On Thursday, February 5, 2004, at 12:23 AM, Jon Johanning wrote:
> I don't mean that porn is "whatever gets anyone off" -- obviously,
> "pornography" in the ordinary sense of the term refers to written or
> graphic material (hence the Greek root -graphy).
etymological references to greek roots aren't rarified? ;-)
ok, whatever written or graphic material gets anyone off? is that really better?
i don't want to beat a dead horse, and i think this conversation is winding down. but i do want to say this: precisely the point of this discussion is not, as you understood carrol (rightly or wrongly), to shut out the non-professionals, but rather to try to understand how that straightforward common sense definition of pornography is insufficient for an analysis of the literary AND other (social, historical, economic, etc.) aspects of pornography.
at least from my perspective. and i think it's pretty clear that i have some ideas but i don't feel like i've got it figured out. that's why i like the discussion.
j