After three editions (On Compartmentalization, Where Are You?, That's Too Sexy?), my little series about spanking porn was supposed to be over. But doclash raised another interesting aspect in one of his recent comments which I would like to share with you.
In his comment doclash wrote: If I may now introduce another topic regarding a matter which I can find distracting (and detracting) in film scenes – anachronism. I find props which simply do not fit the period to be irritating. For example, pieces of 1960s to 1990s electronic equipment in scenes set in the early 1940s, one of the best examples being miniaturised electric shock torture devices which would simply not be possible with the electronics of the time. Also, to be believable, school scenes really need to be set in the 1950s, 1960s or earlier. That means no computers, no modern wall or desk phones, no cordless phones, certainly no mobile phones and no modern studded BDSM spanking paddles and similar. Also, the dramatis personae and terminology need to be appropriate for the time, i.e. female teachers would not wear trousers, pupils would not be called students and would not wear jeans, staff would address each other formally, not by first names, male staff (except possibly art teachers) would have short hair and be clean shaven (or have a neat moustache or short, neat beard at most), male pupils would also have short haircuts (sorry Pandora!) and female pupils would not sport modern tattoos or body piercings. Does anyone else have views on the issue of anachronism?
Donpascual picked up the topic and wrote: Anachronism is a point well worth discussing. I think, it is largely a problem of tight budgets. Producers grind out videos at top speed and minimal costs, to hell with quality and such things as timelines, historical correctness, and appropriate props. The only producer I know, who is careful to get every detail just right, down to the enema jar, is Lupus of course. Perhaps, they also profited from the late entry into the modern western world. They simply have all the old props, which we have thrown away decades ago. It's also the love to detail of true film makers which these Czech kinksters have in abundance. Niki Flynn wrote about it in her book "Dancing with Wolves".
I thought about doclash's and Donpascual's comments and my reactions concerning anachronism in spanking porn. Then I wrote the following replies. To doclash: I guess there are many people who prefer scenarios to be as historically correct as possible. Maybe I'm a bit lucky here, in that I am not so much interested in history to know exactly how historically appropriate clothes etc. looked like, so small mistakes don't bother me that easily. And I can live quite well with fictional scenarios, for example a British school that still practises CP today. I have to admit that I'm often not too comfortable with historical scenarios, anyway, because they can be "too real" for my taste. But I can relate to your observation that props which don't fit can be irritating. For example, in the "Dojo Discipline" series of Spanking Central, the Japanese word "sensei" is used to address the trainer/teacher, but there is a Korean flag hanging on the wall. I already found that a bit irritating, though it didn't keep me from enjoying the scene. And to Donpascual: I think you are right about tight budgets. Even Lupus seem to invest less time and money per video nowadays...
I think doclash and Donpascual have raised an interesting topic! That's why I would like to pass it on to our readers, and hear about your thoughts and opinions about anachronism. Is it important for you that the props fit the period of a spanking film? Do anachronisms in spanking porn tend to irritate you? Is there a difference depending on how familiar you are with a certain period and / or scenario? How about private play? If you have any thoughts on the topic, you are warmly invited to share them in a comment!
In his comment doclash wrote: If I may now introduce another topic regarding a matter which I can find distracting (and detracting) in film scenes – anachronism. I find props which simply do not fit the period to be irritating. For example, pieces of 1960s to 1990s electronic equipment in scenes set in the early 1940s, one of the best examples being miniaturised electric shock torture devices which would simply not be possible with the electronics of the time. Also, to be believable, school scenes really need to be set in the 1950s, 1960s or earlier. That means no computers, no modern wall or desk phones, no cordless phones, certainly no mobile phones and no modern studded BDSM spanking paddles and similar. Also, the dramatis personae and terminology need to be appropriate for the time, i.e. female teachers would not wear trousers, pupils would not be called students and would not wear jeans, staff would address each other formally, not by first names, male staff (except possibly art teachers) would have short hair and be clean shaven (or have a neat moustache or short, neat beard at most), male pupils would also have short haircuts (sorry Pandora!) and female pupils would not sport modern tattoos or body piercings. Does anyone else have views on the issue of anachronism?
Donpascual picked up the topic and wrote: Anachronism is a point well worth discussing. I think, it is largely a problem of tight budgets. Producers grind out videos at top speed and minimal costs, to hell with quality and such things as timelines, historical correctness, and appropriate props. The only producer I know, who is careful to get every detail just right, down to the enema jar, is Lupus of course. Perhaps, they also profited from the late entry into the modern western world. They simply have all the old props, which we have thrown away decades ago. It's also the love to detail of true film makers which these Czech kinksters have in abundance. Niki Flynn wrote about it in her book "Dancing with Wolves".
I thought about doclash's and Donpascual's comments and my reactions concerning anachronism in spanking porn. Then I wrote the following replies. To doclash: I guess there are many people who prefer scenarios to be as historically correct as possible. Maybe I'm a bit lucky here, in that I am not so much interested in history to know exactly how historically appropriate clothes etc. looked like, so small mistakes don't bother me that easily. And I can live quite well with fictional scenarios, for example a British school that still practises CP today. I have to admit that I'm often not too comfortable with historical scenarios, anyway, because they can be "too real" for my taste. But I can relate to your observation that props which don't fit can be irritating. For example, in the "Dojo Discipline" series of Spanking Central, the Japanese word "sensei" is used to address the trainer/teacher, but there is a Korean flag hanging on the wall. I already found that a bit irritating, though it didn't keep me from enjoying the scene. And to Donpascual: I think you are right about tight budgets. Even Lupus seem to invest less time and money per video nowadays...
I think doclash and Donpascual have raised an interesting topic! That's why I would like to pass it on to our readers, and hear about your thoughts and opinions about anachronism. Is it important for you that the props fit the period of a spanking film? Do anachronisms in spanking porn tend to irritate you? Is there a difference depending on how familiar you are with a certain period and / or scenario? How about private play? If you have any thoughts on the topic, you are warmly invited to share them in a comment!
(Picture courtesy of Her First Punishment. The video is called "Birching of Serf Girls". Note that serfdom was abolished in Russia in 1861. Also note the guy's Adidas trousers!)
17 comments:
Obviously I'm biased because I start with my available cast and then do what I can with them, but I definitely consider there to be two broad genres of school scenes: authentic historical scenes replicating a time when CP was genuinely practised, and fantasy/alternate reality school scenes, when we can picture mobile phones and modern students in a school or culture in which CP is still normal. The latter is the world in which most of the group roleplays I've taken part in happen, and it's a very natural one. It's also much easier to set films in for obvious reasons.
The first one has its advantages, and if I were to attempt it I would take that attempt very seriously. When I produce historical fiction I try to have a little anachronism as possible - earrings are taken off, wall plugs are hidden from shot, etc. If my M/M scene "The Prefect and the Fag" had been, as I originally envisaged it, a pre-war public school story contemporaneous with Roald Dahl's childhood, I would have sought to obtain authentic costumes and would have cast boys who looked the part. But that's out of my range for now, and personally I find the alternate reality version of the school scenario no less hot.
In general, though, I agree that if one is aiming to represent an actual historical period, one should try to be accurate. I just don't think that all school scenes are or should be innately historical!
What a fun subject. I worked with Spanking Epics, and they specialized in period pieces. Bethany was very thorough about getting authentic costumes and props, and scripting the dialogue with timely verbiage.
And yet, even with the most thorough preparation, mistakes happen. In Schoolmaster's Revenge, which took place in 1912, Keith Jones forgot to remove his wristwatch and it wasn't discovered until later. They Photoshopped it out of the pictures, but it remained in the film.
And when I was dressed as a Puritan, I wore black thigh-high stockings... with lace tops. I highly doubt Puritans wore those. (But I couldn't find those plain woolen stockings!)
I do think accuracy and authenticity are important. A few little details can slip by, but overall, a period piece needs to go the extra mile to be believable.
I certainly enjoy historical scenes and value highly any attempts to create authenticity insofar costumes and locations are concerned. For the action itself: I am not quite sure what severity could be be considered authentic, for example in the classic victorian maid scene, but I don't really want to see people getting thrashed until they are bleeding. So, I admit that a movie may skip a bit of authenticity if it suits my personal taste.
Of course, I also see the problems with a small budget, so I don't expect a spanking movie to be an epic in the league with "Lord of the Rings" (also it would certainly be interesting what Pandora would do with such a budget).
I am also not actively spotting for mistakes, anachronisms and continuity errors. It seems that some people make a sport of it but I consider myself quite benevolent. Basically, I really want to enjoy a movie if it seems that the producer invested honest effort and creativity.
But stuff like modern sports wear in a historical setting is like pulling the emergency break on my train to spanking phantasy land. I think this is some kind of insult towards the viewer as if he was too stupid or indifferent to be bothered by such a blatant anachronism.
Very interesting topic Kaelah which I have brought to the attention of 'Mr Bishop' who is a well known pedant and writer. He is a Theatre critic and not a TV programme or film goes by without him saying something like "they didn't use that word in the early part of the 1900's"! He does like Downton Abbey on TV though and has read all of Julian Fellowes books so he thinks the details are spot in that.
I always pay attention to detail and do my research in my own work, because how else can I feel totally in character? If I don't feel transported to the right place myself in every detail then and it is harder to make it believable for myself never mind anyone watching. Of course things start off in just an empty room and we have to use our imaginations, but in spanking films, although I think people are only really interested in the actual spanking action parts it is still important to have the setting or props right so that some viewers can relate to it if they were actually there themselves once. I never wear a box pleated gymslip without the right belt or a crisp cotton blouse freshly ironed and polished shoes, and no make up or jewellery of course...as for tattoos, I dont have any, and I doubt girls had them in 1960's schools anyway? :)
The other thing that would make a good blog subject is continuity in editing. How many films have you seen where the cutting has shown bottom stripes in one frame immediately followed by a blank canvas?! Producers often shoot over two days so it is important to consider if a film needs to be re-shot or continued the next morning etc....
@Emma Bishop
Ah, mentioning tatoos!! Now, that is the anachronism of all anachronisms!
Each time, I am seeing - what in German we call - an "Arschgeweih" in a period piece, my stomach starts churning!
Bad enough to see these barbaric disfigurements in a modern video, but in historical context, the producers should cut the wages for the model because of unprofessional appearance!
To avoid unnecessary replics: I am all for fair pay, of course.
But the bare back including bottom of a spanking model should be just that: white (or black) skin like a painter's canvas. In my opinion the spanker is cheated of the joy to create a genuine masterpiece without a "watermark" on the canvas. And the viewer pays for something he hasn't asked for.
It would be interesting to pursue that specific topic :-).
I agree, if it's a historical setting, then the approach should be to make it right, in all details.
I don't think school scenarios have to be historical though. There is lots of room for fictional scenarios which can play these days or in the future.
Let's face it we don't watch spanking films for the historical interest. As long as the producers have made an effort I can normally overlook the odd anachronism. I can even forgive the odd tattoo especially as some of my favourite spanking stars have them.
As a consumer I would like to say that I am happy to ignore the odd digital watch or whatever, if it is obvious that some effort has been made in trying to make the scenario as authentic as possible. Time and money are always going to be a factor and here at the viewing end that has to be taken into consideration. I do object when no real attempt has been made for historical fantasy.
On a side note, before the 1930's tattoos where common amongst the richer classes. king George V and VI as well as Winston Churchill's mother all sported ink. So, for example, in a Victorian scenario featuring an aristocratic spankee a tattoo would not be out of place.
On another side note, I learned recently (via a BBC Radio 4 documentary a few weeks ago) that there are large communities of people of Korean decent living in Japan. Although they suffered a lot of racism in the past, the Japanese authorities have, in the last 2 decades, been encouraging these groups to indulge in their Korean culture. This includes the showing of flags in homes, schools and other places during times of Korean feasts and holidays. So it is not uncommon to see Korean flags in Japan.
Prefectdt
From my point of view, if a CP scene is going to be set in the past, then everything should be as historically accurate as possible. Certainly, the dress should be contemporary with the period, and modern artefacts should be kept out of shot. Things like mobile phones showing up in 1950s or 1960s scenes are a distraction. I also believe the severity of the punishment – within reason – should reflect the historical setting.
I have no problem with CP films being set in the present, after all fiction is fiction, and any imaginative writer ought to be able to invent a pretext for the scenario.
On a historical point, it’s worth noting that corporal punishment remained legal in private fee-paying schools in the UK up until 1998.
The Adidas trousers are less jarring than the fact that he's holding a single switch and not a birch switch, as advertised! At least one might imagine that someone from the old Russia had three white stripes down his trouser leg.
I'm perfectly happy to give a pass to a video where the idea is to provide entertainment rather than present a historical piece. It depends on what the maker advertises.
But if they presume to give me something that is supposed to be historical then the more authentic they make it the more respect I have for them. If they are going to present something that is supposed to be a Victorian hiding of a maid, then I need to be convinced not just that the maid is in a Victorian setting but that the premise of her punishment fits within the discipline she could reasonable expect.
What means the most to me is that the video be internally consistent. And, as mentioned here, continuity counts for a lot. I don't want to see marks springing up in advance of the actual punishment being administered!
@ Pandora:
I absolutely agree with you about the difference between period pieces and fictional scenarios. And filming historically accurate period pieces is of course much more expensive than filming fictional pieces, and therefore not every producer can afford them.
@ Erica:
Even very expensive Hollywood movies always have small continuity errors or historical inaccuracies. The viewers have to live with them and I think most people can live with minor mistakes in spanking clips as well. Of course one should avoid bigger mistakes, but I think the wristwatch is a typical problem! I'm not sure whether I remember it correctly, but I think when Ludwig topped for Lupus, I took his wristwatch away from him at the set to make sure that he wouldn't accidentally be wearing it.
@ Fenris:
I guess for everyone there is a certain limit concerning suspension of disbelief! But like you I don't always want historical accuracy when it comes for example to the severity of a spanking. I am into naval scenarios but I don't want to watch anyone being whipped so harshly that the whole back is full of blood and permanent scars remain.
@ Emma:
It must be really hard for Mr Bishop to watch films! I have to admit I'm quite glad that I don't have the historical knowledge to spot all the small mistakes. It would surely be very distracting!
You are of course right, many viewers of spanking films are probably first and foremost interested in the action. But I think there is also a high percentage of viewers for whom the surrounding scenario is almost as important as the action itself. There even seem to be some for whom the scenario is actually more important than the action. So I think it's a good thing to give one's best when creating the setting, bringing the characters to life and editing the final film.
@ Donpascual:
Your comment has indeed raised a discussion, on Nimue's blog. I think you made a valid point concerning historical accuracy and tattoos but in my opinion your wording wasn't the best.
You are absolutely entitled to your own preferences, but if you don't like tattoos in general, the best thing to do in my opinion is not to watch videos with models who have them. In my opinion sporting a tattoo doesn't make a spanking model "unprofessional", and cutting the wages isn't appropriate, either.
What I think is a valid request, though, is to expect a professional producer who claims to produce a period piece that's close to the historical thing to either hire a model without a big tattoo above her bottom for such a scenario or to make the effort to cover it up. The latter seems to be easily possible, as Pandora and Adele stated in Nimue's thread.
@ Ursus:
I agree with you, there is definitely enough room for both, historical and fictional scenarios.
@ Simon:
Of course spanking films aren't big Hollywood productions and are mostly watched for their erotic appeal. But I would be very careful with “we” formulations. Like I wrote in my reply to Emma, in my opinion there are people for whom the surrounding scenario is even more important than the action. And I think for someone who is into historical scenarios, accuracy can indeed play a very important role. I'm not so much into historical settings, but I have to admit that vanilla films or series are often more erotic for me than spanking videos (despite of the lack of explicit action) because of the more complex scenarios and characters.
@ Spankedhortic:
Thanks for the historical information, Prefectdt!
I'm quite sure that King George V and VI as well as Winston Churchill's mother didn't sport a modern “Arschgeweih” (tramp stamp) tattoo, though. At least that would have looked quite funny! ;-)
Concerning that martial arts scene: The thing is that it was set in an American dojo with and American trainer. That's why I was irritated about the Japanese title in combination with the Korean flag. Korean's have their own martial arts with their own words for the different ranks (they weren't allowed to practise their own forms of martial arts during the Japanese occupation, but luckily the heritage survived). But as I already said, it was just something that irritated me for a moment but didn't spoil the scene for me.
@ Steve from Kent:
As I already wrote in my reply to Fenris, I am sometimes quite glad if the severity isn't 100 per cent historically accurate, especially when it comes to naval back whippings. But as you said, within reason the severity can of course reflect the historical setting as well, in addition to the props, the clothing and the like, and therefore make a scene more believable.
@ Rich Person:
I think you made a very valid point here: It always depends on what the producer advertises! That doesn't only go for historical accuracy but for everything else as well.
I think that commenters covered already very good angles and interpretations of the fantasy-vs.-reality conflict which is inherent in any production. However, I would like to add my observation on how, although it is ultimately all about fantasy, a very popular fetish gets a pass big time. I am talking about school CP scenarios. Tattoos, cell phones, modern props and wall plugs notwithstanding, is it only me, or does it matter that such classrooms are populated by pupils/students who are clearly mature women? No, I am not asking for teenagers to be brought in, that is not the point - however, talking about anachronism and mismatch, what would happen to the industry if such scenes suddenly stopped being produced because of the incongruence of 25+ year-olds with school uniforms and classroom settings?
Role and age play in private may be one thing, and it works for many. For me, however, school CP just doesn't fly in whole, although one must acknowledge the intrinsic appeal of the actresses therein. Even Lupus' Schoolmaster examples get a B at best, in spite of the lavish details otherwise.
Sorry about that. I thought that the dojo scene was set in Japan.
Prefectdt
@Kaelah
Blogs, as are forums, are a slippery ground to move on. Coming back into the middle of heated discussions after years of abstinence, I will have to learn that again.
My comment on tattoos was not intended at all to hurt feelings. If a woman is proud to wear one that is absolutely her privilege.
Using a vocabulary which was meant to appear exaggeratedly sarcastic, I obviously misjudged the adverse effects. I apology for that.
Otherwise, of course, I still consider a white back and a bottom without prior marks before the coming spanking important for my viewing pleasure.
@ Val:
The age factor is indeed a difficult one, when it comes to school scenarios. I think I usually imagine the characters to be young adults at the very end of their school days. In Germany pupils are often around twenty when they leave school, so with some suspension of disbelief that works out okay. Especially because, like you, I am happy to know that the actors and actresses are consenting adults and no real pupils.
@ Spankedhortic:
There is no need to be sorry for anything, Prefectdt! There is no explicit information about the country given in the clip, anyway. But the trainer and the student are both American and they talk English, except for the word sensei. That's why I assume that it is supposed to be an American dojo.
@ Donpascual:
Of course you are entitled to your own aesthetic preferences! And I know that your comment was only tongue-in-cheek. It's very tricky to know whether everyone understands a certain comment as being tongue-in-cheek or not. Ludwig loves tongue-in-cheek comments because they make discussions more lively and can be used to emphasize one's opinion. I usually stay away from this kind of exaggeration because I'm afraid that people might misunderstand it. I think it's a matter of personal preferences and style. And in case someone gets a tongue-in-cheek comment wrong there is always the possibility to clarify one's point of view in a follow-up comment.
And please-don´t forget pubic hair - I really dislike shaven models in historic settings when shaving was completely uncommon. Interesting to hear about the tatoos though- what kind did they have? Sailing ships and hearts with "mother" written over it?
Post a Comment