How to write dirty jokes like Shakespeare – five-step guide

Look up “Shakespeare + dirty” and you will find an ocean of articles walking you through some of his sexual innuendoes that you might have missed when reading him in class. Shakespeare had a true talent, and he didn’t shy away from anything. But how can you learn to write like him? What lessons can you take from his works and apply to your own? Well, these five lessons here would be a good start.

Step one: the one-word power

Hide a simple word with a sexual connotation in plain sight.

In both these cases, the word “cunt” is more or less hidden in the lines but would be clear to hear when spoken out loud.

This clever little trick does two things: you won’t get told off for sexually explicit language, and though these were easy to spot for regular theatre-goers of the day there will always be a charm to sharing a secret “code”, to understanding something which wasn’t said plainly.

Step two: misunderstanding metaphors

Let’s take these two one at the time, and add some context to them, trust me, you will find them hilarious. First image first, and here’s the context for that.

Petruchio: Come, come, you wasp. I’ faith, you are too angry.

Katherine: If I be waspish, best beware my sting.

Petruchio: My remedy is then to pluck it out.

Katherine: Ay, if the fool could find it where it lies.

Petruchio: Who knows not where a wasp does wear his sting? In his tail.

Katherine: In his tongue.

Petruchio: Whose tongue?

Katherine: Your’s, if you talk of tales. And so farewell.

Petruchio: What, with my tongue in your tail? Nay, come again, Good Kate. I am a gentleman.

The Taming of the Shrew, Act II scene I

What’s so great about this one is how Petruchio starts the analogy of wasps, Katherine changes it to fit her needs, and then Petruchio brings it back to his benefit, and through all of that, the meaning of the analogy constantly changes.

In Petruchio’s first line “wasp” means merely someone angry and out of reach of reason, but Katherine takes that insult and turns it into a warning to Petruchio, telling him to keep his distance for he can never know what she might do – and, in fairness, she has tied up her sister and is not afraid to hit a stranger if she sees fit. With his line stating that he will “pluck it out”, meaning he will tame her, domesticate the wild animal she is known to be.

Katherine then turns the sting analogy to mean her wit, not just her anger and wildness, saying “if the fool could find where it lies,” declaring herself smarter than Petruchio and therefore the one who will win this little battle. Petruchio, in turn, decides to make it sexual rather than intellectual by saying the wasp’s sting is “in his tail” (same way we still use “chasing tail” today). Argument wise this is where Katherine starts to lose ground. Up till this point, she has gone along with his analogies but changed them to fit her own purpose, for example agreeing that she is a wasp and that it is possible for him to pluck out her sting (if he can find it). Now, instead she says “In his tongue”, making this the first she backtracks and changes the rules of the game (like a bad improv actor saying “no, this is not how it is”). This shows us that he got to her with this line, that she was not prepared to defend herself against such blatant sexual advances, however well disguised – and it possibly even shows us that she feels a physical attraction too, one she cannot deny or control.

Petruchio now has control of the conversation rather than Katherine, and so he goes on to ask “whose tongue?” And here Katherine changes the nature of the analogy altogether, saying now that he is the wasp and not her, with the line “Your’s, if you talk of tales.” When talking of “tales” (or “tails”, wink wink), it is true that the male is the one with the sting. With this, she turns the whole conversation around and makes him the wild animal she was accused of being, and then she bids him farewell – to which he replies “what, with my tongue in your tail?” The scene quickly escalates when Katherine now no longer has any wit to deflect his sexual advances and decides to hit him instead.

If this does not prove that sexual references cannot have both wit and personality, and be made all the greater for it, then I give up.

The second of our two images is quite the opposite. Here we shall see a lack of wit turn a sentence around to ridicule its speaker.

Falstaff: Why, an otter.

Prince Henry: An otter, Sir John. Why an otter?

Falstaff: Why, she is neither fish nor flesh; a man knows not where to have her.

Mistress Quickly: Thou art an unjust man in saying so. Thou or any man knows where to have me, thou knave, thou.

Henry IV part I, Act III scene III

The scene is that Falstaff and Mistress Quickly are both calling each other out in front of the prince, both wanting him to be on their side (like children ratting on each other to a parent). And so Falstaff calls Mistress Quickly an otter, which is not a usual insult, judging by Prince Henry’s response.

The sexual brilliance comes from Mistress Quickly’s own reply to this insult, saying “any man knows where to have me” saying, basically, any man could find her vagina just fine – and possibly implying it has been put to the test.

Step three: the double meaning words

“To die” also means to achieve sexual climax, giving this seemingly romantic declaration a sexual spicing up. It can be compared to the modern “to come”.

The modern language is full of sexual euphemisms that are all very clear to people who hear them, and this one will have been just as clear in its time. The beauty here is that it is put into a context where the non-sexual meaning could also have been the intended one. This leaves the audience with one of those “how dirty is your mind” kind of games. If you like it romantic and heartfelt, you can have that, if you like it dirty and playful you can have that too. Like those dural images where you can see either-or.

Step four: be unexplicit but clear

Phrasing something clearly, especially when it comes to sex, can often have a less than desirable sound to it. For example, using clinical terms in a sex scene, or describing only movements, or even describing movements too accurately, can take away the charm. Instead, use unexplicit words but make your meaning clear. “Graze on my lips” provokes far more attractive images than “kiss my lips” which sounds plain boring, or even worse “put your lips against mine.” A little bit of imagery doesn’t hurt, it actually helps. A lot. A whole lot.

Step five: be natural

This goes both for when you are talking about sex and when you are describing it. The quote we just talked about counts for this as well, using natural metaphors to make it seem less clinical, but also having a natural approach to sex on its own, as something pretty much everyone wants and thinks about.

Whether it is describing how even a mother can be a sexual being (despite how awkward it is for a child to notice this), or whether it is having a boner, Shakespeare doesn’t deny it or lock it away. It is a part of the world we live in, part of life, and as cleverly disguised as it is in some of his works, he cannot be accused of denying its existence.

So there you have it, five tips for writing sex scenes, sexual inuendoes, sex jokes, or whatever else sex you want to write. What do you think, should we continue this with a part three with jokes?