Hullfire URL: http://www.thehullfire.com/en/index.php/arts/546-when-the-curtains-twitch
When it comes to thinking of sexual images in art, there are
certain iconic scenes which may come to mind.
Whether they are romantic (Kate Winslet’s palm pressed against the
fogged-up window of a car in Titanic), comedic (a certain scene involving
baked-goods in American Pie) or just downright disturbing (The Exorcist – but
perhaps the less said about that the better).
Or, if you are more classically minded, then perhaps you will think of
the sexual scenes on Greek ceramics, or the paintings of nudes in the work of
Titian and Renoir.
Whatever the medium, be it film, television, paintings or
literature, sex has been a subject of fascination in the creative world for as
long as human beings have been able to write and draw. The question is, with sex permeating our
entertainment wherever possible, whether it ever transcends its sole purpose of
enjoyment or appreciation to actually become believable. We may sometimes forget, while possibly
watching the entirely over-the-top sex scenes in the latest episode of True
Blood, that sex is more than just erotic and pleasurable. It can be an act of tenderness, awkwardness, biology,
controversy, and even violence. Whether
art can realistically capture all of these (though not necessarily all at once)
is certainly an intriguing thought.
While the filmic examples given above are clearly
exaggerated in order to serve a specific purpose in their respective
narratives, film (or the moving image in general) is arguably the most suited
method to capture sex the most realistically.
Unlike literature and traditional art film targets more than just one of
the senses, sight and sound, and most importantly it allows for the images to
move in real time. It is therefore no
wonder pornography has thrived the most in this multi-sensory medium.
Pornography is an interesting case. It is the only ‘genre’ of filmmaking where
the sex is actually real, and yet it is the most unrealistic of all. There is a big difference between something
looking real and being realistic. Obviously pornography cannot even begin to
capture all of the emotions of sex, but then again that is not its intention,
and it cannot be faulted for that. It is
also not intended for mass audiences in the way that cinematic releases are,
like for example, 1973’s Don’t Look Now and the 1981 remake of The Postman
Always Rings Twice. The opposite to
pornography, both films have sex scenes which are notorious for being so
realistic that for decades viewers have speculated that the actors are actually
engaging in intercourse, although this has been denied many times. The intense realism achieved by the actors
effectively conveys the passion between the characters and serves a particular
purpose to the narrative of each film rather than just being gratuitous; a
perfect blend of realism both in action and emotion.
In these two films, however, the emotions displayed are
positive: passion, intimacy, connectivity between two people. This is perhaps a contributing factor to
their success, and although they were controversial at the time they were met
with relatively little resistance from censors.
This makes us wonder what happens when a film depicts sex just as
realistically, but instead of capturing the enjoyable aspects of sex it makes
the audience feel uncomfortable and even forces them to face a sad reality.
One such film is last year’s Blue Valentine, in which
a couple whose marriage is failing struggle to reignite their love for each
other. One scene involving cunnilingus
created outcry when it caused the film to be given an NC-17 rating in the US
(similar to the 18 certificate, but known as a kiss of death as it is
associated with pornography and thus restricts the amount of advertising and
distribution a film can get, reducing its potential box office) . The scene in question is no more graphic than
Don’t Look Now or even the average romance, leaving critics puzzled as to why
it was treated so unfairly. The censors
were accused of misogyny and sexism, but it has also been suggested that they were
uncomfortable with seeing sex depicted in such a bleak, disheartening and
uncompromising way, as the couple’s attempts to love each other are clearly
futile. (Thankfully, after an appeal the
film’s rating was eventually reduced, but interestingly it was released as a 15
in the UK without issue.)
So clearly film, and all art, is capable of depicting sex in
a way which is both realistic and believable.
The problem lies in censorship boards’ skewed views of what is and isn’t suitable for mature adults to
view, but also whether audiences actually want
to see it depicted this way, with both the highs – pleasure, love, erotica –
and the lows – disappointment, embarrassment, failure.
No comments:
Post a Comment