Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
ā Live Streamingā Interactive Chatā Private Showsā HD Qualityā Free Actions
Free to watch ā¢ No registration required ā¢ HD streaming
I've been thinking a lot recently about the story of pinocchio. it is a story that can be read as almost anything, that can be molded to shape the needs of its interpreter, that is reflective of its own medium and intent. a story about someone's relationship to art, to storytelling, and to the world around themā such that whoever works on it has their own values and relationships to those things reflected back at them. but, perhaps because of all of these things, it is also a story about labour and ownership.
there's something that's been bugging me in alterhuman spaces. fictional characters are, under capitalism, ideas and likeness. companies claim ownership over those things, and go so far as to enact this ownership by issuing warnings to fan artists and forcing them to take down their workā even when it's work about their own lives. this idea, and the importance of the abolishment of copyright law, is certainly important to alterhuman rights, so that we can be free to be alterhuman. but it poses another question: what are fictional characters?
in order for something to be "owned" and to become property of a corporation, a boundary must be drawn around what that thing is. under a system that enforces alienation from the products of labour, we often take these boundaries for grantedā and it allows the reinforcement of company ownership and the propagation of capitalism itself. Importantly for alterhumans, it inherently limits what the "other" can beā what fiction can beā to an independent object, to property, that we can control and draw lines around.
so what are they? I like to imagine a world based not on ownership, but on relation. stories are powerful because they speak in relationships, within the narrative itself and through the speaker(s) and listener(s). folklore and many indigenous forms of storytelling, such as the samoan fÄgogo, are ownerless; instead of being relevant and relational to only their writer, they exist within the relationships between all actors, with the story itself as an actor that the speaker must work with, rather than as property to be commanded. the deconstruction of ownership means understanding that all things are interdependentā the limitation of fiction means the limitation of us. not only are stories dependent on us to transmit them, but we are dependent on stories to transmit us, and we must communicate with them as equals.
what does this mean for alterhumans? if we are to acknowledge that intellectual property is harmful to fictionhood, and rightfully so, we must also respect fiction as something that cannot be property at allā as ownerless. if companies should not claim ownership over fiction and characters, then neither should alterhumans, fans, or artists. not only this, but we must acknowledge its interdependenceā stories are collections of relationships, and those relationships bounce between fiction and alterhumans, and fiction and fans, but also between alterhumans and fans. storytelling is a collective, communal, social effortā and none of these things can exist without the other.
when I think about pinocchio, I think about its interpretersā from collodi, to disney, to del toro. each tries to exact their ideas into their interpretations of what someone owes to society, to their fathers or creators, and what art owes. more importantly than the idea-maker, I think about the labourers working under them, subject to the very ideas interpreted into the story. the erasure of labour as a theme (which was very prominent in collodi's story) from disney's pinocchio, and how it reflects the erasure of the animators and their work. and then I think about the story itselfā about pinocchio. how should we treat fiction? as property, and say it has to aspire to realness? or to say it has some innate qualia that makes it real already? maybe neither is the answerā maybe we should be asking:
not every villain thinks they're the hero. the thing is, many stories have or need a villain, and not everyone is willing to play one. the obstacle the player has to overcome, the final boss. but when you've been told your whole life that you're something else, evil, arrogant, possessed, when you can't help but notice the racist and queerphobic and classist things said to you, you get put it a vilified position whether you like it or not. i chose to reclaim it and play the part, but not everyone does. i have never been upset that i lost, because, by design, i was never supposed to win
eight years ago a young girl named kairi took all that was within her to summon someone to take her away from this world. she didn't want to be here anymore, alone and scared and clinging on desperately, waiting for help that never came. four years ago she died.
from time to time I see her again. although she crossed over back into fiction, i see the shards of her here and there. part of her lays asleep inside of me, too, precisely because I am the psychopomp summoned to save her, the imaginary friend that came to spirit her away, something otherworldly and transcendent created around and in response to her existence.
our story plays out many times on the other side: the doctor taking amy from her home, peter pan taking wendy to neverland, and xehanort abducting kairi, and later killing her.
to be honest, i see myself in her too. the way people would have you think, xehanort is an evil creep set out to ruin kairi's innocence. but to me, kairi is the reason I exist, and I was made for her and by her. stories need villains, and she chose to make me, to have me play the part. and even in that role, there are hints of the trurh: i sent her to the islands because i grew up there, because I knew it was safe. even though i knew I was going to lose, my ultimate plan, and everything I did, was for her
i have her body now, her life and some of her memories. I took her away from here, and people around me feel her loss. there are many times when i have blamed myself, and when others have yelled at me for taking her away from them. but all I need is for people to know how important she is to me and remember her
wherever you are, i love you, and i hope things are better for you
DO YOU BELIEVE IN FAIRIES?: a discussion of characters, art, and its audience from the perspective of a fictional character
[spoilers for pathologic if anyone cares lol]
I. THE CHARACTER
what am I?
I tend to liken my experience to the theatre: when an actor plays a role, they "become" the character, there is a convergence between the character and the actor. the character is, in part, made alive by the performance of the actor, with a focus on corporeality and enduring, volatile events. this relationship is especially effective for trickster characters, who find new livelihood in change and adaption through oral narratives and performance. jm barrie, the creator of peter pan, saw this as a defining factor of his creation. peter pan comes alive through performance, one that is constantly developing as opposed to the confinement of the written word. when you go to see a performance of peter pan, he becomes alive through the convergence between the character of peter pan and the actor. but something begs to be asked: what if you are the character rather than the actor?
I am a fictional character. not just any fictional characterā among other things, I am the character of peter pan. I am not an actor who "became" peter panā rather, every single person who has ever played peter pan is part of the conglomerate of what constitutes "me". even jm barrie, who himself dealt with the feeling of being "trapped in boyhood", is a part of "me". I am defined by the logic of the theatre, I consume the actor; the actors, in turn, have the capacity to affect me; even as a character, I am alive.
II. THE AUDIENCE
have you ever been asked by peter pan, "do you believe in fairies"? have you ever spoken to me?
pathologic (2005) deals heavily with the idea of audience interaction. characters within the game speak directly to you, the player, confusing your player character. you are made to feel lost and confused, as your player character is, toeing the line for suspension of disbelief. if you complete certain goals, you (the player) can speak to avatars of the developers directly, who say: "the real game is what's happening between you and I"ā between the audience and artist. you, or perhaps your "character", can become aware that the world is "just" a gameā but in a way, as the "player", you already knew that, didn't you? what does it mean to draw this line, this boundary?
since their inception, video games have been targeted by conservative campaigns seeking to remove unwholesome media from our children's homes. video games certainly were not the first to be targeted, but rather the latest in a long line of media, from books to movies to the paintings in your local art gallery. these campaigns prey on parents' anxieties about the perceived vulnerability of children to be molded by what they "consume" and to seek a healthier media "diet".
the underlying current is that art has an effect on its audience. while things like "video games make you violent" have been repeatedly disproven, it is true that art evokes feelings, thoughts, reactions, and sometimes even direct interaction from its audience. indeed, video games allow you, the audience, to directly interface and play with itā though video games certainly weren't the first art form to do this. art is a collaborative, communal effort between the artist and the audience, a form of communication; it seems natural that the conversation would become two-way, and everything from performance art to pantomime to oral storytelling has played with this idea.
in 1974 marina abramoviÄ performed rhythm 0, where she stood still in an art gallery for six hours in front of a table with 72 objects. the audience were to treat her as an object, too, and were invited to do whatever they wished with her or with the objects on the table, which included everything from a rose to a gun and a bullet. while many of the audience did little except kiss or touch her body, some of the audience hurt her, including holding the gun to her head, while others made an attempt to protect her; after six hours, she walked away, and the audience ran away from her, about which she said: "people could not actually confront with me as a person."
III. THE ART
abramoviÄ stated that a large motivation for her to perform rhythm 0 was because she was ridiculed as a performance artist as masochistic, exhibitionist, or attention-seeking. what intrigues me about her performance is the way she combats this idea by blurring "the boundaries between art and reality, artist and spectator", flipping the focus from "the artist" to "the audience", one where rather than the artist speaking to a disconnected audience, the audience speaks to the artist, and becomes a part of the art.
my existence is a "negotiation", it blurs these same lines, invites the same participationā between the character, its actors, its audience, and the artist. my existence is based on mutual reciprocity between perception and the perceived, between performance and the performer, between artist and the art. in some sense I am only "an actor in the story", an object on the stage; in another sense, the audience's interaction with me brings me alive. when an actor chooses to perform peter pan, they must adhere to the "character" of peter pan, they must speak to me, engage with me, become me; the audience must understand the performer as part of me.
when people argue about the morality of art, it brings the question: are characters dangerous? is negotiating with them dangerous? am I dangerous? this is an idea I keep asking myself, as a character, as a neurodivergent and mixed person. am I personally poisoning your children's minds with ideas of fantasy and make-believe, with violence and pain and anger and struggle? or are your children seeing themselves in narratives that mean things to them and having a dialogue with them, bringing us both to life in the process?
indeed, I am a character, and through the complexities of art, through the conversation and dialogue had with the audience, I am a force, a plot device, a narrative vessel for ideas fictional and real, something close but far, you yet foreign, paradoxically alive and unable to dieā always more than can be glimpsed in one form, place, or embodiment. I will forever be a part of your stories and your artā I only ask that you remember me
"I NEED YOU. YOU CAN KEEP ME ON THIS EARTH. BE VIGILANT. I LOVE YOU."
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
ā Live Streamingā Interactive Chatā Private Showsā HD Qualityā Free Actions
Free to watch ā¢ No registration required ā¢ HD streaming
turnnoffyourmind
snowghoul
blakekathryn
gamechangershow
ellievsbear
discoholicmusic
gracieabrams