The Sex-Files
| Fanfiction | |
|---|---|
| Title: | The Sex-Files |
| Author(s): | Steve Han |
| Date(s): | August 31, 1994 |
| Length: | |
| Genre: | het |
| Fandom: | The X-Files |
| External Links: | |
Click here for related articles on Fanlore. | |
The Sex-Files is an X-Files parody fic by Steve Han.
It contained a character from another fan's story, Gemma, by Kellie Matthews-Simmons.
Some Fan Reaction
A week after the story was posted at alt.tv.x-files.creative, some fan's took issue with Steve Han's intermixing of the terms erotica and smut. The comments below are from that discussion at "The Sex-Files" - a topical new story, Archived version, September 6, 1994.
Kellie Matthews-Simmons, the author of "Gemma" posted the first comment, one in which she quoted a large part of "Erotica" by Anais Nin:
In reference to Steve Han's sudden desire to write erotica, or "smut" as he refers to it. It is truly unfortunate that he cannot differentiate between the two genres, and that sex is somehow a bad and dirty thing. I excerpted the following material from the Preface of Erotica by Anais Nin. I thought you might find it interesting. To make a livin, she wrote erotica for a mysterious client of a collector, who acted as an agent.
[MUCH from "The Diary of Anais Nin, Volume III snipped]
I think you should aspire to higher levels of "smut."
Steve Han replied:
Wow, Kellie - I have to give you credit. This has got to be one of the most creative criticisms (flames?) I've ever received. I'm quite honored, actually, that you would take the time to look up such a perfect and fitting passage. I hope you had all this text on-line; I'd hate to think you typed it all in just for moi... :^)
Seriously, I was wondering how long it would take before you attacked my story (nearly a week!). I thought you'd be angry at my using a likeness of one of your characters, but instead, you criticize me for my alleged confusion of erotica and smut, and my lack of aspiration to write "true" erotica instead of just smut...
And to that, I'd say, whoa, Kellie - chill. If you'd read my story, and if you'd read any of my other stories, you'd realize that I do not aspire to any great literary heights, whether in erotica or otherwise. Rather, I seek only to provide an injection of humor. And in this case, remember the raging debate over erotica in the .creative forum, which you also voiced your opinion upon. I simply felt that the whole debate was ridiculous, as I agreed with whomever it was that said, "If you don't like it, don't read it!"
I agreed with those who feel that people should be allowed to post anything they want, as long as it involves M&S, without having to endure criticism about the story's content, as long as the proper warnings are provided.
Therefore, I felt that the situation could use a dose of humor, which was why I wrote the silly story. And I think anyone with a high school education can differentiate between erotica and smut, at least in the way you differentiated them. It should also be apparent, therefore, that I was spoofing erotica with the use of exaggerated, stilted smut. If you took personal offense at this, well that's unfortunate, as it wasn't intended. (and warnings *were* provided in the story).
In addition, I don't think I treated sex as a dirty thing in my story - rather, I treated it with humor. Just because it wasn't surrounded by a sweeping, romantic saga or imaginative poetry doesn't make it "dirty" in my book. I suppose your objection to my treatment of the subject is not unlike certain people being offended at seeing Mulder or Scully engaging in any "encounters" in stories. It just doesn't fit their perceptions of how an X-Files creative story, erotic or otherwise, should be written.
Personally, I find it curious when people take offense at a story like this, or any story in which M&S are seen as being out of character. They seem personally offended, even wounded in a way, as if to say, "how dare you write that! now, after reading that story, I can never look at M&S the same way again! I'll be emotionally scarred for life!" Puh-leeze..
In conclusion, Kellie, I think you're taking all this stuff much too seriously. I say that people should be free to write whatever they're comfortable with - whether straight stories, humor, erotica, or even smut - without being prodded to provide cleaner or more spiritually fulfilling contexts. Methinks that instead of thumbing your nose and criticizing me for writing a lower form of fiction, your time would be better spent in other, more noble pursuits. Maybe you could write another story for us, perhaps?
The last thing I'd want to see in this group is a flood of arguments about story types, generated by those who seek to establish an X-files creative intellectual hegemony, drowning out those creative efforts they see as being base, shallow, or otherwise not up to their personal standards. That sort of activity sounds suspiciously like censorship and book burning to me.
Margrathea replied:
Mr. Han, in your preface to your story you described it as erotica. I define erotica as a literary genre, which does require aspiration to great artistic heights. Although you describe your previous work as parody, you do not describe this particular story as one. In future, I wish writers here would categorize their works so unfamiliar readers will be able to better choose what to read. Calling your story erotica is like calling "Gemma" an Adventure or Crime-Drama. ...
Mr. Han, please consider writing the proper warnings in your works. If I had seen your story immediately as parody (although it became obvious by it's extremities of metaphor! :> ) I would have been more prepared to enjoy it as such. But forewarned that it was erotica, I did not expect flat characters (oxymoron) behaving like horny, indiscriminating animals.
I think that the comment about aspiring to a higher level of "smut" is rather tongue-in-cheek, though I may be wrong. "Smut" in your preface is a word interchangeable in meaning with "erotica." Kellie, as a serious writer, must see that you were writing parody, and seems to be merely chiding your for claming your work as erotica, compared to her own extensive efforts.
Steve Han replied:
People, I think this is insanely ridiculous that we're even arguing about this when we could all be doing better things, like reading or writing new stories (which was a point I made in my previous post). But as long as people want to discuss such matters...
As someone else has said, one person's erotica is another person's smut. It all depends upon your perspective. Some people are comfortable with the subject, and others are not. One person's erotic art is another person's pornography. Perhaps I'm not as literary minded as you are, but to *me*, "erotica" means erotic story. Nothing more, nothing less.
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary defines "erotica" as the following: "literary or artistic works having an erotic theme or quality."
Note that it says nothing about the height of such literary or artistic endeavors. Now if the steep requirements for great literary or artistic heights for erotica is an understanding between literary scholars, well, let's just say I'm not a literary scholar. I simply take my definitions straight from the dictionary. Perhaps in the future, we should separate all "erotica" into two categories - high literary erotica vs. quick-n-dirty smut. :^)
Well, you answered for yourself why I wasn't more explicit. Much of the humor lies in discovering the pardoy aspect for yourself. Besides, I thought I had given plenty of hints in the foreward that the story was not to be taken seriously. Perhaps in the future I should bang it into the reader's heads - "THIS IS A PARODY!!!!"
As I've noted, different people can have different definitions for words like "erotica" and "smut." Therefore, one person's usage of the terms may be different from another person's, but that doesn't make it any less valid. In my case, it should have been apparent that I was using the term "smut" as a tongue-in-cheek, semi-derisive term for erotica. And in any case, why chide a person for their particular use of the lexicon? No one has an exclusive license on the term "erotica."
[snipped]
if it was meant in this way, sounds like so much snobbery and superior literary posturing to me, and it's appalling that anyone would make such a statement. Would you go into a greasy spoon restaurant and suggest they stop serving greasy hamburgers, and instead switch to a menu of fine French cuisine? Of course not; everything has its place in the greater order of things - greasy spoons and French restaurants alike. The same goes with stories, whether high literary erotica or cheap "smut." And as so many people have stated, "if you don't like it, don't read it."
[snipped]
If you've read my prologue, you'd know that I was "putting my own spin on things." And besides, why should it bother people if I were passing off cheap smut as fine erotica? Caveat Lector, as someone said. It's not like I'm making money by selling substandard stories to unsuspecting consumers. It's not like I'm selling you a lemon. Perhaps you feel cheated because you were expecting something on the level of "Gemma," and found a cheap spoof instead. Well, sometimes life is disappointing that way. :(
But is that any reason to complain? What if someone were to post a story labeled as "Comedy/Spoof", but it wasn't terribly funny - perhaps it was just a collection of inane cliches (like the ones I often use :^) ) and flat jokes. Should I then complain (in public, no less - not via e-mail)? Should I say that it demeans the fine comedy of Shakespeare or Mel Brooks to call this lame piece a comedy? Perhaps these writers are confusing inanity with comedy. How offensive!
Or what if someone wrote a story labeled "Suspense/thriller", but it was neither suspenseful nor thrilling? Should I post an article complaining that the author doesn't know the meaning of suspense? That they can't tell the difference between suspense and cheap hooks? that they should aspire to the suspense of Shelley and Hitchcock? why, the nerve of those writers, passing off their cheap crudity as suspense! How dare they!
I seriously doubt that people would take any such actions, if simply out of politeness. And yet they feel free to attack my piece as a stain on the pure white gown of high literary erotica. Perhaps they see me as a street peddler taking up shop inside Tiffany's, hawking cheap costume jewelry. Methinks that some people are taking this genre far too seriously, trying to ward off the heathens who would desecrate their fine art form. I smell a sacred cow here, folks.
Alan Sawyer wrote:
Cmon lets all lighten up. I love both of your stories and would hate to see a fight break out. Now even though my sense of self-preservations says I should shut up, I just wanted to say, (how do I do this without pissing someone off I think to myself....??) even though I didn't like Sex Files plot that much , mainly because I like the Gemma character, and messes with my mind to imagine M or S doing that kind of thing, it was a parody and meant in humour, and we were all warned, and I guess if I wasnt as fond of the characters as I am, how they are, and didnt `know' them as well it would probably have been funny. I hope that all came out right... Even though I have 0 writing experience and dont claim to I though Id just get that out. Anyway...
Kellie Matthews-Simmons wrote:
*sigh* Okay, I KNOW I have a sense of humor somewhere. Maybe it's here, buried under this stack of e-mail messages...
How's about we just agree to live and let live? No more of this silliness. My previous post on this topic was not meant as a flame, just as information that might be enlightening.
Enough is enough. This group is for _creative_ work and there's nothing particularly creative about this thread, or group of threads. A lot of people have posted some new stories, so lets go read and forget about this, okay?
Michael A. Chary wrote:
Folks, this group is for fan fiction using the characters from the FOX tv show the X-Files. When the group was created there was no standard of quality or "aspirations to artistic heights" or anything like that. There can't be without a moderator. The simple fact of the matter is that *any* fiction using characters or situations from "The X-Files." belongs here. Or at least does not *not* belong here. Oh, and for the record Anais Nin once called D. H. Lawrence's collected works "filth." And that's in her diary as well...