, lifted whole speeches.
    For an author the fascination is into getting into another author's head, seeing how voices changed. And with choosing the book that works with their voice the best.
    It's partly a development of the "auteur" culture, so prevalent in the arts in the last half of the twentieth century that says "leave this alone," and a view that classic pieces are set in stone.
    Who's to say that the author wouldn't have put the scenes in themselves, if the times were more conducive to doing so?
    Oh yes, and it's fun.

  3. I can only agree Lynne. Just look at the classic fairy tales now becoming popular movies with adult themes. "Art" such as the classics are not set in stone. If someone does not like what a person has done to what they deem as sacred -- be it Shakespeare or Tolkien :) -- Guess what? Free will gives them a wonderful advantage -- they can simply not read a book or not go see a movie.

    1. Billi, it's amazing how little attention the fairytale adaptions have got, and they have also been turned into erotic books--I don't recall seeing anyone batting an eyelid there, but I may just have missed that. I ponder on how erotic fairytales seem acceptable (when in their non-erotic form they are targeted at children) yet the classic adaptions are seen as terrible when they are aimed at an adult audience.

    2. The difference between the fairytale retellings and Clandestine Classics is we're now living in a post-50 Shades world and the media is rabid for news of anything having to do with erotic fiction for women. In their minds, the genre was created by E.L. James. We, and many other women who have been reading erotic romance stories for years, know that isn't true, but fact has little bearing over a good sound bite.

      Adams Media published "wild and wanton" versions of Wuthering Heights (in late 2010) and Pride and Prejudice (in January 2012), but those caused nary a ripple, and there certainly wasn't any outrage, because there was no media frenzy surrounding erotic romance at the time.

    3. Billi,

      Great point. If we were talking about a movie version of "a classic" it would be a different story. The director could at his or her discretion visually depict sex scenes without touching the dialogue and there would be far fewer panties in bundles.

  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

  5. I agree with my fellow TEB author, Lynne. The beauty about writing--well, actually about the act of creating itself is that it continues to evolve as society does. What you view as a travesty, others view as an opportunity to pay homage to authors who have come before us. If you do your research, you'll find that many of the works being sampled have tons of erotic references and innuendo. Shakespeare especially was quite the "dirty" writer. I do hope you change your mind and give some of these lovely stories a chance. I for one am very proud to be an author for this company. Oh, and by the way, TEB doesn't need publicity stunts--we're kind of awesome all by ourselves.

  6. I think they're an excellent idea, and as many others have said, you do have free will those of you who do not like this idea, which generally means you don't read them, really it's quite simple. I would love to have the ability to be as amazing as the authors in this company and so many others. I have seen comments on various sites that say the authors of the Clandestine Classics are not 'good enough' to write their own stuff and that they have to 'steal' 'sacred' writing. Well, not being rude, but if those people took the time to look, they would see that all the authors have very good books of their own out there, it's not like they are all debut authors, it's just that they are now in the media light for these particular stories. I for one will be purchasing all of them, they're not all genres I would normally go out of my way to buy, but my interest is peaked, and who knows I may love them and discover a few new authors to start reading :)Don't knock it till you tried it!

  7. I can only follow my fellow authors on this one, obviously, as I'm one of the authors who has added to one of these glorious books. I do, however, understand why some people are so upset by this, but the erotic classics are, to us, like Julia said, us paying homage. It is so exciting to bring the classics into modern times, so that those who would never have picked up a classic book may well do so now. This is such a heart-warming thing for me, to know that such great authors are being read all over again by an audience who may possibly have shunned them or would never have given them the time of day until now. I, for one, cannot wait to read them all. Exciting times ahead, with my nose stuck inside the pages containing fabulous prose written by the original authors and the amazing talent of those who have added scenes. Wonderful, wonderful, wonderful!

  8. I was, at first, a teeny bit mortified by this line myself. Once I got over the shock I realised that I was being silly. Jane Eyre is one of my favourite books of all time and I have read it time and time again since I was ten. I therefore think it's perfect just as it is. But that doesn't mean that someone else can't write in the bits that I fill in in my sordid imagination. I'm an Erotic Romance author myself with Total-E-Bound so I am quite good at filling in the blanks. However others might not be and might want those sexy bits written in for them.
    Anyone who writes and puts their work out there for the public knows that it will be used and adapted, quoted and mis-quoted in a million different ways. An Author needs to come to terms with that. I am also sure that the authors involved will have written really complimentary sex scenes in fitting with the original classic. I am sure it has been a real labour of love and I am sure it's been tastefully and erotically done. I am also sure that opinion is going to continue to be very split over these books. When you change something that has been the same for many, many years there's always going to be a group of people who disprove of that.

  9. "We're not rewriting the classics. We're keeping the original prose and the author's voice. We're not changing any of that."

    I'm sorry, if this quote in the Huffington Post is accurate, then it has the feel, if not the essence of plagiarism. We're not talking rewriting fairy tales, but the lifting of entire works and adding an author's two cents.

    And as to "Who's to say that the author wouldn't have put the scenes in themselves, if the times were more conducive to doing so?" We can't ask them so we'll never know.

    I guess public domain makes using someone else's exact words--a lot if not all--fair game. I would rather see homage paid in the re-creation of a work, or its world, than piggybacking on the original itself.

    And, to make perfectly clear, I am not intimating the authors are not "good enough", just that I'd rather spend my money on something original they wrote in their own voice.

  10. Hahaha are you serious? You're trying to make money with this? Like fine if you want to write this, but I could find better written porn on classics from for free!

    And fine if you want to write this, but don't pretend you're "keeping the original prose and the author's voice." Because Jane Austen would TOTALLY write that Darcy was "hot, spicy, and all man." LOL.

    And for the record, I do think all the characters did were held hands and pecked cheeks, at least until they were married. Because that was like, maybe the way things worked back then or something. And then, in all seriousness, I think you guys have written the sex wrong. I think it would have been slower and more sensual. Because people never really touched back then, their first kiss would have been erotic enough, without sex immediately following. And then I think it would be more special and sensual, and less conventionally "sexy" as you lovely authors have written it.

    By the way, Darcy's "manhood." HAHA. Couldn't you have just called it a dick?

    Please. You are not paying "homage" to anything. Thanks for all the laughs I got while reading the excerpts. I hope SOMEONE will buy these for your own arrogant sakes'.

    1. "Couldn't you have just called it a dick?"

      Uh, no. For this book that would not have worked. The word "dick" wasn't used in reference to a penis until 1891. P & P was first published in 1831.

      I'd like to give thanks to you for also providing a laugh, bless you.

      Just in case you need it for future reference, you might find this site very useful:

      Have a nice day!


    2. Oh well I suppose since you authors are the ones who are experts on 19th century sexual terms and not me, that is why you guys are writing these and not me!

      But wait! Using the lovely site you have provided me, the definition of "manhood" is

      early 13c., "state of being human," from man (n.) + -hood. Meanings "state of being an adult male," also "manliness," are from late 14c. Similar words in Old English were less explicitly masculine; cf. manscipe "humanity, courtesy," lit. "man-ship;" mennisclicnes "state of man, humanity, humaneness, human nature." The more "manly" word was werhad "male sex, virility, manhood" (see first element in werewolf).

      Nowhere does it say it was used as a euphenism for penis. So maybe the appropriate word here would simply be "penis." I don't know, what else did they ACTUALLY use? (Btw, I was originally being sarcastic, saying that 'manhood' is just as inappropriate a word as 'dick' to use in context.)

      Oh! And you have told me that P&P was first published in 1831. Actually, you have the digits switched. It was first published in January 1813.

      That is all. Have a lovely day!

  11. I would just like to agree with my fellow authors above and add that I really cannot see why this new line has received so much vitriol in the press. If you want to read them, please do. If you don't, that's fine. There is no need for a level of outrage more suited to the sight of us drawing boobs on the original Mona Lisa.

    Given that erotic sequels and partner novels to Austen and Bronte have been being written for years, plus that we are in the era of "Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter", I can only suggest that everyone stick to what they like to read and stop acting as though erotica writers are the devil incarnate.

  12. First off, fantastic idea! I can't wait to start reading these!

    Secondly, I find it so humorous that people have nothing better to do then come onto this site and complain about how they think this is a bad idea. Get a life people! If you don't like it fine, you're entitled to your opinion, but no one cares. People can and can't read whatever the hell they want.

    I guarantee everyone complaining how this is just "atrocious" has gotten under their covers and read a good erotic romance at least once in their life. All the sudden it is a big deal because a publishing company decided to add a little spice to an old story?

    Why is it that no one complains about the classics being remade into movies and the directors adding some sexual scenes into them (which are most definitely not in the original book)?

    Bottom line, if I was this publishing company or an author that is adding some sex into one of these stories, Id tell the lot of them to piss off. This is a great idea! Haters will hate, that is for sure.

    Hey, if you don't like this kind of literature you don't have to read it!

  13. but the whole point of Jane Eyre especially is the fact that they both feel such overwhelming erotic desire, and yet resist it. It was a hugely controversial book in its time, largely because for almost the first time in mainstream literature a female protagonist acknowledged that her passionate erotic desire for Rochester was so overpowering that she was tempted to throw away convention and become his mistress. And didn't, because she wanted control in the relationship that the illicit sexual path he was offering wouldn't have given her. To give them sex scenes totally undermines Bronte's original project with the text and suggests that whoever thought it needed re-writing was totally blind to the unspoken erotic charge that drives the novel. Jane Eyre doesn't need sex scenes added because they're already there - you just have to use your brain while reading.