Lit poetry: Porn vs. the erotic

[Angeline]

I think you misunderstood what I (and Ballard) said. He didn't use the word "exploit" in the way it is so often used, as if pornography was a form of exploitation of women, or as if the actors were being exploited by the producers. That's bullshit. What he said was that pornography itself - not the industry - deals with the way people exploit each other. A vignette where two strangers meet and fuck - it deals with how they ruthlessly exploit each other for their own sexual gain. No other literary genre is that honest.


Again, you're confusing the porn-producing industry for pornography itself as an art form. "How we exploit each other financially" isn't a form of fiction. It isn't literature. But compare pornography-the-literary-genre with its peers: romance novel, political thrillers, murder mysteries, essay, etc. No literary genre has a chance, when compared to the potential of pornography as a political tool. None of them have the sheer shock capability, the impact. Done right, used right, sex is the best way there is to force you to "to face the truth about our western lifestyle", as you put it. If you want to write a novel about how we exploit the third world, no other genre will be as big a kick-in-the-teeth as pornography can be. That's why pornography has become so prevalent amongst the most respected and progressive authors of our time. It can be a very powerful tool, and they're understanding that.

I'm not saying that all pornography does that, of course. Most is crap - as literature. But it has the potential to be much more.

Erotica doesn't have a prayer against that. With more or less artistic value, more or less poetics, more or less metaphor or imagery, its ultimate goal is sex, and it cannot escape that. Its goal is to distract.

Yes, but couldn't you write pornographic romance or mystery or whatever the genre is? And--if I understand you correctly--I don't think one needs to see erotic and pornographic writings as being in competition with one another or even as points on a scale to an ultimate shock value. Either of them could be political or not or an end in itself. You probably agree with that though. I still say that the choice of which way to spin a write has more to do with the intention of the writer and the perception of the reader--it's a personal thing. I do agree though that much "erotica" could be rewritten in a more "pornographic" voice if the writer is feeling free enough or willing enough to do so.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

I offer Wangui Waithira by jd4george

That's a perfect example.

 

[bogusbrig]

No literary genre has a chance, when compared to the potential of pornography as a political tool. None of them have the sheer shock capability, the impact. Done right, used right, sex is the best way there is to force you to "to face the truth about our western lifestyle", as you put it. If you want to write a novel about how we exploit the third world, no other genre will be as big a kick-in-the-teeth as pornography can be
.

I don't find pornography that shocking and have yet to read any shocking pornography but maybe that is just me.

As for the poem Champagne has put a link to, yes its disturbing but you could equally put a gun to the childs head and blow its brains out. Equally disturbing or more disturbing? Either way it happens.

The point is though that the child can be taken advantage of because of poverty. The pornographic content is a symptom of the childs world, that is more disturbiing than the pornography itself.

 

[champagne1982]

I don't find pornography that shocking and have yet to read any shocking pornography but maybe that is just me.

As for the poem Champagne has put a link to, yes its disturbing but you could equally put a gun to the childs head and blow its brains out. Equally disturbing or more disturbing? Either way it happens.

That kind of snuff writing is in the same genre as pornography. In fact, I think the assassination you describe is more deeply pornographic than the inferred sexual abuse of the child in Wangui Waithira. I don't believe pornography needs sex to be pornographic at all.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Yes, but couldn't you write pornographic romance or mystery or whatever the genre is?

Of course. There are no pure genres.

And--if I understand you correctly--I don't think one needs to see erotic and pornographic writings as being in competition with one another or even as points on a scale to an ultimate shock value. Either of them could be political or not or an end in itself. You probably agree with that though.

No, don't think Erotica and Pornography are in competition in any way. But I maintain that because the sex is at the surface, Pornography has a reach and a potential to be used as a "serious" literary tool far greater than Erotica. It's obvious that you can write erotica and give it a political spin, tell a cautionary tale, but by design, a significant part of the piece's energy and momentum will be diverted and channelled to the sensual arousal instead. Not that's anything wrong with that, but it is what it is.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

I don't find pornography that shocking and have yet to read any shocking pornography but maybe that is just me.

- Crash
- American Psycho
- Glamorama
- Porno

 

[Lauren Hynde]

I don't believe pornography needs sex to be pornographic at all.

Precisely.

 

[bogusbrig]

That kind of snuff writing is in the same genre as pornography. In fact, I think the assassination you describe is more deeply pornographic than the inferred sexual abuse of the child in Wangui Waithira. I don't believe pornography needs sex to be pornographic at all.

The real pornogrphy in such episodes is that we can sit around and discuss it knowing these things really happen in our name.

Whether such pornography is shocking I suppose, depends on what you believe the motive of the writer is. Most pornography I have read gives me the impression it is the author getting off on his/her own kink and is vying to indulge the reader's base instincts. Nothing wrong with that in itself. However, when it comes to child porn or such violent porn, if I can't suspend belief and believe the author is enlightening me about injustice or the human contidion, then I just have disdain for the author. I suppose its all about context. However I still don't see pornography as the most political of all genres.

 

[bogusbrig]

Just a thought.

What if the reader is just getting off on the pornography he or she is reading and not being enlightened to the injustice or facet of the human condition the author is trying to illustrate, where does that leave the politics?

Does that make the author a co-conspirator and a pornographer because his/her audience is just a consumer of pornography?

 

[bogusbrig]

- Crash
- American Psycho
- Glamorama
- Porno

The only thing each book has in common (I have not read Glamorama) is that they are about as interesting as reading a telephone directory. Yes there was shock value in them but that was lost because the prose I found pedestrian. Like all fiction, it's not the idea that counts but the quality of writing.

But such personal sexual politics (I assume that is what the authors were trying to get at) is really a western indulgence. Nothing wrong with a little indulgence, I'm quite partial to it myself but to elevate it beyond its worth is just decadence. I don't mind a little decadence either but let's be honest about it.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

The only thing each book has in common (I have not read Glamorama) is that they are about as interesting as reading a telephone directory. Yes there was shock value in them but that was lost because the prose I found pedestrian. Like all fiction, it's not the idea that counts but the quality of writing.

Many, many people would consider any one of those four books as amongst the best ever written, so that's just a matter of your opinion.

 

[bogusbrig]

Many, many people would consider any one of those four books as amongst the best ever written, so that's just a matter of your opinion.

Enjoyable to have a duel with you.

I unintentionally played a little dirty because I was editing my post while you was replying to it.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Just a thought.

What if the reader is just getting off on the pornography he or she is reading and not being enlightened to the injustice or facet of the human condition the author is trying to illustrate, where does that leave the politics?

Does that make the author a co-conspirator and a pornographer because his/her audience is just a consumer of pornography?

You're asking if that makes the author of the pornography a pornographer? No. That was already a given...

 

[bogusbrig]

You're asking if that makes the author of the pornography a pornographer? No. That was already a given...

Then there is no intention other than to shock or indulge ones base instincts? Hardly an art form if it lacks intention beyond that. It's like me flashing my assets at a passing woman just to shock her and pleading mitigating circumstances because what I am doing is a powerful political gesture.

 

[Angeline]

Precisely.

I just realized that you are defining pornography broadly, and now everything you are saying makes perfect sense to me. The power and urgency of pornography is what has literary potential. Isn't that what you mean, Ms. Hynde?

I love it when I understand you. It makes me feel smart.

 

[champagne1982]

<snip> It makes me feel smart.

Pfffft... You are smart.

 

[Angeline]

Pfffft... You are smart.

Yeah and ty, so are you but Lauren is well scary smart. She has a sponge brain. (Lauren, that's a compliment, baby.)

 

[champagne1982]

Sponge Brain Hynde Pants

 

[Angeline]

Sponge Brain Hynde Pants

hahahahaha

it's an av in the making.

(don't shoot, Lauren!)

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Then there is no intention other than to shock or indulge ones base instincts? Hardly an art form if it lacks intention beyond that. It's like me flashing my assets at a passing woman just to shock her and pleading mitigating circumstances because what I am doing is a powerful political gesture.

That doesn't even make any sense, does it? You're accusing a person who produces pornography (whether or not that pornography has merits far beyond those of a wank) of being a pornographer, as if that wasn't a given from the very start. Newsflash: If you write pornography, you're a pornographer.

Or are you giving the word "pornographer" a connotation that applies only to the sleaziest wank material with no redeeming value? That would be a rather salaciousness-indulging puritanical view, coming from you.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

hahahahaha

it's an av in the making.

(don't shoot, Lauren!)

I won't.

 

[champagne1982]

hahahaha... May all your spores be brainy! Love that AV.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

hahahaha... May all your spores be brainy! Love that AV.

Thank you!

 

[bogusbrig]

That doesn't even make any sense, does it? You're accusing a person who produces pornography (whether or not that pornography has merits far beyond those of a wank) of being a pornographer, as if that wasn't a given from the very start. Newsflash: If you write pornography, you're a pornographer.

Or are you giving the word "pornographer" a connotation that applies only to the sleaziest wank material with no redeeming value? That would be a rather saliciousness-indulging puritanical view, coming from you.

Are you saying pornography isn't wank material? I thought that was the whole point of pornography. You said pornography was the most powerful political form. To say that you must believe the intention of the writer goes beyond his/her reader merely wanking over their creation. Its a matter of intention.

For example. Manet's painting Olympia, which on the face of it was every bit as pornographic as the paintings of his contemporaries but he applied a context to his subject that confronted the hypocrisy of contemporary bourgeios society. He had political intent which raised his work above the mere pornographic, where the paintings of his contemporaries were painted purely to titilate. To the culturally educated the painting was aimed at, it was obvious he was shocking them to make a point which was reason for the indignant reaction to it. Context and intention set it apart and why I would not call him a pornographer. If you was a contemporary who was honest with themself about the hypocrisy in society it was not shocking but truthful. However, if you was so inclined you could just view it as pornography and who is to stop you.

 

[bogusbrig]

I've just shot myself. On one level I find myself agreeing with you. But the artist/writer has to use pornography with an intent to expose, enlighten, provoke or educate.

However to make a career of pornography as though every work has this intent I would find highly dubious. Going back to my previous post about Manet's Olympia. One Olympia can shock, two seems to be stretching a point, three seems the intention is to paint porn.