transgression

So, we're in the midst of finals week already, and I've just finished half of my exam for Fiction Workshop. It's a two question take-home, and really not bad as exams go; I'll do the other half tomorrow and I should still have plenty of time to study for my other two exams. But anyway, the question I've just finished was about the role of transgressive behavior in two of the books we've read for class, and that got me wondering about some things.

The first part I wrote was about Trash, a collection of short stories by Dorothy Allison, which is, in short, probably not a book you'd want to discuss with your grandmother. (At least, not mine.) I made the point in my response that the transgressive elements in the book are not gratuitous displays of "vulgarity for vulgarity's sake" because they help to emphasize the underlying themes of love and betrayal and all that jazz, but I'm not sure if I entirely agree with that. I mean, to some extent, I do, and don't get me wrong, I really loved the book. But I definitely felt like at least a few times when I was reading the book,there were places where it seemed like yes, some parts were just a bit over the top, unnecessary to any thematic development, put in simply because the author was on a roll with the swearing and explicit scenes and couldn't quite figure out where to stop. I didn't discuss these in my paper, because a) I couldn't find any examples offhand, b) it's already the required length, and c) I'm tired.

But anyway, this brought me back to wondering about the second story I turned in today as part of my final portfolio for that class. It's certainly the most R-rated thing I've ever written, complete with my first use of the f-bomb in something I'm turning in for class, and its very own sex scene (le gasp!). I was back and forth on whether or not to put that particular scene in for a long time; it was part of the story in my head, but I feel like I could argue equally as well for its exclusion as for its inclusion on a thematic basis. I argued it over in my head so much that any instincts I may have initially had on the matter were long since trampled under reasoning and justifications in both directions. And I never got up the guts to turn in any draft with that scene in it for critique in class, so I didn't have anybody else's input on whether it should stay or go either. I ended up leaving it in, because as I said, it was part of the story in my head, and I had taken some time in writing it too, so I felt like there must have been something there, at least to begin with. But now I'm wondering where exactly is the line between honest storytelling and gratuitous "honesty" in this area? And how does one know the difference? I'm afraid my critical eye is still a little foggy with self-censorship. But I'm definitely better about that than I was at the beginning of term, so that's something, anyway.