the_comfy_chair | Take Clothes Off As Directed by Helenish

Take Clothes Off As Directed by Helenish

helenish is NC-17, BDSM themed, and an unauthorized homage set in the alternate universe created by

xanthelj in General & Dr. Sheppard and Coming Home.

I read Helen's story both as a sly, clever reflection of male/female relations in Western society, and a look at the potential pitfalls of a society with an institutionalized BDSM lifestyle. And it's an interesting contrast to Xanthe's stories and style.

First off, I have to say I feel kind of cheeky posting about this, because I've only read parts of General and Dr. Sheppard, and I haven't yet decided whether or not to read Coming Home. I have some strong feelings about BDSM, and (of course) that colors how I read stories with that subject matter. I think BDSM in the bedroom is a kink, and I take a live and let live attitude toward kink. BDSM (and Domestic Discipline) as a lifestyle is something else, and it's something which for personal reasons makes me uncomfortable.

Having said all that, I think I read enough of General & Dr. Sheppard to get something of a feel for the writing, and I think it's an interesting contrast. Xanthe's writing feels lush and emotional, sweeping the reader along like a fictional Tchaikovsky. Helen's writing is more spare, quirky and at times almost uncomfortable, more like, say, Erik Satie. And I think these different styles suit the different stories very well. I can see these two styles/stories existing in the same universe, the lush, operatic story told of people who are happy and suited to their lives in this society, and the quirky, sadder story of people who don't quite fit and aren't quite as happy.

I found Helen's story to be very sad, the only hopeful part being that John had finally found in Rodney a partner who loved him and would treat him the way he wants/deserves to be treated. I'm not sure if it was Helen's intent, but I read this as John not really being a sub per se (nor Rodney being much of a top), but both of them forced into the roles by the rigid hierarchy of their society, and going along the best they could. I read it as John being the sort of person who wants to play BDSM games in the bedroom, not live it as a lifestyle, and the only reason he wasn't crushed by this society is because he's a stubborn, contrary bastard.

I was almost nauseated by the way Elizabeth so obviously and earnestly felt she was doing the best, right thing for John with her inappropriate 'discipline', when in actuality she was more of a hindrance, just one more thing to be ignored/overcome in John's attempts to be himself and to do his job. Because being routinely beaten, undermined and humiliated is just the downside of being a sub who's trying to do his chosen job. (And, of course, he wouldn't have these problems if he hadn't got above himself and stayed in his proper place.) It felt very realistic, and therefore very unsettling, to see just how easy it was to strip John of his dignity and humanity, and turn him into a second-class citizen, essentially a slave. And perhaps it's all the more unsettling because there are still people in the world who are slaves, and who are routinely treated in degrading, disrespectful ways, and they too have no choice but to suck it up and endure.

Although it's a bit of a slap in the face to overlay this dynamic on our society and see the sub=women angle, I think (I hope) things are not quite that bad for women anymore. At least not in first world Western societies. It's also good to remind myself that fantasy universes aside, most of the people living rigid BDSM lifestyles are doing so because they want to, not because they have no choice. Nevertheless, I think this story is going to stay with me for a long time.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Of course it is. It's appropriate anywhere. Why should I or anyone have to explain it? Some people are not going to like things. Is that so hard to accept? I don't like the sort of fic Xanthe writes. I can tell that without even reading it. It's not hurting anyone to say that. We're all adults, not babies.

Thanks for clarifying why I have the issues I do have with that story. If it is appropriate for others to dislike another work, then it should be appropriate for me to criticize people using someone else's story to do so about another story.

It's totally appropriate for you to dislike Helen's story. It's totally appropriate for anyone to like or dislike any or all of the stories referenced in this discussion. If people are are using the stories to criticize other people then that's another issue and nothing to do with this community or this discussion. We're here to talk about the stories, not criticize people or make assumptions about their motives.

As I said from the beginning, the story wasn't about feminism at all to me. I said it was to me about relationships. So far no one has taken me up on that.

I understand that you don't see feminism in Helen's story, but a lot of readers do, and they're finding it an interesting topic of discussion. However, I've seen thoughts about the relationship in several of the comments posted here.

I don't want to be condescending or give unwanted advice, but you might reply to some of those with your own thoughts on the relationship issues in order to spark discussion. Or post a comment with some details of your thoughts about the relationship. I've noticed that a lot of times people will only respond to one or two points in a comment/post that touches on several different things. If you make the comment only about what you want to discuss, then the replies are more likely to be related to that topic.

I am fine with others finding feminism where I don't. I did notice the discrepancy between how a sub was treated in Helen's story and how a top was treated. The big difference was I didn't find enough evidence in the story to convince me that was the point. I dismissed it because it seemed highly inappropriate to assign feminist issues about our society on a fictional D/s culture. It leads to all sorts of inappropriate responses because it was referring to another story in which it had nothing whatsoever to do with such a topic. I still don't understand the purpose in bringing that other story up in the first place. I concentrated on the relationship because that is how I related to the story since it in fact did bring up another story in which the relationship was the key issue.

I still don't understand the purpose in bringing that other story up in the first place.

I believe the other story was brought up because Helen's story was written in the universe created by Xanthe. If it hadn't been brought up in Helen's summary, people still would have made comparisons between the stories because it's the same universe. Nobody else in SGA has written a universe like that one, and Xanthe's stories are very well known. It's not like nobody would've recognized it if Helen hadn't said anything--in that case they would have been bitching about Helen riffing off Xanthe's creation without attribution or acknowledgement.

What I don't understand is why you keep bringing this up here again and again. Helen's summary and whether or not it was responsible for other people's criticism of Xanthe's stories has nothing to do with the stories themselves, which is what this discussion is supposed to be about.

The inappropriate responses has to do with how others view D/s. Are you now saying that I can't bring up the fact that when someone writes D/s in a story in such a way that allows for inappropriate responses?

I don't understand what you're trying to say.

Helen's story is not about D/s. It's a metaphor. An allegory. A parable. Its literal words are not what it's about. If you're looking for responses that have to do with the actual practice of D/s or with D/s as portrayed by Xanthe, I'm afraid you're going to find all the responses inappropriate, because the people talking about Helen's story are not talking about D/s.

So you are saying because I disagree with the notion that the story is an allegory about the way women were treated and in some cases are, therefore I'm the one giving the inappropriate response. Fair enough.

After reading dkwilliams' comment below, I have to retract my statement that people are not talking about D/s -- some indeed are.

I don't think disagreeing with the notion that the story is an allegory is inappropriate, no. But saying that people's comments about D/s are inappropriate when the people who do think it's an allegory are not actually talking about D/s is.

I think you are misunderstanding what I'm referring to. I was referring to the fact that as an allegory it inappropriately assigns false notions about D/s, whether that was the purpose or point of the author, I don't know.

People have taken this story to mean many things and some of the things they have taken the story to mean is in fact saying inappropriate things about a subculture. If that wasn't the author's intent, I feel better about that, but if it was meant to garner such inappropriate responses about a subculture, that is what I am taking issue with.

I never once said that people should only view it a certain way but plenty of people are saying that I should view it the way they do.

Okay, I think I understand you!

I was referring to the fact that as an allegory it inappropriately assigns false notions about D/s,

Is it possible that the false notions are there as a result of D/s as we know it being warped and changed (in Helen's story) as a result of becoming an institutionally mandated culture rather than an individual sexual/lifestyle choice?

What are the false notions that are bothering you?

The reason why I dismissed the notion that it was not an allegory was because the very idea that a sub would be viewed as less than was upsetting to me and why I moved on to the relationship in the story.

Sure I find feminist issues as appropriate to discuss in any topic, but closely binding it with negative notions about what it means to be in a D/s relationship was doing the very things everyone claims the story wasn't about- that it was supposed to show that women were treated badly and in some cases still are in a culture that denigrates women- it falsely assigns negative notions to being a sub.

Whether it was intentional or not, when saying that because the subs were inappropriately treated that therefore means the story is an allegory about how women were treated and in some cases still are, reflects badly on submissives. People keep saying but that isn't what the story was about. I don't know what the purpose of the story was, but it brought up negative notions of what it is to be submissive.

As I have said and will repeat, I didn't automatically think of women and their history in our society because I was thinking about relationships and how we relate to each other. The story to me was about how some people have difficulty relating to others for many reasons and Helen definitely did express that. That is what I keep saying is what I liked about the story, even if it was overwhelmingly sad and meant that being in a relationship takes work and communication.

I don't think it gives the wrong message about submissives at all, because I think people get this isn't actual real-life BDSM. I think most people here understand that BDSM in real life is a CHOICE. Consent is of paramount importance--even hardcore 24/7 BDSM lifestylers have to have some kind of negotiated consent, or else it's just abuse, rape, assault, etc. Flogging someone without their consent is--obviously--assault, in this universe.

In

helenish's world, there is no consent given, and it's just systematic abuse from society serving as an allegory for systematic abuse towards women, who also never gave their consent.

This is not the BDSM in the real world, it's a wholly different system. Regardless of whether you interpret it as a critique of BDSM in the real world or not, it is important to note that in the story John doesn't enjoy the sexual harassment, he doesn't enjoy the restrictions placed on his career, and this isn't consensual, it isn't a choice made of his own free will. As such, I think real-life consensual BDSM and this universe's BDSM aren't remotely the same thing even though they have the same name, because there's a big difference between flogging someone who wants it and flogging someone who doesn't--one is BDSM and the other is assault.

And yes, some people aren't understanding that this isn't how BDSM works in the real world, but whether that's the fault of the author or the fault of the reader is a whole different question. But I still think

helenish makes it very clear that it's not entirely consensual, and as such it's not that being a submissive is bad, but that systematic and nonconsensual oppression is bad, and I do think most people here get this.

Flogging someone without their consent is--obviously--assault, in this universe.

When I say "in this universe" I meant "in real life". Man, those discourse deictics.

Are you saying that Helen's story accurately reflects being a sub? To me the story can't be reflecting badly on submissives or bringing up negative notions of what it means to be submissive, because it really has nothing to do with what being a submissive is about.

I mean, I'm certainly not an expert on how one lives a 24/7 sub lifestyle, but I didn't see any indication that John was that kind of sub, nor did I see the cultural, institutionalized harrassment he was subjected to as anything like what people in the BDSM lifestyle do. Are there specific examples you find troubling, or is it the story's overall use of D/s as a backdrop? I think I understand where you're coming from, but it would be clearer if you gave some examples where you feel the story reflects badly on subs.

I agree with you about the real difficulties of working out relationships. Writing prickly, uncomfortable romance and relationships is one of Helen's strengths, I think.

I'm making an assumption here, and if I'm wrong, I apologize, but it seems like you feel very strongly about the accurate representation of BDSM and D/s, and if that's the case I do understand. It would be hard for me to see something I cared about warped the way Helen has warped BDSM in the service of her story, and think that people unfamiliar with the subject would read that story and think that's how it was.

I have let my emotions get the better of me but yes, that is what I was trying to express the entire time. Other issues certainly cropped up after reading some comments after reading but that is the gist of it.

I'm afraid you're going to find all the responses inappropriate, because the people talking about Helen's story are not talking about D/s.

Hmm, I'm afraid I'd have to disagree with this part of what you said, although not necessarily the rest (I see it as an allegory/parable, too). A number of comments have been about how this would be how a real BDSM universe would probably work, seeing as human beings tend to have to find someone to oppress\blame\denigrate. Which is unfortunately true. So as far as that goes, people *are* talking about aspects of BDSM like D/s. Of course, whether or not this is how a real BDSM universe would work out is speculative since maybe we'd all evolve differently if we'd been brought up in that kind of universe. ("A spanked society is a polite society", to paraphrase Lazarus Long?)

You're right. *wince* I think that Helen's story isn't about D/s, but some people are talking about D/s.

That's actually one of the things I found especially realistic and creepy about the story--the way D/s and BDSM was warped into a means of institutionalized oppression and bigotry, and just all around same old same old vile human behavior. It hits a little too close to home, you know?

Thank you, M, for managing your discussion so well in my absence--I'm a day sleeper and not always around when discussion is taking place. I appreciate your graceful handling of this thread.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Take Clothes Off As Directed by Helenish

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Another thought

Re: Another thought

no subject

no subject

no subject