The Wall (essay)

From Fanlore
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Meta
Title: The Wall
Creator: M.J. Fisher
Date(s): January 1978
Medium: print
Fandom: Star Trek: TOS
Topic:
External Links:
Click here for related articles on Fanlore.

The Wall is a 1978 essay by M.J. Fisher.

It was printed as an opposing viewpoint to Karen Fleming's essay Truth forever on a scaffold. Both essays were printed in Spectrum #35.

The topic was explicit adult material, specifically Kirk/Spock content in Star Trek: TOS zines, a topic that was raging across fandom at the time. For more context, see:

Some Topics Discussed

  • homosexuality is lumped in with "bestiality, incest, sadomasochism, and even nihilism and necrophilia"
  • fans will likely get bored of all the sex and return to normal
  • liberal and conservative fans
  • suggestion that the solution was labeling, warnings, and age statements, things that were not a part of fandom at that time
  • slander and free speech
  • "ratting out fellow fen" to TPTB

The Essay

Last summer a feud broke out in STrekdom. A feud that has erected a wall between us and separated us into opposing sides. The feud was over the issue of pornography and indecency in fanfic. To some people the whole controversy seemed absurd since most people in fandom feel that fans tend to be more open-minded and liberal than the rest of the mundane world. Yet, to other people, the porno debates seemed inevitable as they reflect similar campaigns going on throughout the country to get rid of pornography. Personally, I was impressed by the futility of the whole thing. Both sides have clung to their arguments and refused to give any ground or to compromise in any way. As I write this the porno problem in fandom has not been resolved. It has only lost steam for the moment and awaits dormantly, ready to erupt again full-force at any moment. The height of the debates occurred late last summer and early in the fall of 1977. The reason that the pressure died down was due in part to the demise of Halkan Council, which carried some of the debates, and also in part to pressure from STW to keep everyone away from everyone else's throats. Since that time there haven't been many zines out to carry on the discussion, but there is still a chance of the issue exploding once again.

It's hard to say if any compromises will be met. Fandom has been moving toward more "liberal" fanfic steadily. This means that fanfic has been moving away from the basic form of story found in the series, and toward more experimental forms of literature, including pornography and erotic fiction. Because of this, the fans that are new to fandom are introduced to fiction that is far removed from the type they ever saw on the screen. The neofans can't help but feel alienated by this "new wave" of fanfic. On the other hand, the fans who have been reading fanfic for years are being affected by the boredom factor involved in reading the same plots over and over again. For the older fans, the experimental fiction (including pornography) is something different. It's new blood. It's unique. So, the schism has been developing for a long time. Old fen vs. neofen. Along with the neofen there is also a group of fans whom I call "purists" who read and write Star Trek fiction in its original form. Together with the neofen who are alienated by the new wave, the purists have chosen the most obvious and volatile topic which differentiates the two groups: pornography. Actually, the two groups differ on more than just the issue of pornography. The liberal group is seeking variety and "freedom of expression"...whatever that may mean. The conservative group is sticking with ST fiction in its traditional form. Both sides are fairly well matched for audiences. The newer fans entering fandom are flocking to the side that they associate best with: the purists. The left wing has the support of many of the BNFs who have been in fandom for several years. So, each group has fairly equal support.

The arguments between the two groups over pornography are also divided. The liberals have a slight edge since fandom consists of fairly liberal people to begin with, so it has been the right wing that has been making most of the charges. The first argument to come up was that sex is a private thing and should not be incorporated into fanzines. To this claim, the left wing remarked that sex is a part of life, and that authors should have an equal license to write about sex as much as they have to write about any other human condition. Besides, they add, the professional markets are rife with books containing explicit sex scenes. The implication is: if they can do it, we can do it.

Well, strike one for the right wingers. I don't suppose that many of them ever suspected that argument would work anyway. The stigma that "sex is dirty" hasn't held much water since the mid-60's.

Onto Round Two...The public should not be insulted by allowing pornography and indecency in all of the fanzines. Right? Not so, say the liberals. Who says that the entire bulk of fandom is insulted by putting porno in the zines? Many of the editors of the so-called pornozines don't consider their material to be pornographic at all. They claim that the conservative people in fandom will call almost anything pornographic if it offends them personally. Toward this end, there can be no compromise in actually categorizing a particular fanzine as "pornographic." What one editor may consider a mature handling of a subject, another reader may consider vile and indecent. This is perhaps the hardest task that the conservatives have: proving that a zine is pornographic. The editors of the accused zines can always bat their baby-blues and say in the most sweetly-innocent voice possible, "Why, I don't print pornography." All we can do is make our own personal judgement. Only when the majority of the people consider a certain zine pornographic can anything be done.

Round Three. All right, if you can't find a standard by which to call something pornographic or not, then let's stick with material that contains explicit sexual themes. Such zines, the right wingers contend, should be restricted to only a few zines that are just for mature audiences. It might also be possible to widen the category of restricted topics to include: homosexuality, bestiality, incest, sadomasochism, and even nihilism and necrophilia. These topics should not be scattered about in all of the fanzines, but sequestered in just one or two.

To this idea the liberals have replied with one of the favorite stock defenses in the writing field: What ever happened to the right of free speech, and freedom of the press? The editors of many fanzines will tell you that they do not want to be pressured into doing one kind of format or another. In actuality, I believe that the problem is more economic than it is ethical. The big genzines in fandom must appeal to both neofans and fans who have been reading fanfic for years. In order to appease both groups the larger genzines try to carry stories of both the traditional type and of the new wave. Perhaps editors may feel that it is necessary to carry both types of fiction in order to capture both audiences. Besides, pornography has sale appeal. What editor wouldn't be tempted to increase sales by including something risqué? I have a feeling that, at least for the present, pornography is too profitable to be excluded from all of the zines, and while most zineds claim to be above avarice, they don't want to lose their shirts on a zine that doesn't sell either.

Round Four. Until now the pros and cons have been evenly matched, but now the cons bring out the heavily artillery. Star Trek is still owned by Paramount, they state. Pornographic stories and stories that deviate wildly from the original show are presenting a bad image of the series which reflects badly on Paramount. People who are writing smut are legally liable for slander. Paramount could sue them.

But, the pro side doesn't flinch at this. They realize that a goodly number of people have been writing material for several years now that Paramount might object to. Should Paramount decide to crack down on these people with threats of legal action, it would create havoc. Personally, I wouldn't want to be the poor schmuck that wrote the letter to Paramount telling them about it all. I doubt that [s]he would ever be able to show their face at a convention again. Yet, it's still a possibility. If it did happen I doubt that it would kill pornography in Treklit, only drive it underground for a year or so, until the heat died off, and then resurface again. There is also a lot of pressure against doing that to someone else in fandom. Ratting on your fellow fen isn't greatly admired, and I suspect 'that if anyone was ever dumb, enough to go through with it, that it would trigger a civil war in fandom that would end up harming everyone. As somebody once said: A remedy is worthless if it cures the disease but kills the patient in the process.

Round Five. Since the opposition can't use its trump card without harming their own image, the next tack is a more emotional appeal. What's wrong with writing stories as Roddenberry originally planned to write them? What ever happened to the dream of Star Trek? they ask. The zines of today lack the optimism and hope that the series contained. They have lost that vital spark that made ST so special.

The left wing doesn't feel this way at all. To them, they have gone above and beyond the limits that STrek had in the past. They have raised Treklit to the level of literature. To many fans who have been reading stories for years, the old action-adventure format based around the "big three" [Kirk, Spock, McCoy] are old-hat and blasé. Someone once remarked to me that the original series had a predominance of action/adventure, with touches of characterization and moralistic plotting, combined with an overall sense of wonder. It was pointed out to me that fanfic has put most of its major emphasis upon characterization, with few of the formats directed toward action/adventure, and little of the plotting directed toward forming a moral. Looking through most fanzines you'll find that this is true. It's not uncommon to find one or two-page character studies that have no plot at all. Certainly stories that have no strong overall plot cannot hope to copy the same spirit that the original series did, which was always structured along tight, and often dramatic plotlines. Much of fanfic is bogged down in overly introspective characterization. Certainly the purists have a point here. In many fanzines it is impossible to achieve the same sense of wonder from the stories that the original show provided. The purists hope to regain some of that sense of wonder by bringing back a little of the dream of ST, yet the liberals seldom listen. They are too busy turning out literature. Where has the dream of ST gone? Good question.

Round Six. As a last resort, the right wingers would appreciate just one minor compromise from the other side of the fence. Would it be too much to ask to just put notices inside the zines and the advertisements for the zines, stating whether they contain material that may be offensive.

Personally, I think that this isn't so much to ask, and it may be the one compromise that the liberals will concede. A notice such as "may contain material objectionable to some people," or "Intended for mature readers only" should suffice. Some people want to put an arbitrary age on sales such as 16 or 18, but then you'd get arguments from the other side questioning why one age constitutes maturity and not another. So, a general warning notice of some kind could still be settled upon. This would allow zineds to warn people who might be offended by explicit topics, yet sti11 allow them to print the stuff that brings in the audience.

So, where do we go from here, with most of the major topics and arguments exhausted? It is useless to debate the ethicalness of pornography (or related topics) because like any victimless offense such as prostitution, gambling, and drug abuse, somebody will always be around to use them. They have been around since the beginning of civilization and have resisted every attempt to eradicate them, so there must be some social importance in them. I suspect that pornography will resist all efforts to completely erase it. It is best to deal with the situation realistically and keep it away from the people offended by it, if possible, since there will always be people offended by what other people write. More than just pornography and indecency in Treklit separates the pros and cons. I'm convinced that we now have two separate groups in fandom (and probably more, which aren't as easily definable yet) one of which wants to stay with the traditional forms of ST fiction, while the other wants to go off in tangents, exploring new literary fields. Pornography is just one of the many experimental forms being tried out by the left wing authors in fandom. Left to their own devices I'm sure that the bulk of mainstream writers will lose interest in porno and move onto other experimental ways of writing ST originally. The question becomes, how bizarre will the experimentalists get?

For the moment, keeping a lid on things may indeed be the best answer. Perhaps a new fad in literary trends will take the place of porno. We might all be able to compromise just a bit too and put notices in zines and ads. If Kirk and Spock want to make out within the pages of written fiction, fine. Just as long as everyone is given fair warning. After all...buggers can't be choosers.

Fan Comments

Fan comments touched upon Kirk/Spock fiction being "distasteful," "out of character," done without the actors' consent, that it should be labeled so that one could boycott zines that contain Kirk/Spock material, that it should be kept private, and also "think of the children."

I have read in "The Wall" and Karen Fleming's article.

First, I resent having labels like "left wing," "right wing," slapped onto people just because of their stand on this particular issue. "Pro" and "Con" seem to be sufficient in my opinion.

Also — I would like to point out to you that none of the "porn" zines have deceived any fans in their ads. I've been exposed to fanzines since 1976—just about the time that the controversy surfaced, from xeroxed stories in the underground. Every one of these ads have said "age statement required with order." "if you don't like the theme, done buy the zine." These stories are not being shoved down any fan's throats. All they have to do is refuse to order or read the zine.

Now, about Karen Fleming's [essay] — her statement that this "filth" was being brought into the fans' homes by zines that had been "straight" before.

Which zines are these? I've been reading zines like Warped Space, Contact, Galactic Discourse etc. before and after the controversy began. The "straight" zines are still "straight." Any inferences to the subject in the stories of these zines have been so subtle as to cause one to miss it the first time, perhaps always. And none of the zines have printed stories involving the actual sex acts between the two.

What has happened is that new zines have started printing in this period—and the editors have announced their purposes right from the beginning. I've seen their ads, I know it!

The only case I could possibly think of in which a switch could occur is in the case of the fan-letter-forum zines like Halkan Council. And it's the fans who determine what the content of the forum will be.

As for withdrawing the subject to more "private" means of communication—I don't think that's necessary. All one has to do, if the discussion is too embarrassing, is to get up and leave the group. If you're feeling bold enough to verbally state why you're doing it, do so. Otherwise, you can write to those fans, state why you did it and ask ' that you be alerted in advance if they're going to continue to talk about it so you can avoid it. Also I've seen some "con" letters in some of these letter forum zines, too. So, maybe you can have your say there.

At T'Con though the K/S lovers' panels were labelled accordingly—so no one walked into the panel against his or her own will. These safeguards I think, are sufficient. [1]

Both you and Karen Fleming had valid points in your discussion of pornography in fanfic; however, you both seemed to have missed one very essential area of this controversy. Isn't there anyone else in all of fandom who cares about the feelings and opinions of the actors who are being portrayed in these stories?

The actors have rights too. While the printed page may be faceless, the illos in Thrust, for example, are most definitely not. (Please, before anyone tries to jump on me for being prudish, I purchased Thrust with full knowledge of its intended subject matter. I didn't find it shocking, only rather adolescent.)

Personally, I don't see the K/S sexual relationship. I am, at least, trying to understand it. I have no objection to sex as a part of writing, be it hetero, homo, or potluck. I've read this thing long before it became the vogue in Treklit, and I've seen "dirty" pictures too. Big deal.

All the yelling about rights always centers on us, the fans. It's "my freedom of expression" vs "my right to choose what comes into my house." We've all complained at times about the shoddy merchandising Paramount has done with Star Trek, and we tend to sympathize when the actors say they've been used by Paramount. If it's wrong for Paramount to use the actors' faces in money-making schemes, what makes it O.K. for us to use those same faces to advertise our sexual sophistication?

Sex for sex' sake doesn't make any better a story than mindless adventure; of the two, the adventure story is often more honest about itself. Too many of the sexual stories we've seen in Treklit are pretentious in their sexuality, giving the impression that the writers have just discovered sex. Far from being new, sex is one of the oldest things around. Sex for sex' sake is boring whether it's pro porn or Treklit. Yes, professional markets provide all varieties of explicit sex scenes in books, pictures, and movies. The people in the pictures are paid for their work. They have the choice of posing for the pictures, and each of us has the choice of whether or not to buy.

But pity poor Shatner and Nimoy! Over ten years ago they took jobs in a TV series as a couple of professional actors, and now they are expected to put up with the slightest whim of every selfish fan, and her freedom and her rights. Even in one of the rare stories that say "Oh, this is an alternate universe," the illustrations of that story are a part of this universe. The faces in those illustrations are recognizable to anyone familiar with William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy as actors. These men have feelings, families, and professional images to be considered. Who speaks for their rights?

Jeff, you said "I wouldn't want to be the poor schmuck telling them (Paramount) about it (K/S)." There doesn't need to be any "poor schmuck." What's to prevent someone at Paramount from buying some of this stuff over the counter like fans do Thrust, for instance, was on sale in its brown envelope at the con in New York Feb 18-20. Mail gets delivered here [California] too, so Paramount could even use the traditional method of acquiring zines. Unless the address said Paramount Studios, the zine ed wouldn't know who was placing the order.

In many ways the Trek actors are at our mercy, defenseless against the rumors and innuendos that swirl about them. Fandom is in a pretty sorry state when we battle ad nauseum over the sexual preferences of fictional characters, but turn our backs on the fellow human beings who gave those characters life. [2]

Your article "The Wall" was most interesting. This longstanding discussion seemingly has no answer since, like politics and religion, no one is going to change his opinion. It would seem, therefore,, that the only logical progression is to try to at least understand the opinions of the other side. One can them be forewarned, on whatever side of the fence he tends to sit, so that no one will be subjected to that which he does not appreciate, is offended by or on which he does not wish to waste his time, eyesight and mentality. The subject is one which fans should be able to discuss in an open-minded manner and one which surely should stay within the confines of fandom.

It is my intent to add another dimension for consideration to a subject, which, while it lies dormant for the moment, is still considered in the minds of fans. Hopeful, I may add to the further insight of, and understanding between, fans. I could in no way improve upon an already excellently written and most objective article.

If it is necessary to classify myself, it would have to be as an "old fan, purist" as I' have been an active Star Trek fan since 1966 and I hold the true characters and integrity of the Star Trek entitles sacrosanct.

I am all for exploration into characterizations and fanfic as long as the exploration does not adulterate the basic nature of the character. A logical progression of an idea which was stated or alluded to on a Star Trek episode can be an interesting exercise. Where does the logical progression leave off and fantasy begin? Who is to say what adulterates the basic nature of a character?

There are many qualified persons who possess a much more than adequate insight Into the characterizations of Spock and Kirk — it being these two that fanfic seems the most obsessed with. To name a couple, Star Trek's creator, Gene Roddenberry and Dorothy Fontana. Has anyone ever considered that the Spock and Kirk entitles are alter-egos, so to speak, of Leonard Nimoy and Bill Shatner? Perhaps would-be authors of fanfic might consider asking Misters Nimoy and Shatner how they feel about certain aspects of the exploration. How far, for instance, do they think Spock and Kirk would go in any given situation — if at all. Possibly these gentlemen would not care one iota about discussing the subject. I suggest that they have the right to be asked. The entitles of Kirk and Spock were conceived by Gene Roddenberry. They were brought to life by the integrity, character and artistic abilities and, yes, love of Misters Shatner and Nimoy. The entitles should, therefore, be inviolate. Certainly there is freedom of speech and yes, there is open-season in fanfic, but has anyone considered the feelings and dignity of these three lovely gentlemen?

While I wholeheartedly believe in literary freedom and creativity, I suggest for general consideration that anyone presuming to alter the characteristics of any established entity in the name of exploration, fanfic, literature or whatever, takes on the responsibility of upholding the qualities of that characterization which make it unique. They should not. Inadvertently, lower it to the base natures to satisfy sexual or egotistic fantasies. And if this end is indeed their desire, they should create their own entitles and their own universes.

I do not consider either the sex act or the human body to be "dirty." In fact, my personal experience has been quite the opposite. I do consider some slanted ideas and connotations placed on both the act and the body by some individual mentalities as somewhat more than slightly tainted. "Sex" in itself cannot be blamed for the way it is used in reality or fantasy. Some fantasies should be kept personal. Bad taste is still bad taste whether it is in style or not. Today, sex is openly discussed. I do not offend easily, but when I am offended, I do not hesitate to cry foul.

Hey! My ten year old son and I are both avid zine readers and I do not care for him to come in contact with some of the explicit material mentioned in your article. Although he is probably a more mature reader than many adults and even though he already has a more than adequate sex education, I have my hands full handling sex on television and peer questioning in grade school.

I no way am I against new/old ideas and current subject matter being presented in a tasteful manner. Some fanfic is not. Not to say it could not be with a little ingenuity and effort. Most likely the authors of the fanfic under discussion do not feel that they have trespassed, or presented what some consider lurid material. This is solely a matter of their experience and conscience. I do not judge them. I reserve the right to disagree with them. I defend their right to disagree with me. Freedom of speech is the right of every individual. So too is the right of dissent. It is also an individual freedom not to be subjected to that which offends. If one would not frequent an adult bookstore, one should not be inadvertently subjected to offensive material in zines.

If possibly offensive material is to be included, it should be noted, by all means, in the advertisements. The fan can also make it a point to learn which fan-authors write material to which they object and not buy the zines which publish their work.

In deciding whether a zine is pornographic or not, each individual must be charged with letting their own integrity, moral code and experience be the deciding factor. [3]

References

  1. ^ from Spectrum #27
  2. ^ from Spectrum #37
  3. ^ from a letter by Dawn M in Spectrum #38
Retrieved from "https://fanlore.org/w/index.php?title=The_Wall_(essay)&oldid=2619456"