Today's work/fandom collision

[rivkat]

So I am at this intellectual property conference, and the first panelist (who I like a lot) started with two provocative questions: How many in the audience thought of themselves as authors? (All of us.) How many had had positive experiences producing or performing in pornography? (Nobody raised a hand.) And here I am, sitting in the audience with the fic nicknamed “Kryptonian Sex Secrets” open on my desktop. How am I supposed to react? Would I have been more honest to raise my hand? I do think of some of my fiction as pornographic, even though it’s not a great term and even though it causes me some discomfort.

The panelist was talking about porn made with real bodies, not porn made with words based on imaginative conceptions of real (actors’) bodies. So she didn’t mean me, not exactly. But should she have?

Comments

[oiran.livejournal.com]

I'm not at all understanding the presumed relationship between author:general purpose, and performer:porn, whereas comparing author:general purpose with author:porn provides solid grounding for discussion. So, yeah, I think she should have meant you.

The order in which the questions were asked implies that the she was confident that she knew what the answers would be in advance--always a bad practice, but certainly an especially clumsy approach when your audience contains a great many lawyers who know (or ought to) better than to do such a thing.

I'm now very curious whether an assertion to the affirmative on your part would have completely thrown her, or if she would have been prepared to address that topic seriously, as well. However, I'm guessing that if you had indicated you'd had many a positive porn-production-related experience, you'd probably have derailed the panel, even if you hadn't said another word.

At some point during the discussion, did she make a specific connection between porn actors/producters/fluffers/whatever and writers of non-pornographic works?

[chase820.livejournal.com]

I would rather grade 100 freshman comp papers without benefit of caffeine than admit to any of my colleagues that I occasionally indulge in smutty fanfiction. But I am ashamed of my shame. Does that make me any less cowardly? Not sure.

I bet one would be amazed just how many people with lots of letters after their names are masquerading as part-time ficcers. It makes sense, since fanfiction is all about playing with text, and who enjoys that sort of diversion more than an academic?

In answer to your question, she didn't mean you but she should have. Many women who'd never download people porn have no compunction about storing gigabytes of NC-17 fic on their computer and sending of reams of praise to the authors of it. Amazing, how much attention this quirk of feminine sexuality still doesn't get. Or if it does, you can almost hear the lurking accusation beneath all the dry academic prose: "What's wrong with these women?"

I'm reminded of Valerie Steele's academic work on fetishism, when she very deftly points out that the one truth about pornography and BDSM that so few cultural critics want to address is the pleasure of it. Women don't strap themselves into eighteen inches corsets only to make some kind of comment on the strangling effects of the patriarchy, nor because their daddies did something hideous to them.

My Daddy is/was the best of all possible fathers. And I don't write slash simply because I find it a welcome relief from the crushing heteronormative politics of male/female romances. That's one reason: I also find it really hot.

[irishabastard.livejournal.com]

I am curious too, as to how an intellectual property conference speaker was expecting to effectively segue a question about positive porn experience among self-styled authors. Was the presumption that it was impossible to HAVE a positive experience producing or performing in porn? Porn, like art, is whatever you think it is, and whatever you like. So should she have meant you? Do you think of what you were reading as porn? Hard to say.

[malkingrey.livejournal.com]

I'm reminded of Valerie Steele's academic work on fetishism, when she very deftly points out that the one truth about pornography and BDSM that so few cultural critics want to address is the pleasure of it. Women don't strap themselves into eighteen inches corsets only to make some kind of comment on the strangling effects of the patriarchy, nor because their daddies did something hideous to them.

This has to be related somehow to the way that, over in the literary studies corner of the academy, nobody ever admits to picking a particular genre or period or author to specialize in because they think that reading it/him/her is more fun than a whole day at Disney World.

[chase820.livejournal.com]

Is this an American thing, I wonder? That if you admit your work is somehow fun, it's not really work? Goes back to the old Puritan "suffering and denial are good for you" philosophy, I s'pose. We're such freaks.

[chase820.livejournal.com]

I know from my own reading that there is still a lot of controversy in feminist studies over whether pornography--especially filmed pornography--can ever be healthy to produce or consume. Yes, female sex workers say that it's their choice to do this work, it makes them money and gives them independence, and what could be more liberated than that? But one has to wonder where the impulse to fuck people on film for money rather than, say, go to law school comes from. Both professions can make you wealthy and independent, but really--who's kidding who here? Does anybody really see Jenna Jameson as a healthy role model?

We've all heard the story of the girl who worked her way through Brown by stripping, but how common a goal is that? For every law student, aren't there a thousand strippers who come from abusive backgrounds, now supporting equally abusive boyfriends and/or drug habits?

I'm not quite sure where the divide between exploiting yourself and being exploited is, or if it even exists. That's why I prefer my porn drawn or written. At least that way I know I'm not enjoying the fruits of anybody else's trauma. Not that way, anyhow.

[irishabastard.livejournal.com]

I have heard that argument, and I don't necessarily argue against it. I don't have a point of reference cause if I end up doing porn, noone BUT me is benefiting. Having worked at a strip club on more than one occasion, though, I can testify that in my experience if a girl is a stripper or a porn star, she probably has some issues with self-esteem, a need for attention, cocaine, or all of the above. There are, however, more college students than you might think. Remind me, when we next speak to tell you about the group of prositutes in Holland who recently brought a suit to the international court of justice to get recognized as independent contractors, and won.

[itsaslashything.livejournal.com]

Would you have a link to the story Kryptonian Sex Secrets? I don't think I've read that one.

[rivkat.livejournal.com]

Well, she said her main concern for the presentation was the conditions under which pornography was produced and the potential for harm and coercion experienced by the performers. So if she'd specified that definition of porn as filmed or photographed human beings at the outset, my answer would have been "no." Still, I think you're right that a "yes" answer would have brought things to a crashing halt.

[rivkat.livejournal.com]

I feel pretty much the same way -- in a different world, I'd want to be further out, but that's not my world.

And I think she had some good points about how porn starring real human beings is produced, even setting aside its effects on mostly male consumers. I do feel acutely a discomfort with what turns me on when I'm thinking as a feminist, and sometimes I wonder whether there is an invisible spillover between my fantasies and my actual behavior. I worry more about the possible spillover between men's fantasies and their actual behavior. It's kind of attractive to split the baby by saying "use text and virtual images all you want, just don't use real people in your productions." But that gives me what I want and denies some people, mostly men, what they want, and maybe it's just special pleading. I don't have good answers.

I think you're absolutely right about discomfort with pleasure. And yet the speaker was asking about whether performers in filmed porn actually experience such pleasure; I'm sure some do, and I'm sure some don't. The question that her framing of the issue made me confront, not for the first time, is whether my pleasure comes at someone else's expense. I think the answer is "no," but I wish I could be sure.

[rivkat.livejournal.com]

In some ways, I think we take that as read. But it's always worthwhile to say that I do this because I love it. Too few people get to love their work to take it for granted.

[rivkat.livejournal.com]

I agree -- there's no way she expected a positive answer. But then again, we're not a group that had much reason/need to participate in filmed porn, and we have lots of reasons not to admit so if we did -- probably we'd admit to being Republicans first.

The most sympathetic take on her position -- which I probably agree with -- is that law, including intellectual property law, treats porn of all types as speech and creative work. But there's another aspect to some types of porn, which is how it gets produced, and there are important questions about the participants and the true level of choice they have and the risks they face, from physical to emotional to social.

[rivkat.livejournal.com]

It's a draft of a story I'm writing. I will post it as soon as I can! In the meantime, koimistress has a better story with a similar theme, in progress, at http://members.aol.com/koimistress/gilgamesh.html

[paigehunt.livejournal.com]

My answer is short and sweet - there is an exclusion clause for fan fic. The closest we come is "erotica". In the x-files fandom, I termed it "if you write it, they will come" cues in "Field of Dream" soundtrack and quirky smile....

[chalciope.livejournal.com]

This is an interesting question. I have always thought of NC-17 fanfiction as not "real" porn, but on the few occasions when I have shared it with friends, they are always quick to point out the erotic aspects. This has happened even with fairly tame fanfiction and novels, so I am not sure whether it is something to do with our societal standards and I am just an anomaly (this is most likely it) or people just don't feel comfortable reading anything with erotic overtones in front of other people without pointing out those overtones. I've never thought of it before as the words being based on real actors' bodies, but then I never have been very imaginative (I usually picture blobs). So no, personally I don't think of fanfiction as belonging to the category of "pornography" but maybe that is just because of the negative connotations that word often has?

Anyway, "real" porn or porn made with real bodies is not very appealing to me, and to paraphrase an author's note I once read, made me very uncomfortable about eating sashimi for a while after I saw it for the first time.

BTW I added you as a friend, hope you don't mind. I love your fanfiction (pornographic or not)!

[rivkat.livejournal.com]

The negative connotations are a big deal, but for myself I have tried to take fannish references to "porn" seriously as part of dealing with my own anxieties about writing sex. "Erotica" has always seemed wrongly distancing, and "smut" occasionally too jokey. When you write stuff that makes other people (women) say they were sexually aroused (and bracketing for the moment the extent to which that's also a performance, since I have no way of knowing how true that is, or even what it means to say it's true), "pornography" is at least an available term.

My imaginations are based on actors' bodies, but not really -- I don't want to see them naked. I'm not even sure I want to see the characters naked. There's some relationship between the actors and the characters, though, which is why I start there.

Welcome, and I'm glad you enjoy the stories!

[tehomet.livejournal.com]

I don't think so. I guess for me, the divide isn't between creations using real people and creations using imaginary ones... although that is an important distinction. Instead I think of pornography as being about commercialism/commodities/profit, or at the very least 'power over'. Whereas any creation that involves sexuality (says she, trying to avoid writing porn/smut/erotica or similar words) is a free thing and is about 'power with'.

I sound like a hippie and an incoherent one at that, but I hope you know what I mean.

[rivkat.livejournal.com]

I'm attracted to that -- something about authenticity and free expression of sexuality -- and yet, and yet. Given the role of power in sexual fantasy, why try to extract it from the expression of that fantasy? Aren't I engaging in power games when I write, too? As I said to another commenter, I wish I were confident that my distinctions are in some way objectively valid, rather than designed to preserve the sexy stuff I like while denying others the sexy stuff they like. To the extent that their stuff is oppressive and mine isn't, I'm okay with that -- but the problem is that I don't fully believe that theirs/mine and oppressive/nonoppressive map well onto one another.

[corinna-5.livejournal.com]

Is this the story you sent me piece of in December? I assumed it was an abandoned WiP. !!! Would sending comments on the part I had be at all helpful?

[rivkat.livejournal.com]

I am really hoping to get a draft finished by the end of April, at which time I'll post a general cry for help and I'd love to get your comments.