This is a straight, honest question to which I would appreciate an equally honest answer. If anyone would prefer to reply off-Lyst then I will preserve their anonymity. I reserve the right not to believe anyone who I think might be misinformed or deliberately lying, but will still preserve anonymity if they wish, no matter who they are or what they say. I may cite replies in future argument, but will not 'out' anyone who answers off-Lyst.
Julie has now referred several times to pornographic art of characters performing sexual acts. I have never seen such artwork. I have seen plenty of nudes rendered with varying degrees of artistic talent, but not once I have seen any involving two characters doing anything explicit. I can't even recall any nude art depicting two characters doing so much as look at each other. On the other hand, I can understand that some of the more extreme work might be very carefully circulated around a just as carefully chosen clique. Perhaps the likes of me have been deliberately sheltered from what may offend or may be misused to attack its afficionados.
So my question is: Does such art exist? A straight yes or no will suffice, though any further comments on quantity, style, subject matter, availability etc would be appreciated.
Neil
Thank you to all those people who replied to my query. I had my suspicions, but I didn't know for certain that such artwork, rare though it is, did exist or that it was available in zines. At least I know now that Julie's argument does have some factual basis.
The slash debate at Redemption showed that contentious issues like this can be debated in a mature and intelligent fashion. Whether or not they will be is another matter altogether. Personally I am not happy about erotic or pornographic fan art. I have no moral objection to depictions of nudes, male or female, or images of explicit sexual acts, but when such images relate directly to real people, however idealised or out of date, I think it represents an invasion of their privacy and dignity.
Fiction relies on words, and words make explicit the connection between narrated events and the fictional characters performing them. The participants are named as the fictional characters they are. Images, however, weaken this connection, since we inescapably see not only the character but also the actor who played that character.
It's not as simple as I (as a writer) would like it to be, since though words may connect narrative with fictional character, nevertheless we visualise what we read and hence see the real life actor. Any reference within a written text to eg Tarrant's butt or, for that matter, Jenna's boobs, cannot be wholly divorced from Stephen Pacey or Sally Knyvette, even if the intention to make that connection is completely absent.
If you follow that argument through to its logical conclusion then it follows that, to show respect to the actors, no erotic fanfiction, perhaps no fanfiction at all, should ever be written. I don't support that notion at all. Or you could go the other way and say that the actors' feelings are irrelevant and fans should be free to write and draw whatever they wish. Unfortunately, I can't support that either.
Ultimately, it's all down to where you draw the line, and unsurprisingly most people tend to draw it at pretty much the point where they themselves are standing. I candidly admit that that is pretty much what I do. I do know that I would not want to offend any real life person, however inadvertently, with what I write, and certainly not jeopardise their careers. Where B7 actors are concerned, I owe it to them not to; they made the series that inspired me to write in the first place.
Some people have said (jokingly or otherwise) that they themselves would not object to being depicted in pornographic art. That's irrelevant. It's what the people who *are* being so depicted think that counts. And even if you yourself don't object, what if it was your parents? Your partner? Your children? I doubt if anyone on this Lyst needs to look far before finding someone they care about who would be deeply hurt and angry about being eroticised for someone else's gratification.
Does pornographic material distort fans' minds? I very much doubt it. There have been numerous studies on the effects of sex and violence in the media, and the results seem to be vague and ambiguous. Any impact would appear to be mild and temporary. Admittedly there are some people out there who behave atypically in a way that most of us would consider 'disturbing', but all the evidence I'm aware of suggests that such disturbance lies within the individuals themselves, or at least outside of media influences. Every attempt that I'm aware of to cite roleplaying games like Dungeons and Dragons as an influence on suicide or homicide has been thrown out of court, as it has with violent books or videos. I would expect the same to happen with fan erotica.
There are disturbed people around, and in any sizable community such as fandom it is not surprising that a few such individuals will be found. That, to me, says far less about fandom than it does about society as a whole.
I doubt if any kind of unanimous verdict can be reached on this one, but we can at least - if we choose - declare where we stand and why.
Neil
Does pornographic material distort fans' minds? I very much doubt it.
IMO that's a sticky one, though... I wouldn't say that pornography distorts anyone's mind, any more than violent movies (etc.) do, either. But if you're fed a steady diet of the stuff, with no corrective factor from other material (a healthy sexual partnership, a fondness for great literature, psychotherapy...), I think it might have some bearing on how you view reality, relationships, etc...
I've seen this happen too often in the gay community.
Shane
"Avon, you were my only friend..." --Blake
From: littles@lycos.co.uk
Does pornographic material distort fans' minds? I very much doubt it.
IMO that's a sticky one, though... I wouldn't say that pornography
distorts anyone's mind, any more than violent movies (etc.) do, either. But if you're fed a steady diet of the stuff, with no corrective factor from other material (a healthy sexual partnership, a fondness for great literature, psychotherapy...), I think it might have some bearing on how you view reality, relationships, etc...
I've seen this happen too often in the gay community.
Why single out any one particular community? It happens in every community, throughout the whole of society, every minute of every day. Reality is constructed for us from birth. We are 'fed a steady diet' of something we like to think of as 'reality' throughout our lives, whether it's nude art or billboard posters for jeans. Who is to say that a 'healthy sexual partnership' is a necessary thing, or even a good thing, let alone a fondness for great literature (who defines the 'great'?), and the equation of psychotherapy as a 'corrective factor' is something I find very disturbing.
Not, however, as disturbing as sly insinuations of homophobia.
Neil
Shane said: I wouldn't say that pornography distorts anyone's mind, any more than violent movies (etc.) do, either. But if you're fed a steady diet of the stuff, with no corrective factor from other material (a healthy sexual partnership, a fondness for great literature, psychotherapy...), I think it might have some bearing on how you view reality, relationships, etc... I think this confuses cause and effect. No one is "fed" any amount of pornography, s/he chooses to consume it, and the type of pornography selected usually reflects the person's existing preferences and fantasy life.
-(Y)
Shane said: I wouldn't say that pornography distorts anyone's mind, any more than violent movies (etc.) do, either. But if you're fed a steady diet of the stuff, with no corrective factor from other material (a healthy sexual partnership, a fondness for great literature, psychotherapy...), I think it might have some bearing on how you view reality, relationships, etc...
Dana said:
I think this confuses cause and effect. No one is 'fed' any amount of pornography, s/he chooses to consume it, and the type of pornography selected usually reflects the person's existing preferences and fantasy life.
Absolutely right. But I'd raise three points:
1) Sometimes B7 fandom reminds me of a trip I made to Amsterdam a while back. The first day I was there, I was walking around with a big grin on my face, looking at all the dirty shops, museums, etc. By day three, I was just totally deadened to it; sort of like "oh God, not sex _again_." Likewise, when I first got into fandom, I was like "good God, somebody's written a story about Avon and Blake having sex." Now, I'm so totally deadened to it that I just don't question it any more... unless something happens to make me think.
2) Porn's a fun thing. So are cigarettes. So is chocolate. But all three are addictive, and are best used in small doses.
3) Slash, however mild, only works if you take it out of the context of the series, cause it's not canon. I think there's been a couple of threads on the subject of the distortion of the programme lately which have proved this more or less conclusively.
Shane
"Avon, you were my only friend." --Blake
Shane said:
- Porn's a fun thing. So are cigarettes. So is chocolate. But all three
are addictive, and are best used in small doses. Well, cigarettes are literally addictive and seriously harmful, chocolate and porn are only figuratively addictive. And this rather rebuts your first point-- if you're going to enjoy porn or chocolate, you have to pace yourself and avoid overdosing.
- Slash, however mild, only works if you take it out of the context of
the series, cause it's not canon. I think there's been a couple of threads on the subject of the distortion of the programme lately which have proved this more or less conclusively. I'd say it would be more accurate for you to say "threads which I found very persuasive and well-argued." It's difficult to have a vigorous discussion about slash on this list, because the discussion must be curbed in view of the beliefs and sensibilities of some list members.
-(Y)
Dana Shilling wrote:
Well, cigarettes are literally addictive and seriously harmful, chocolate and porn are only figuratively addictive.
I may have to dispute the chocolate. My understanding is that chocolate causes _some_ of the same changes in brain chemistry that substances more generally considered addictive do - elevated endorphins, and serotonin too, IIRC (makes a lovely pain-killer). The brain wants more, so it forces chocolate cravings. I'd call that an addiction, if a very mild one.
Mistral
Shane said:
- Porn's a fun thing. So are cigarettes. So
is chocolate. But all three are addictive, and are best used in small doses. Well, cigarettes are literally addictive and seriously harmful, chocolate and porn are only figuratively addictive. And this rather rebuts your first point-- if you're going to enjoy porn or chocolate, you have to pace yourself and avoid overdosing.
Ah, but... supposing you work in an office where everyone eats a lot of chocolate? Gradually you start eating more and more too... and let's just hope you're smart enough to recognise how much is too much, and what's causing you to eat too much, or you're going to need to go on a serious slimming diet.
- Slash, however mild, only works if you
take it out of the context of the series, cause it's not canon. I think there's been a couple of threads on the subject of the distortion of the programme lately which have proved this more or less conclusively. I'd say it would be more accurate for you to say 'threads which I found very persuasive and well-argued.' It's difficult to have a vigorous discussion about slash on this list,
We have been managing it, though, and from the sound of it a long overdue one, especially, IMO, on the canonicity point.
Shane
"Avon, you were my only friend..." --Blake
Shane said:
We have been managing it, though, [vigorous discussion of slash]
and from the sound of it a long overdue one, especially, IMO, on the canonicity point. Nope, we've been having a discussion which has to be tamped down and severely bounded because of the sensibilities of some Lyst members. -(Y)
--- Neil Faulkner N.Faulkner@tesco.net wrote: >
Personally I am not happy about erotic or pornographic fan art. I have no moral objection to depictions of nudes, male or female, or images of explicit sexual acts, but when such images relate directly to real people, however idealised or out of date, I think it represents an invasion of their privacy and dignity.
(Huge snip)
I doubt if any kind of unanimous verdict can be reached on this one, but we can at least - if we choose - declare where we stand and why.
I have been following the 'discussions' re: this subject and have sorely wanted to say something, but being new (and also, my last post being something, I'd rather forget)I wasn't quite sure how to 'step in' with my thoughts on the subject. However; Neil, has made it easy for me with his(IMO)very well thought out post. This expresses exactly(to my mind)what is inherently wrong with nude and/or suggestive drawings of real people who have not given actual consent for these to be undertaken. I personally, see nothing wrong with pictures of say Avon and Servalan kissing or Avon and Cally/alien or Blake and Inga, Vila and Kerril etc, as this is in keeping with aspects of the show but anything out of sexual context with the show really should not be displayed in realistic imagery. JMO folks but Neil did ask and this is where I stand.
Just an afterthought...If explicit material is desired for a zine or whatever, I was wondering if maybe abstract was a possible solution or would this be worse? I know bugger all about art - I only know what I like (seascapes, landscapes and waterfalls).
===== Cheryl. (My favourite 'Blake's 7' moment) What a fiasco! We could take over the ship you said, if I did my bit. Well, I did my bit, and what happened? Your 'troops' bumble around looking for someone to surrender to, and when they've succeeded, You, follow suit! (Avon to Blake. "Spacefall")
_____________________________________________________________________________ http://store.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Store - The fastest, easiest way to open an online store.
<I have been following the 'discussions' re: this subject and have sorely wanted to say something, but being new (and also, my last post being something, I'd rather forget)I wasn't quite sure how to 'step in' with my thoughts on the subject. However; Neil, has made it easy for me with his(IMO)very well thought out post. This expresses exactly(to my mind)what is inherently wrong with nude and/or suggestive drawings of real people who have not given actual consent for these to be undertaken. I personally, see nothing wrong with pictures of say Avon and Servalan kissing or Avon and Cally/alien or Blake and Inga, Vila and Kerril etc, as this is in keeping with aspects of the show but anything out of sexual context with the show really should not be displayed in realistic imagery. JMO folks but Neil did ask and this is where I stand.>
Excellent post, Cheryl, you've said it better than I could. Here's to more of same.
A lot of people on the slash thread have been saying that slash/porn is fine so long as it doesn't hurt anyone. Which is fine, when you're talking about fans, who as, people have pointed out, can just turn the page. But isn't it hurtful to the actors to have their images used in this way, without their consent (or, frequently, knowledge)? Other people have talked about slash as depicting love-- but how loving is it to use someone's image in a way which they likely would not enjoy being depicted? Or to take the characters several people have collectively created and developed, and place them in scenarios which are completely at odds with this characterization? IMO it could even be seen as a form of contempt, hatred even, for the people who created the series if not for the premises of the series itself.
Shane
"Avon, you were my only friend..." --Blake
-
Cheryl _ -
Dana Shilling -
littles＠lycos.co.uk -
Mistral -
Neil Faulkner