Happy Sexy New Year!!
Thanks for making this an enjoyable first month of blogging. I have some exciting things planned for 2007:
1. Shopping for Porn at the Desert Industries
2. Book reviews: Mormon and Non-Mo Erotica
3. Porn versus Erotica Discussions
4. Religious Erotic Parodies
5. New Erotic Fiction
6. Erotic Poetry
7. Personal Essays on the Mormon Experience or Erotic Experience or Both
I love input and would like to hear any of your thoughts on where the 2007 is going to take us erotically or otherwise.
7 comments:
Well, it looks like 2007 will be a great year!!!
I look forward to all those things!!!
Regarding the porn vs. erotica question: It's too bad Punk Rock Lawyer deleted his blog before you showed up -- we had some interesting discussions on the subject.
Here's a quick overview of where we were at:
Some felt that the difference was that "erotica" is mostly stories (for women) whereas "porn" is mostly pictures (for men).
Personally I contend that they're just two words for the same thing, and the only difference is the connotation that expresses the speaker's moralizing/value judgement:
erotica: good
porn: bad
erotica: high-brow
porn: low-brow
erotica: stuff that turns me on
porn: stuff that turns other people on
;-)
c.l.
I'm playing just a little hooky before work and wanted to just give you a heads up on the Porn v. Erotica debate. I don't think it is a gender division, if that was the case this site would be Morm Porn, being the guy that I am.
I think it may be the Mormon preoccupation with opposites that seems to demand placing erotica and porn as antonyms. I see it as a spectrum created by the elasticity of the words. I've read bad erotica and viewed good porn. I've had erotica that didn't turn me on and porn that did. I've read low-brow erotica and viewed high-brow porn. And vice versa.
This is what makes the discussion so potentially intriguing to me.
So do you think there is a difference between the two? What do you think the difference is?
I'm proposing that really there is no difference; that the difference between "porn" and "erotica" is an artificial one created by people who want to believe that the things they find arousing are good and beautiful while condemning other works they find dirty and disgusting...
The word "construct" comes to mind. Whatever reality, or definition, you perceive and believe, it's purely something you've created for yourself. It has no meaning beyond what goes on inside your head.
Well, without delving into Wittgenstinian philosophy unless absolutely necessary, the porn versus erotica debate will be waged in the blog.
I understand what you are saying about constructs removing meaning Steve, but that doesn't mean we give up the discussion -- in fact to give the words shared meaning is why we must have the discussion.
I intend to do several posts on this in the coming months, but the concept of art, pornography and erotica. On thought for both Steve and c.l. and any other lurkers in this discussion is what about a definition based on the artist's intent?
Just some food for thought.
Another question would be a/the definition based on the reader or viewer's intent... but that's not something I'll explore here (right now).
I'll admit up front that my experience is predominantly with gay porn and/or erotica. I DON'T see straight/gay porn the same way.
I agree on many levels with Chanson, that erotica and porn can be visual versus literate. It is sad that Punk Rock Lawyer deleted - he kept pushing the envelope of the limits of porn/erotic.
Great great writing in here, Wanker.
I think your right that you could use the viewer's intention as a possible defining attribute as well.
I've always looked at gay porn and straight porn as essentially identical. Why do you find them different?
You and c.l. have me intrigued by Punk Rock Lawyer, but in the mood of your new found fabulosity Sideon, we shall eclipse anything he'd done before deleting.
Thanks for the kudos Sideon.
Post a Comment