On Oct 11, 2008, at 4:41 PM, William Conger wrote:
So does porn qualify re aesthetic experience?
Yes, but it's overwhelmed by a kind of didactic or sensationalizing effect, namely, the prurient. For the most part, only a very small fraction of pornography is particularly noteworthy as "literature," and when that happens, it's called erotica! <g>
It's really hard not to view a naked figure without the erotic or sexual dimension intruding itself.
Why do some religions prohibit human representations--iconoclasm? Because of the power of the image to draw interest to itself and its represented subject with its intriguing, excitatory, prurient power. Pornography just takes the wraps off and makes no excuses for the unavoidable way the portrayal of a human figure can "be read."
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Michael Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED]
