<HTML><HTML> From: "Michael Dawson > No, the claim was that porn didn't exist as a _genre_, but emerged > 1500-1800. Lynn Hunt (and Ken) ddidn't argue that porn didn't exist prior > to that era. I suspect it's probably an argument very similar to the > argument that homosexuality, as we understand it today, didn't exist prior > to the 1800s. Ultimately, whether you buy it or not, there's plenty of info > out there on the 'net and in your library, so you can judge Hunt's claims > for yourself. Maybe we'd even have a much more fruitful conversation than > what has transpired so far--with some interlocutors unable to grasp the > basic claim to begin with. > > Kelley What "genre" of printed material _did_ exist before 1500?  For that matter, what year did the word "genre" come to life as a way of classifying literature?  It can't have been before there were printing presses in copious numbers. ^^^^^ CB:  Impliedly, "genre" is being used as a transhistorical category , the status denied to "sex" and "pornography".  What is it that makes "genreness"  the same in ancient Rome, on the feudal manor and in modern Manhattan ? Is it literary criticism universalism ? </HTML>