snorkackcatcher: (Default)
[personal profile] snorkackcatcher
A newspaper story that happened to chime with musings on a fandom subject I never got round to making a specific post on before ...

The Guardian's G2 section today had an article entitled Beyond Lust by one Jonathan Jones, concerning an Art and Sex Exhibition at the Barbican (a link from that page goes to a display of a few exhibits that the paper warned May Offend, although frankly none of it seemed worth raising an eyebrow over, let alone anything else). Much of the article seems to be not unexpected, um, wank (with approving nods to Foucault and disapproving ones to the Church), but the introductory paragraph outlining its thesis struck me:
You could not exclude Schiele from an exhibition entitled Seduced: Art and Sex from Antiquity to the Present. Nor could you exclude his Viennese contemporary, Gustav Klimt, whose Reclining Masturbating Girl hangs nearby, nor Picasso, whose painting of himself at the age of about 20 being fellated is in the same room. And yet there's something about that title, "art and sex", that doesn't quite do justice to these artists. It implies that art can sometimes be about things other than sex - and I'm not sure if Schiele or Picasso ever believed it could. I'm not sure if I believe it myself.
Emphasis mine, because it had my jaw dropping at the sheer nuttiness of the contention -- however overstated for effect. I'm sure Mr Jones doesn't really mean to imply that landscapes, or portraiture, or devotional art, or abstract explorations of shape and colour, or any of the numerous other things that art can be 'about', are actually, in fact, about sex -- because that would be silly. But in the article he does seem to come close to suggesting that sexual themes are so daring and transgressive that they make a piece of art Art, not like that booorING conventional stuff which is about something else, and that this is the true measure of an artist -- which may say more about the chap himself than about the art. As he concludes:
It's a risky business, admitting to how much you enjoy looking at sex. I loved this show, but left feeling sad and ashamed; then I had to come back the next day and look again. It is the bravest and most intelligent exhibition of the year.
Bravest and most intelligent? Bullshit, I suspect (although I'm not going to bother travelling to London to find out). It would have required considerable bravery to put on an exhibition on this subject half a century ago, but not so much these days. But his attitude -- that sex is by far the most Significant and Authentic subject of artistic expression, and that other subjects are just milquetoast stuff that lacks the guts to explore sexuality -- seems not uncommon.

You can already see exactly where I'm going with this, can't you?

Having camped in fandom for a few years -- or at least the modest subset of it that writes and reads fic -- I've often found myself exasperated with its emphasis on shipping, and especially with the amount of attention directed towards 'offbeat' R/NC-17 material such as incest, kink, and contrived pairings. Now if people like all that simply because they find it entertaining or totally hot, and don't mind saying so -- hey, fair enough. That's a perfectly sensible, no-bullshit reason. But when things get highfalutin' and considerations of Artistic Expression are brought in, it's often irritating. I've gazed with incomprehension at opinions such as (roughly): "I wouldn't write genfic -- I can't include sex? I'd find that so restrictive!"

I've come to the conclusion -- observation, really -- that there are people with a take analogous to that of our Mr Jones. It's the most important subject, it's what fanfic is Really For, and writers who choose other subjects for their fic or write ratings below R are pursuing an inherently lesser and artistically weaker field of little interest to us grownups.

Um, it's all wrong ... that is, I think I disagree. :) My personal general approach (oft-expressed to the point of tedium -- stop me if you've heard this one before! :D), is that there are a huge number of different stories that can be told, in a very large number of which the characters' sexual behaviour plays either no role or only a secondary role. (This applies to both fanfic and 'original fic', btw -- and to artistic expression in general, plz to be noting Mr Jones.) The sensible course of action would seem to be to just write the damn story, include romance and sex if and when they have some role to play, don't bother if they don't, and don't worry about what rating is appropriate until you've finished. Adding superfluous scenes to a story tends to weaken it artistically, and superfluous shippy scenes are a very common example of that. Even if you're writing under strict genfic rules, having to exclude one particular subject seems far less restrictive to me than feeling you have to include it ...

So I'm afraid I can't agree with Mr Jones, or with that particular hardline section of fandom. Narrow focus on sex in fic or art is just as ridiculous as going to great pains to avoid it entirely -- as an attitude, it seems more adolescent than adult. And if we are going to get highfalutin', it probably doesn't achieve nearly as much as claimed in terms of Artistic Expression, or artistic growth for that matter. I'd encourage writers who take this line to try how the gen half (or 5%) lives for a change. You never know, you might surprise yourself by liking it. :)

(This has been your irregularly scheduled grumpy rant.)

Date: 2007-10-17 12:45 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lls-mutant.livejournal.com
I'm right there with you. Sure, I'll write the odd piece of PWP, and I've certainly read some, but the fics that have stuck with me the longest are gen, or if sex is included it's included for a reason. Not that stories shouldn't have sex ever, but when sex changes the dynamic between two characters, it certainly makes sense to include it.

It's funny. I think one of the pieces of art I've found most moving and profound is most certainly non-sexual. (I also always see it in frame shops.) It's a picture of a middle-aged man in a business suit standing in front of the Vietnam Memorial, and the ghosts of his comrades in the reflections. It's an incredibly moving piece, and even though I've seen it several times it always makes me want to cry. (Since you're a Brit, you may not have seen it. It's by Lee Teter and you can see it here)
And I know the best piece of fic I've ever written was totally gen. (Men and Angels.)

I agree, though, that I just do not understand the fascination with a lot of the kinks. If it is sexual- like you said, hey, that's fine. But the big one I really don't get is why incest is supposed to be so hot. I mean, heck. I have a younger brother. And objectively, I can admit he's very attractive. And before he decided to become a total jerk, we were close. But the idea of him having sex- much less with me EW!!!- just makes me want to puke. I know there's supposed to be a difference between art and fiction, but I still don't get the attraction at all. And it is very frustrating to read so many newsletters and see most of the recs be NC-17/Adult, whatever.

I'm all for sex in stories, or even stories about sex. It is a part of life. But yeah- it's a part of life, and certainly not the only one!

Thanks. I've been wanting to say that for a while, too :)

Date: 2007-10-17 01:51 am (UTC)
ext_22: Pretty girl with a gele on (Default)
From: [identity profile] quivo.livejournal.com
Word to the max, man. Especially this:
The sensible course of action would seem to be to just write the damn story, include romance and sex if and when they have some role to play, don't bother if they don't, and don't worry about what rating is appropriate until you've finished.

It doesn't help, of course, that one of the most-used descriptive tools for stories in fandom is the pairing label. If you're just writing a story, sticking in a pairing label may range from being an entirely honest statement about the majority of the material you've written, or, at the other extreme, a tangential statement about two people who happen to briefly get together while the main plot of the story is going on in the foreground. There's more than enough room for all the stories on that continuum, but it seems like most people think of shippy stories as very close to the 'all about the pairing' model, and think of gen stories as very close to the 'all about the events' model, despite the fact that the best stories usually combine the two things seamlessly.

Date: 2007-10-17 09:12 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jdbracknell.livejournal.com
It doesn't help, of course, that one of the most-used descriptive tools for stories in fandom is the pairing label. If you're just writing a story, sticking in a pairing label may range from being an entirely honest statement about the majority of the material you've written, or, at the other extreme, a tangential statement about two people who happen to briefly get together

Oh, I totally agree. The number of times I've written something that's mostly gen only to get reviews going 'oh, I like this, but what's the pairing going to be?', when to me, it's not about that - it's about the story. Everyone tends to write the characters who appeal to them, of course, and if they have a particular relationship with someone else you need to reflect that in your writing - but the focus on shipping does drive me a bit mad sometimes. It's really very possible to write a trio story in which Ron and Hermione happen to play roles without it being a shippy story about them, in my opinion.

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] quivo.livejournal.com - Date: 2007-10-17 10:40 am (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] jdbracknell.livejournal.com - Date: 2007-10-17 11:05 am (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] jdbracknell.livejournal.com - Date: 2007-10-17 02:10 pm (UTC) - Expand

Date: 2007-10-17 06:57 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] elspethdixon.livejournal.com
Hmmm... as a gen and het/slash fan who has very strong shipping preferences, there are a lot of pairings that will completely destroy my ability to believe in the story, even if they only "happen to briefly get together while the main plot of the story is going on in the foreground," because I honestly cannot see those characters ever having feelings for one another in canon. So for me, pairing labels don't so much tell me what the story is about, as whether I'll agree with the author's characterization or whether she's actually watching/reading a completely different show/series than I am.

Which is why I advocate them fanatically, even on long, plotty fics that cantain several ships and have the pairings as the B plot (or C plot). I think of them not so much as saying "fic is about a/b" as "fic contains some a/b content."

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] quivo.livejournal.com - Date: 2007-10-17 11:00 pm (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] elspethdixon.livejournal.com - Date: 2007-10-17 11:54 pm (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] quivo.livejournal.com - Date: 2007-10-18 12:16 am (UTC) - Expand

Date: 2007-10-17 03:01 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] the-jackalope.livejournal.com
Oh my goodness yes. And it really bothers me the way that including sex, or whatever in story, fanfic or not, frequently 'elevates' it to the artistic level. Even if the writing is CRAP. I can think of dozens of so called modern literature books that I've stopped because the writing turned me off completely. But you know, it was soooo edgy for icluding X.

Date: 2007-10-17 07:18 am (UTC)
tree_and_leaf: Text icon: "It doesn't take a degree in applied bollocks!" (applied bollocks)
From: [personal profile] tree_and_leaf
Gosh, yes: I rolled my eyes at that article too (and actually considered posting on it, but didn't get round to it, so I'm glad you did.

[Error: Irreparable invalid markup ('<i [...] 'about',>') in entry. Owner must fix manually. Raw contents below.]

Gosh, yes: I rolled my eyes at that article too (and actually considered posting on it, but didn't get round to it, so I'm glad you did.

<i I'm sure Mr Jones doesn't really mean to imply that landscapes, or portraiture, or devotional art, or abstract explorations of shape and colour, or any of the numerous other things that art can be 'about', are actually, in fact, about sex</i>

You know, I have a horrible feeling he does. It's all about sex, obvs., Because Foucault Says So. Devotional art is easy, esp. if you've vaguely heard of bridal mysticism but don't actually know anything about it (or are working with half baked Freud, S not L.), and as for the landscapes... well, look at Mr Mybug. Or the essay in <i>Persuasion</i> which reads a landscape description in a fictitious poem as being about the female body. (I actually went to a lecture as an undergrad which stoutly maintained 'Inversnaid' by G M Hopkins ('Long live the woods and the wildness yet') was really about his repressed homosexuality, regardless of what the poor ignorant author probably thought!

Nonetheless, I do not accept it.

Date: 2007-10-17 11:34 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] nineveh-uk.livejournal.com
Degged with dew, dappled with dew
Are the groins of the braes that the brook treads through,


It's filth, pure filth that is.

(no subject)

From: [personal profile] tree_and_leaf - Date: 2007-10-17 04:46 pm (UTC) - Expand

Date: 2007-10-17 07:18 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jesspallas.livejournal.com
I have to say I agree with you. I don't write R or NC-17 scenes of that nature anyway - partly, I confess, because I (and I speak only for myself and am not in anyway taking a poke at people who do) would be a bit embarrassed to put something that can't help but be so personal to the writer up on the screen, but also because I've never seen the need to include it because it's never mattered to any story I've written. Even when I write pure romance stories, the romance I write for Remus and Tonks for example is always romance born out of friendship, more often than not pre-relationship and if sex comes into it at all, it isn't described because it isn't necessary to the story. I like to think that people can come away from things I write having enjoyed them, without thinking "it was good, but it would have been better if they'd got it on!" Maybe I'm wrong, but I like to think they do.

I don't like stories that are just a sex scene. I read stories with sex in them and enjoy them too but not because sex is included but because the characertisation and story in which it is included are enjoyable - two prime examples being Consequences by PandoraJones and Raw by Gilpin. Both have sexual content but at the same time show the whys and hows of how the characters came to that point beautifully and to me that's what makes them worth reading. To me showing characterisation and a story in both art and fic is what makes it worth looking at/reading and stories written purely for a kink or sex rarely have that at all. They're rather a one trick pony and lack any real depth - or indeed real intimacy - in that sense. And if that's what fic is all about then I and every writer I enjoy has sadly missed the point.

I'll stop rabbiting and go away now. :)

Date: 2007-10-17 09:26 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jdbracknell.livejournal.com
I totally agree. It's all about characterisation and the story for me.

I like to think that people can come away from things I write having enjoyed them, without thinking "it was good, but it would have been better if they'd got it on!" Maybe I'm wrong, but I like to think they do.

I was just wondering - do you get reviews saying that? Because I do, lol. I entered into a long debate by email with someone about Why I Hadn't Written The Sex, once, which made me very irrate and I'm not sure served to change their mind.... I think it's quite irritating when people come to your fic expecting sex just because you've tagged it romance or because there's a romantic plot in it. It makes me wonder if some people reading fanfic are just in it for the sex.

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] nineveh-uk.livejournal.com - Date: 2007-10-17 10:33 am (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] jesspallas.livejournal.com - Date: 2007-10-17 10:49 am (UTC) - Expand

Date: 2007-10-17 09:21 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jdbracknell.livejournal.com
I totally agree. It always seems to me rather sad that some writers assume that the only significiant relationship a person can have with another is a sexual one, and whilst I think romantic stories and stories with an element of intimacy in them can be fascinating if well done, there are so many other stories you could tell that would be equally rivetting. I often find friendship fics far more moving than romances, actually.

I think the story should drive everything - I only ever write sex if I think it shows some aspect of the characters that I can't show in any other way, not because I've got a problem with writing sex or other people doing so, but because I always find sex written for the sake of writing sex feels very hollow.

Date: 2007-10-17 10:45 am (UTC)
ext_22: Pretty girl with a gele on (Default)
From: [identity profile] quivo.livejournal.com
It always seems to me rather sad that some writers assume that the only significiant relationship a person can have with another is a sexual one

Exactly. Even I find myself thinking this way on occasion, or not fighting to add anything different to a relationship because, well, they're together, isn't that enough? That's where I've bogged down several times, assuming that since a relationship between two guys is platonic, it's not as interesting, or not as significant, and certainly not something that's hugely significant to the plot apart from in the usual way.

Whereas it turns out that my entire plot for the story I'm currently writing is moved into action by the simple fact that two guys suddenly decide they're not friends anymore XD

Date: 2007-10-17 10:53 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jesspallas.livejournal.com
It always seems to me rather sad that some writers assume that the only significiant relationship a person can have with another is a sexual one

I think that sums the whole business up beautifully. :)

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] jesspallas.livejournal.com - Date: 2007-10-17 11:41 am (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] jdbracknell.livejournal.com - Date: 2007-10-17 02:21 pm (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] magnolia-mama.livejournal.com - Date: 2007-10-17 04:34 pm (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] jdbracknell.livejournal.com - Date: 2007-10-17 02:23 pm (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] jesspallas.livejournal.com - Date: 2007-10-17 02:44 pm (UTC) - Expand

Date: 2007-10-17 09:40 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lareinenoire.livejournal.com
Ha. First Freud said everything was about sex. Foucault totally stole it from him. People, sometimes a landscape is just a landscape...unless it's Georgia O'Keefe, which at that point, I don't think about the alternatives.

In short, I completely agree. On fandom as well. Pairings do tend to make their way into my stories, but very rarely are they the be-all and end-all, at least in part because I can't write smut to save my life. I've learned to treasure the fade-to-black. And while I tend to write genfic with pairings in the background, I just think it's realistic for the particular characters I'm writing about.

Nothing should get in the way of the stories or the characters. If they need sex, they get sex. If they don't, forget it.

Date: 2007-10-17 10:48 am (UTC)
ext_22: Pretty girl with a gele on (Default)
From: [identity profile] quivo.livejournal.com
If they need sex, they get sex.

I think that summarizes it excellently :D

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] lareinenoire.livejournal.com - Date: 2007-10-17 06:23 pm (UTC) - Expand

Absolutely, "Guernica" is solely about sex.

Date: 2007-10-17 11:45 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] nineveh-uk.livejournal.com
My general opinion of the “daringness” of writing sex in fanfic is that it is hardly the definition of daring to shout “poo” in the middle of a class of five year olds. That said, I think it can be personally daring/challenging for some people, although I am not convinced that these are the people writing Death Eater Orgies TM.

If I must classify, I classify my Potterfic as gen (and most of the Sayers stuff, too, for all that some of it is romance-focussed), but I don’t think gen itself is without problems. I found [livejournal.com profile] femgenficathon enormously difficult last year because the version of gen defined seemed to exclude practically everything I write about, and be too much “woman solo-climbs Mount Everest alone”. Most of the time I don’t want to write gen, het, or slash; I want to write a story. I find the problem with excessive shipping the way it limits the stories rather than the sex per se – attitude rather than act.

As it happens, I am presently working on my first stories in which the story actually requires there be yr actual sex (rather than vague allusions or spoof sex), even if it fades to black rather than reading “she gripped his throbbing manhood”. Part of the reason I’m doing this is for the artistic and technical challenge; I do use fanfic to address areas of my writing that I want to work on, and “stop being embarrassed at the prospect of writing mild sex scenes” is one of them. I hope that they work, but I do not assume that the presence of sex will automatically make them the best/most artistic/most daring things I have ever written.

Date: 2007-10-17 01:39 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pasi.livejournal.com
I can see somebody making this claim for dance, since dance's medium is the human body. But no: graphic sex alone does not a work of literature make.

Date: 2007-10-17 02:34 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] magnetic-pole.livejournal.com
The emphasis that (my corner of) fandom places on sex is really, really interesting. Just as a disclaimer, I tend not to write explicit fic myself, but I read a lot of it and enjoy it enormously. So I'm probably not typical and can only speak for my own experience.

I don't write much high-rated fic for many of the reasons you list here--there are any number of stories to be told about the world, and I don't find myself interested in telling ones that would naturally include explicit scenes. At this point in my life, for whatever reason, families and friendships provide more material for me than romantic relationships, and the daily dynamics of established couplehood are more interesting than the kind of charged, one-off moment that makes for good sex scenes. (I've tried to write sex scenes several times, and they wind up being about miscommunication and frustration, and what fun is that?)

But I also really enjoy reading explicit fic, especially m/m slash, and I've thought a lot about why that is, especially because I don't always find it very erotic, which I think may be unusual. I like reading about certain characters in any context, any genre, or any pairing, if the writing's good. I find getting-together stories fascinating, whether they end in a longing glance or in graphic sex. I love reading about queer relationships, which is something I don't have enough of in my daily life. And I'm also starting to read shippy fics ...I don't know...metaphorically? I don't think the authors always intend them this way, but a lot of shippy fic reads to me as eroticized moments of human connection, and I find I don't have to "believe" in the pairing or the romantic or sexual plotline to appreciate moments when two characters find something in common or see something in each other and connect.

I, er, generally find f/f slash pretty erotic when it's done well. Ahem.

Anyways, it's an interesting topic to think about, especially in relation to this fandom, which seems to lend itself so well to gen at first glance. (Large cast of colorful characters, humor and hijinks, magic, etc.) M.

Date: 2007-10-17 09:06 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] blacksquirrel.livejournal.com


The article sounds poorly thought out, as you've argued, but before giving up on Foucault completely, I did want to stick my nose in for a moment and suggest that part of this argument hinges upon how one defines sex. From your quotations, it sounds like the article's author did intend to discuss bodily - or even more narrowly, genital - sexuality, which is indeed a narrow lens with which to view all of human thought and expression. However, I do think there is a case to be made with regard to thinking about libidinal energy as present in all human striving toward creation, life, excitement, and inquiry - and in that sense, everything may indeed be sexual.

Foucault, I think, would be the last person to suggest that writing sex is automatically more artistic or more transgressive - rather he would ask us to question whether our urge to put sex into language actually serves dominant regimes of power and selfhood - which actively demand that we confess ourselves sexually, and define our personhood and citizenship through sex. Yet, he might also advocate writing about sex, or more specifically sex in that wider libidinal way, as a form of becoming - of inaccurate replication in Judith Butler's terms - as a way of reproducing (genital, bodily) sex until it becomes something that it wasn't before. As a way of, paradoxically, imagining ourselves out of sex (or, if there is no "out," of arranging and imagining it differently).

Date: 2007-10-17 10:34 pm (UTC)
cleverthylacine: a cute little thylacine (american beauty)
From: [personal profile] cleverthylacine
Huh. I frequently have had odd responses to my fic because I tell stories which are arguably gen for the most part, being that they are about other things than sex and romance, but then have bits of het and slash romance or sex in them. And I would feel confined if I were told I couldn't write about sex, just like I'd feel confined if I couldn't write about eating, but my stories aren't necessarily about sex. Or eating. I think we've got the excluded middle here--there aren't just people who only want porn or want stories with no porn, there are people who want stories that are about all the aspects of life.

I also am really tired of being told that as a fan of say, Wincest, I need to be willing to have it brushed off as a kink that is okay as a kink but Not To Be Taken Seriously. The fact that a story is about or includes incest absolutely does not make it automatically edgy, brilliant or transgressive, and I'll be happy to concede that if you'll concede that it's not always about the kink, either. Sometimes it's about the kink, sometimes it's meant to be Artistic and sometimes it's a story which isn't so much of either, particularly when despite the apparent kinkiness of the pairing, it's also the pairing most people in a given fandom see subtext for.

Lastly, just because a pairing seems contrived to you doesn't mean it's a bad pairing, even if it's contrary to stated authorial intent; often canonical pairings seem just as or even more dreadfully contrived than the weirdest fic pairings to me, but then, I think that's because there are a lot of writers who suck at romance, even if they are good at telling other sorts of stories. I think whether or not pairings seem contrived to individual readers has a lot to do with their romantic history and the way they think relationships ought to be. For instance, Ron/Hermione seems terribly contrived to me, but that's because when I see that much bickering I don't think "true love" I think "omg who could live like that!" I know people do, but my gut reaction is eww yuck no thanks; I have a much better reaction to pairings where people start out as enemies and end up as lovers than I do to the constant bickering pairings, because to me constant bickering seems like the sort of thing that would be fun for a few months and then slowly eat away at your self-esteem and peace of mind over years, but I've seen cases where there were misunderstandings or differences of background that caused people to initially hate each other and then, after they got to know each other, become fast friends or lovers.

Date: 2007-10-18 06:57 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] hth-the-first.livejournal.com
You know, the funny thing to me about this is that I would have made the exact opposite statement -- that it feels to me that fanfic far too often debases or trivializes sex and sexuality by not taking it very seriously at all. I couldn't even begin to count the number of times different variations of the "but is that in character?" debate has come up in fandoms I've been in, surrounding the sexual kinks and choices of the characters, and there's always that contingent that will say, "Oh, who the hell cares, it's so HAWT! I love (kink/behavior/trope of the day) so much I never get tired of it, so quit boring us all with trying to make writers work it into the narrative." What I get is a sense that to write "artistically," in the sense of taking a story's theme and characterization and its relevance to canon into serious account, is widely considered anti-sex and anti-hot -- that fandom divides into people who claim to be in it for the art and those who claim to be in it for the fun smut, and that it's rather difficult to keep a foot in both worlds.

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] hth-the-first.livejournal.com - Date: 2007-10-19 02:29 am (UTC) - Expand

Date: 2007-10-18 07:47 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] triestine.livejournal.com
Thank you, thank you, thank you. I'd write a proper comment but I've just written a huge rant about the pedestal and all-pervasiveness of sex (among other things), and I'm worn out. So, once again, thanks, this is going in my memories.
Page generated Feb. 21st, 2026 02:06 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios