Vinyl
Fantasy
published in Gloss No.4, Melbourne,
2002
Polyasexuality is a base state of what is otherwise conceived
of as 'sexuality'. It describes the credo shared by dogs,
slugs, abandoned childen, serial itinerants and advanced
seniles: fuck anything that moves, and if doesn't move,
fuck it anyway. In the face of such totalizing action, the
complete leatherbound library of psychoanalysis is virtually
destroyed. Nothing with which to identify; nothing by which
to signify. Anything can be a trigger; anything can be a
stimulant.
Despite
polyasexuality's spectre of a rampant planet of unmotivated
and unmitigated sex, it is in the interest of breeding to
keep everyone in a state of endless salivation - moist,
lubractive, engorged - so that anyone is ready to breed
at a moment's notice. Most psychoanalytical discourses on
sex bemoan the other side of this flooded pool, focussing
on social and cultural 'outcomes' and 'effects'. These discourses
conjure forth an equally endless wail which wraps around
repression, control, taboo, abuse, etc. in a fey attempt
to promote humankind above and beyond its numbing plane
of triggers and stimulants.
Polyasexuality
renders real whatever turns you on. For anything can and
everything will. In opposition to the notion that one's
identity is somehow co-divined by one's sexuality, polyasexuality
embraces the condition of sexual identity being as fundamentally
meaningless as the occurrence of chromosonic splits in your
DNA.
Porn,
of course, is not about sexuality, but about polyasexuality.
The image of porn is an inversion of representation, for
it does not 'stand in' for anything real. Instead, the porn
image works as a portal into which one stands. It's not
that the body in porn is your body, but that you are that
body. Like a slug, you merge with 'your porn body' because
porn resonates with your polyasexual potential.
Following
this proposition through to its most uncomfortable conclusion,
one is faced with having to accept the dissolution of all
that is deemed 'pornographic' in difference to all that
is deemed 'erotic'. The separation of the two reflects nothing
more than mere cultural mores and taste. Conversely, there
is nothing radical in any sexual practice held as being
subversive. To claim anything for either side is to subscribe
to a phantom binary which is unfelt in the penumbra of polyasexuality.
Codes of representation based around binaries of porn/eros
are therefore useless. However, the mechanics of mirage-making
known as 'the cinema' becomes extremely useful as a reservoir
from which springs an uncontrolled stream of polyasexual
triggers and stimulants.
A
frighteningly effective example of this is the porn subgenre
of bukkake 2. Essentially the amassed ejaculation over a
single face and body, bukkake 's hyper explosion of what
is otherwise the solitary event of the cum-shot makes it
the heavy metal of hetero porn. Bukkake is but one of many
streams which achieve the heightened state of bodily abstraction,
psychological multi-tasking and procedural fetishization
which drive porn's imagination and narration. Its excessiveness
is its raison d'etre, and as such focusses it sharply on
its polyasexuality. The 'star' of both hetero and gay bukkake
narratives is the body cum-upon which in turn symbolizes
the extremes to which one can be fucked by anything.
Bukkake
can anthropologically be perceived as an ancient Asiatic
ritualistic schism which has transferred itself into modern
social practice, but such an operation of explication offers
slight orientation toward its characteristic impulse. Sex
- The Annabelle Chong Story grants a non-porn audience a
glimpse of the industry which now thrives on Olympian fuck
fests, Herculian donganzas and Amazonian mammary explosions.
But Sex rides a Orpah-esque hysteria of self-revelation
which attempts to compete with the bodily feats of Annabelle
Chong's corpus. The point is that porn has throughout the
90s become a spectacular arena where sexuality and polyasexuality
compete in a gory gladitorial arena of bodily action.
If
this is what porn has become, then cinema cannot be unaffected.
Final Fantasy is the best example of this porn-afflicted
cinema. Final Fantasy realizes the submerged pornographic
impulse of Hollywood's fetishization of the human form by
creating a visual narrative realm inhabited not by humans
but by sex dolls. All the characters smell like vinyl, move
like automatic pole dancers, and sound like phone sex. The
strangeness of the film is neither its failed nor successful
'revolution in digital image making', but the base tactility
of its mock flesh and flock hair. Like coming home and finding
your mother wrapped in cling-wrap and your father wearing
pancake, the skin of the recognizable suddenly becomes an
epidermal dimension of otherness. Who these people are instantly
becomes meaningless, because they absolutely are who they
are not.
Final
Fantasy's distinctive aura comes from its sex-doll momentum
and its mannequinned surface. Its astounding budget, its
desperate Americanization, its mythological obviousness,
its gameplay origins, its Japanese cunning are all coindicental
indices of its appearance as a pseudo-cinematic form. Neither
cinema nor 'acinema' - nor the effect of virtuality (which
would be like bukkake with no cum) - Final Fantasy is birthed
in a realm free of those binaries. If cinema is predicated
upon one's identification with character (which it isn't),
Final Fantasy is mobilized by one's polyasexual attraction
to the film's mock veneer. As animation, it realizes the
prime motive of polyasexuality: it moves, so fuck it.
Philip
Brophy: 20 minutes, Qantas Terminal, Gate 3, Sydney October
20th 2002