Thursday, July 05, 2007

suggestion



Reproducible pornography is a discourse thats affectivity derives from the apprehension of a disturbing social reality outside its diegetic plane.

This pornography can only suggest, because it cannot realise:

1. the existance elsewhere of a general social pathology (along the lines of Foucault's scientia sexualis)

2. the existance of a real world of libertinism likewise outside pornography

(there is no libertinism, only a discourse about libertinism)

The affectivity of pornography is built around a double bind: pornography both incites and censures a libertinism it doesn't really relate to. Libertinism is here determined twice: as substance of indictment and as protocol of experiment.

For this reason the current form of reproducible pornography is probably vulnerable to gratuitous parody, as all commodities are vulnerable to gratuities.

4 comments:

ktismatics said...

"For this reason the current form of reproducible pornography is probably vulnerable to gratuitous parody, as all commodities are vulnerable to gratuities."

Funny, but I just don't find libertine sex all that attractive, repulsive, or otherwise compelling. Am I repressed, sublimated, old and desiccated? Don't get me wrong: I'm not immune to porn's desired effect, but isn't that the case with any other sort of advertised commodity? I wouldn't want it if it wasn't being waved in my face. That intellectuals subscribe to the psycyoanalytic fetishizing of sex seems unfortunate to me. Whatever happened to truth, beauty, and justice; to faith, hope, and charity?

catmint said...

ktismatics - I'm shamelessly reproducing my comment from kinofist.blogspot.com a sort of sequel to articles on infinite-thought.blogspot.com - yeah those intellectuals

ktismatics said...

"yeah those intellectuals"

Okay I'll go away now.

catmint said...

Pornography doesn't really belong with libertinism. It's more that pornography, as well as ads, MTV videos etc, plays on ideas of libertinism. Without even committing yourself to being pro or con libertinism per se, I think it's possible to question if this libertinism is more a fantasy version.

My feeling is the critique of libertinism, to be effective, has to be somehow dirty itself.