[Milton-L] Re: porno vs. art?

BlevinsJake at aol.com BlevinsJake at aol.com
Fri Nov 25 12:49:59 EST 2005


Part of the issue is of course that the intent of the producer can be very 
different from the intent of the "consumer." I am fairly confident that Sally 
Mann's or even Jock Sturges' nude photographs of children (her own in the case 
of Mann, children in a nudist colony in the case of Sturges) both of which are 
controversial though typically accepted as "art," can also be the source of 
"unnatural" sexual stimulation when in the hands of a particular person. In the 
case of such photographers, you can indeed see the photos both in a 
contemporary photography museum and ALSO on a website trying to titillate those who are 
sexually aroused by children. Intent of user versus producer makes classifying 
the production itself somewhat complicated--not in all cases (Debbie Does 
Dallas) but in many.


Jacob Blevins
Assistant Professor of English
Editor, The McNeese Review 
McNeese State University
Lake Charles, LA 70609-2655
337 475-5323
blevinsjake at aol.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.richmond.edu/pipermail/milton-l/attachments/20051125/b8755344/attachment.htm

More information about the Milton-L mailing list