{"id":8052,"date":"2011-10-27T09:00:03","date_gmt":"2011-10-27T08:00:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.badreputation.org.uk\/?p=8052"},"modified":"2011-10-27T09:00:03","modified_gmt":"2011-10-27T08:00:03","slug":"dave-mckeans-celluloid","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/badreputation.org.uk\/2011\/10\/27\/dave-mckeans-celluloid\/","title":{"rendered":"Dave McKean’s Celluloid"},"content":{"rendered":"
I’ll get my position down as briefly as I can here so I can get on
with the post. I wouldn\u2019t say I\u2019m ‘pro-porn’
because I’m dead against the unsafe and exploitative (like many
industries, it must be said) mainstream porn industry. I find a lot of
it distressing and unpleasant to watch. But I don’t accept the
argument that violent porn has any causal link to violence against women
beyond the fact that it re-inscribes the values already at large in our
society. Symptom not cause, I\u2018d say.<\/p>\n
I have no problem with porn in theory. But mainstream heterosexual porn
and all its cliches has become so dominant and so widely accepted that
it has become the ‘norm’ against which the bodies, fantasies
and sexual experiences of real people are judged. We need positive,
progressive sex education and much greater diversity, acceptance and
openness about sex and representations of sex.<\/p>\n
Anyway. Here’s a brief synopsis I pinched from this Comics
Alliance review<\/a>:<\/p>\n
Celluloid is the story of a woman who, during a moment of sexual
frustration, discovers a film projector and reel of film that
depicts a couple having sex\u2026 this woman finds herself traveling
from our world into a dreamlike realm of sexual fantasies
that’s presented in the artist’s trademarked
style(s)…. The woman begins simply as a voyeur and eventually
graduates to full participant in various activities with the
entities she encounters.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Of course, reviewing an erotic work is tricky because what flicks
your switches is such a personal matter, but even setting that
aside I found I was disappointed. It didn\u2019t turn me on. But
it didn\u2019t interest me either. In this Comic
Book Resources interview<\/a>, McKean outlines some of his aims
behind the project:<\/p>\n
Most pornography is pretty awful. I mean, it does the job at the
most utilitarian level, but it rarely excites other areas of the
mind, or the eye. It’s repetitive, bland and often a bit
silly. I was interested in trying to do something that\u2026
tickles the intellect as well as the more basic areas of the
mind.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Yay for intellect-tickling! That sounds right up my street. But
I don\u2019t think
Celluloid<\/strong> delivered. I realise now that what I was
hoping for was something that felt as different to mainstream
porn as Black Orchid<\/strong><\/a> was from most 1980s superhero
comics. And of course it
is<\/em> different on its shimmering surface, but the
fantastic situations and sensual artwork are resting on
some conventions from mainstream pornography that hold no
allure for me.<\/p>\n
For example: the female protagonist is inevitably thin,
white, and able-bodied, with long blonde hair.
She’s apparently bi-curious heterosexual. After
having a bath in her empty house, she decides to put her
high heels back on. The situation that frames her sexual
journey is that she comes home and calls her
boyfriend\/husband\/playmate, but he\u2019s still at the
office, so she\u2019s stuck with a pout, a bath and some
self-pleasure. I was half expecting her to order a pizza
and get it on with the delivery man. One reviewer, who I
won\u2019t grace with a link, even described her as a
\u2018bored housewife\u2019.\u00a0It just feels so
clich\u00e9d, and for me that undermines the eroticism
of the art and the originality of the project.<\/p>\n
Visually the weakest section (in my opinion) is what
I\u2019m going to call the Boobfruit section, in which
the protagonist:<\/p>\n
\u2026encounters an \u201cearth mother\u201d figure,
haloed in fruit and with fourteen breasts\u2026 as
the woman consummates her meeting with the goddess,
the resultant imagery throws some interesting
analogies between fruit and the
body.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The beginning of the
Boobfruit episode. The 'earth mother'
character is wearing some grapes on her head. Image
\u00a9 Fantagraphics, 2011<\/p><\/div>\n
I don\u2019t know what Graphic
Eye<\/a> find so interesting about the analogies
between fruit and the body. Fruit as a symbol of sex
and fertility, and particularly cis female
reproductive organs, is pretty much as old as art.
Here\u2019s some extremely luscious fruit
conveniently dropped into a painting of a youthful
Elizabeth
I<\/a>, painted at a time when her fertility was a
subject of international political speculation. And
what could Frida Kahlo possibly be referencing here<\/a>?
You get the picture.<\/p>\n
There\u2019s also a clich\u00e9-within-a-clich\u00e9
of fruit being used as a sensual reference point in
descriptions of lesbian sex. I just couldn\u2019t
take this episode seriously, especially as the fruit
pictures look like they\u2019ve been cut out of an
M&S advert.<\/p>\n
In the Comic Book Resources interview, McKean
says:<\/p>\n
I also thought it would be more interesting
coming from a woman’s perspective, and for
it to be essentially fantastical, a series of
sex dreams, allowing for a more impressionistic
view, trying to express the feelings of each
stage, rather than just showing you literally
what happens\u2026<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/a>As a big fan of Dave McKean’s rich and
haunting art and illustration, I was intrigued and admittedly a bit excited to
hear he was producing an erotic graphic novel earlier this year \u2013
Celluloid<\/strong>.<\/p>\n
Pr0n<\/h3>\n
Back to Celluloid<\/h3>\n
Tickle my Intellect<\/h3>\n
Boobfruit<\/h3>\n
<\/a>
Subject or object?<\/h3>\n