[Greta Christina] Is All Porn The Same?
You may have read or heard this criticism of porn. I’ve heard it more than once. It goes roughly like this:
“All porn is basically the same. Porn may be fun and arousing — but as a literary/ art/ cinematic form, it’s inherently tedious. After all, there just aren’t that many ways for people to have sex. So describing or depicting it is automatically going to become repetitive.”
Now. Obviously, I have no truck with this attitude whatsoever. But it took me a little time thinking about it to realize what exactly was wrong with it.
Not that much time, though.
First, and at the risk of being snarky: If you think there are only a handful of ways for people to have sex, then I feel sorry for your partners. There is quite a bit more variety available in sex than a few standard variations on fucking and sucking. Read any good general sex guide, like The Good Vibrations Guide to Sex or The Guide to Getting It On, and you’ll get a sense of the tip of the iceberg. Or take a look at the entertainingly long list of adult movie genres available for rent at Bluedoor.com. (Admittedly, many of these genres refer to technical formatting and plot devices and whatnot . . . but there are more than enough sexual options to keep an enterprising couple busy for a good long time.)
But second, and far more importantly:
What makes porn interesting isn’t that it comes up with some new and different sex act, or some new combination of previously known sex acts.
What makes porn interesting is that it comes up with new ways to look at sex.
Think about other topics for literature or film or art. Think about, say, murder. There are only so many ways people can commit murder, too. You can shoot someone; stab them; strangle them; poison them; bludgeon, electrocute, smother, or drown them; set them on fire; cut off their head; hit them with a vehicle; throw them off a high place. I’m sure there are more . . . but you get the idea. There are probably no more ways to kill a person than there are to have sex with them. Maybe even less.
And yet murder is a vastly fruitful topic for art and film and writing, one that inspires both fascination and respect. Yes, genres such as murder mystery or true crime may be looked down on . . . but I don’t think anyone would argue that all writing/ film/ art about murder is the same.
Why? Because, while there may be a limited number of basic methods to commit murder, there are a limitless number of reasons to do it. And a limitless number of consequences for it. And a limitless number of ways to feel about it: before it happens, and during, and after.
What makes writing about murder interesting isn’t that it comes up with a new and different physical method of committing murder. What makes, say, “In Cold Blood” or “Hamlet” more interesting than, say, “The Vicar in the Parlor” or “A Deadly Game of Love” or some other generic detective novel of the month is that it makes you look at murder differently. And for that matter, it makes you look at humanity in general differently. It makes you look at what causes conflict between people. What makes that conflict turn murderous. Why some people murder and others don’t. Whether everyone is ultimately capable of murder. Whether murder is ever justified, and if so, under what circumstances. How murder affects the person committing it. How murder affects a family, a community, society as a whole. The relationship between moral responsibility and abusive upbringings or mental illness. Etc., etc., etc.
And what makes good porn more interesting than . . . well, than “The Vicar in the Parlor” or “A Deadly Game of Love” or some other generic porn novel of the month?
It’s exactly the same thing. Good porn makes you look differently at what sex means to people. How sex feels to people. Why people want to have it (apart from the obvious biological drive). What people get out of it (again, apart from the obvious). What about sex can be surprising. What about it can be disappointing. How sex can change relationships. How it can change the way people see themselves. How sex can bring out the worst in people, or the best, or the most complicatedly human. Etc., etc. etc.
Now, I can hear a chorus already starting to ring: “Lord, have mercy. Porn with plot. Shoot me now.” And I’ll certainly admit that bad porn can be bad by being too plot- heavy, just as it can be bad by having no plot at all. Plus, to make things worse, a lot of plot- heavy porn makes the mistake of simply dropping the plot in around the sex, with little or no concern for their relevance to each other, in that Plot/ Sex Scene/ Plot/ Sex Scene structure we’re all so depressingly familiar with.
That’s not what I’m talking about. I’m talking about weaving the two together. I’m talking about making the sex a central part of the character and motivation . . . and vice versa. I’m talking about sex scenes that get you inside, not just what the characters are physically doing or physically feeling, but that gets you inside how it feels to be these unique people having this particular sex. I’m talking about sex scenes that get you to care passionately about these people and the sex they’re having, and that move their story forward. And I’m talking about non-sex scenes that keep the theme of sexuality alive, taking the changes and discoveries that happen during the sex and running with them. I’m talking about porn where you don’t even divide it into “sex scenes” and “plot scenes,” where it’s all just an integrated part of a compelling and arousing story about sex.
And that kind of porn can come in infinite variety.
Yes, a lot of porn sucks. Porn is just as subject to Sturgeon’s Law as any other art form: 90% of it is crap because 90% of everything is crap. Porn may even be somewhat more subject to Sturgeon’s Law than other art forms — since, like any art form that’s stigmatized or trivialized, talented and ambitious artists often stay away from it for fear of ruining their careers. (A phenomenon with an unfortunate vicious circularity to it.)
But the “All porn is the same” critique is unjust. It marks an unwillingness to explore the more interesting and imaginative regions of it . . . or, in a more generous interpretation, simply an unfamiliarity with those regions. And to roll your eyes and complain, “I don’t want plot in my porn, I just want it to get me off” — and then turn around and complain, “Porn is so boring, it’s all the same” — is unjustness compounded. It’s trying to have your cake and eat it too . . . and then complaining that the fact that you can’t is the baker’s fault.
This entry was posted on Friday, 27 March 2009 at 12:31 pm and is filed under Culture. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
on Friday, 27 March 2009 at 5:25 pm Theresa wrote:
This is a perfect example of why I really like your writing! You have done a fantastic job of making a very complicated and sticky subject matter accessible without softening the importance of your message. I have struggled time and time again to try and vocalize my feelings on porn. I know it when I see it just isn’t enough of a descriptive for me. Now I have an article I can refer people to that is direct, concise, and basically kicks ass. Thank you.
on Friday, 27 March 2009 at 9:07 pm Cand86 wrote:
Well said. I would argue that you don’t even have to consider porn with a plot in order to dispel the whole “all porn is the same” myth. The only way I ever see that being true is if you watch porn solely for the bodies banging together; I suppose then everything might blur together in miserable sameness. But for me, every scene is uniquely different, because there are two personalities coming together, two real people interacting in something intimate. There’s always the chance for the unexpected to happen (as the millions of forums on porn fan sites will attest to- some guy saying “In the middle of the scene, X happened and I was like, whoa! Are there other examples of this?”), for individual idiosyncrasies in styles and attitudes to shine through- even better when you have stars who don’t feel pressured to adhere to some porno standard, and directors who let such deviancy from the norm go on, unmolested.
I’ve always been able to watch a scene and find something that makes it stand out for me, the littlest thing, sometimes- a hitch in her breath, a moment of eye contact, something that makes it beautifully different from its counterparts. I do kind of have to pity the people who think it’s all the same- it’s like they’re looking at it through dirty glasses, unable to see the hidden potential . . .
on Saturday, 28 March 2009 at 3:12 am cloudy wrote:
This is about “good porn” in the abstract — rather than looking at actual examples of “good porn” and why they are good.
In addition to DREAM OF THE RED CHAMBER, a number of classical literary fiction works of in China are said to be pornographic; they are great literature that ALSO happens to be pornographic. But surely someone out there has made some films (there are some decent satirical ones) that are pornographic, but they really don’t qualify as “great film” that I know of. [There’s a ‘twisted adventure’ series, eg]
It would really be great to have a discussion of people’s encounters with porn they like and why. It is more than just career fears that keep great film and porn from being intertwined, something more along the lines of underground enforcement and even monopoly (at least on distribution control). Our culture has a lot more underground regulation (especially of anything with political import — like a mass movement calling for an end to global absolute poverty or an effective peace movement that really mobilizes the way ACORN does, etc etc). One of the great tasks of our era’s at least seeming progressive possibilities is to get to a point where the barriers to these things are broken down
on Saturday, 28 March 2009 at 3:42 am Ola wrote:
Throughout the article, I just wanted to shout out the question: “Names, please! Please, give us some names!”
Many porn opposing people simply never saw anything like what you describe. What stories or films come into your mind that fit this description? (Besides your own story “Bending”. It fits the description, imho, but it’s the only one I know)
Thank you!
on Saturday, 28 March 2009 at 9:03 am Jim wrote:
Hm… I realized something about myself as I read this piece. When you say “porn,” I think 5-minute clips of sex meant to get you off. But a feature-length film about sex, with character development and much (the equivalent of a murder film), I don’t think of it as “porn.” I think of it as art, with sex as a theme. There are no movies that are 5-minute clips of something being murdered, meant to satisfy some instinctual urge to release pent-up aggression.
So maybe I need to re-think my definition of porn. Because by my definition, all porn IS basically the same.
on Saturday, 28 March 2009 at 2:27 pm John Evans wrote:
I feel more or less the same way about pornographic video games; nobody wants to do them, so there aren’t any really intensely interesting ones. Perhaps a few (Brave Soul comes to mind). That’s why I’m trying to make some good ones, like Aching Dreams (it’s a start, anyway).
on Monday, 30 March 2009 at 8:07 am Mark wrote:
and yet the percentage of porn seems to be (I am not an expert) more and more of the “ignore ALL plot” variety, “best of” scenes and “4 hours of non-stop” videos and endless repetitions of the same types of people attacking each other in the same types of ways.
To be honest I have not made an exhaustive review, but I would not even know how to find a movie like you describe. The blue-door shows plenty of variation in orifices and techniques but not of what you describe. When was the last time a porn movie showed a woman flirting/teasing a man instead of simply jumping him or a cut and suddenly they are naked in bed.. I wonder if what you describe is wishful thinking rather than where the industry is heading.
on Monday, 30 March 2009 at 9:25 am Greta Christina wrote:
To answer a couple of questions:
I think it’s interesting how many people assumed I was talking about video porn. I wasn’t. I was talking about all media of porn: writing, comics, videos, painting and drawings, performance art, whatever. And I guess I was mostly thinking about written porn. Sorry if I wasn’t clearer about that. I realize that when people hear “porn,” what often comes to mind is “porn videos,” and I should have made it clearer that that’s not specifically what I was talking about.
As to “where to look,” I would suggest looking at any volume of the Best American Erotica series. You might start with Best of the Best American Erotica, the 2008 volume. (And if I may toot my own horn for a moment, you might also look at Best Erotic Comics 2008.)
As to video: I do think there are some videos that transcend the usual extremely narrow limitations of the genre. (The work of Maria Beatty comes to mind.) But for an assortment of reasons, I think this is much harder with video. Partly because it’s a collaborative art form, and thus has many more potential weak links in the chain. Partly because what’s arguably the most crucial link in the chain — acting — is also the most public and the most stigmatized: if you’re serious about a career as a cameraperson, you might go into porn to get your chops, but if you’re serious about a career as an actor, you almost certainly won’t go into porn. (IMO, videos that transcend the genre tend to transcend it in visuals, not in plot or acting.) And partly because video is the most lucrative of all porn media, and thus the most vulnerable to “crank it out,” “lowest common denominator” commercial thinking. For those reasons, I think less- lucrative, solo- artist media like writing, comics, and art are more fertile ground for higher- quality work in porn.
on Monday, 30 March 2009 at 9:31 am Greta Christina wrote:
Oh, and to clarify: The Bluedoor.com reference wasn’t meant to illustrate the wonderful variety available in porn. It was meant to illustrate the wonderful variety available in sex.
on Wednesday, 1 April 2009 at 9:06 am Joreth wrote:
To briefly address your initial statements about all the many ways to have sex, have you seen the Sex Map yet? Being a poly and kink activist, I often hear things like “I wouldn’t try exploring kink to save my relationship because, what if you run out of things to try? Then you’re right back where you started”, which is such a strange idea. I won’t go into all the psychological ramifications of a statement like that, but, as you said, if you think there’s a limit to the kinds of sex people can have, then I feel awfully sorry for your partners.
And, to illustrate that point, there is now the Sex Map. When I found this, I immediately started using it in these discussions. It’s a humorous and light-hearted look at human sexuality, with categories of “sex” representing different countries, cities and regions on a map. The first version of it was wildly popular and generated suggestions of using push-pins sort of like a hobby traveler’s map, showing where one has been.
The second version is an interactive version with push pins to show where you’ve been, where you went and didn’t like, where you would like to go, and what places are “fantasy only” and not places you actually want to visit in real life.
And the third vision is a full-sized color poster you can buy and hang on your wall. I’m hearing that it’s very popular with therapists and even Planned Parenthood has bought some! I bought one and I used color-coded arrow post-its instead of push-pins so that I didn’t mess up the poster with holes. I creased the post-its so that they all stick out at a 90 degree angle, just like the push-pins would have, with only the tip of the arrow stuck to the poster, to avoid obscuring nearby locations.
It’s a really neat idea and I like to use it to spark discussions with potential partners (and existing partners, for that matter!). I highly recommend everyone check it out: http://www.symtoys.com/home.html - in fact, just about everything at this website is related to discovering new ways and learning the extremely vast and varied complexity that his human sexuality.