Art/Porn: A History of Seeing and Touching
From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia
| Revision as of 14:43, 27 February 2013 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff |
Current revision Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | [[Image:Laocoön Group, Clamores horrendos detail, photo by Marie-Lan Nguyen (2009).jpg|thumb|right|200px|This page '''{{PAGENAME}}''' is part of the [[medium specificity]] series. | ||
| + | <br> | ||
| + | <small>Illustration: ''[[Laocoön and His Sons]]'' ("[[Clamores horrendos]]" detail), photo by Marie-Lan Nguyen.</small>]] | ||
| {{Template}} | {{Template}} | ||
| - | ''[[Art/Porn: A History of Seeing and Touching]]'' (2009) by [[Kelly Dennis]] on the [[difference between pornography and erotica]] and the [[antithesis]] of [[Visual perception|seeing]] and [[touching]]. | + | ''[[Art/Porn: A History of Seeing and Touching]]'' (2009) by [[Kelly Dennis]] is a book on the [[difference between pornography and erotica]] and the [[antithesis]] of [[Visual perception|seeing]] and [[touching]]. |
| Excerpt: | Excerpt: | ||
| - | :"We can now see that the “[[sister arts]],” the ''[[paragone]]'', the [[hierarchy of genres]], and even ''[[ekphrasis]]'' are all rooted in an [[opposition]] between [[word]] and [[image]], between an acceptable [[literary pictorialism]] and a less acceptable [[pictorial literacy]]." | + | :"We can now see that the “[[sister arts]],” the ''[[paragone]]'', the [[hierarchy of genres]], and even ''[[ekphrasis]]'' are all rooted in an [[opposition]] between [[word]] and [[image]], between an acceptable [[literary pictorialism]] and a less acceptable pictorial literacy." |
| ==From the publisher== | ==From the publisher== | ||
| Line 9: | Line 12: | ||
| "Do we really [[know pornography when we see it]]? Pornography is condemned for being "too [[close]]" whilst erotica is defended as "leaving room for the [[imagination]]." And the [[art of the nude]] is treated as something much more special, located even further away from the potential of arousal. | "Do we really [[know pornography when we see it]]? Pornography is condemned for being "too [[close]]" whilst erotica is defended as "leaving room for the [[imagination]]." And the [[art of the nude]] is treated as something much more special, located even further away from the potential of arousal. | ||
| - | ''Art/Porn'' argues that these distinctions are based on an age-old [[antithesis]] between [[sight]] and [[touch]], an antithesis created and maintained for centuries by [[art criticism]]. Art has always elicited a struggle between the senses, between something to be viewed and something to be touched, between visual and visceral pleasure. | + | ''Art/Porn'' argues that these distinctions are based on an age-old [[antithesis]] between [[Visual perception|sight]] and [[touch]], an antithesis created and maintained for centuries by [[art criticism]]. Art has always elicited a struggle between the senses, between something to be viewed and something to be touched, between visual and visceral pleasure. |
| Images compel the senses in ways that are both taboo and intrinsic to art. Contemporary responses to images of the nude embody this longstanding tension. Our fears about the materiality of art when in close proximity to our own bodies exist alongside a regulation of sensory response which dates back to Antiquity. | Images compel the senses in ways that are both taboo and intrinsic to art. Contemporary responses to images of the nude embody this longstanding tension. Our fears about the materiality of art when in close proximity to our own bodies exist alongside a regulation of sensory response which dates back to Antiquity. | ||
| Line 16: | Line 19: | ||
| ==Cover image== | ==Cover image== | ||
| On the cover is one panel from the ''[[Every Playboy centerfold, by decade]]'' by [[Jason Salavon]]. | On the cover is one panel from the ''[[Every Playboy centerfold, by decade]]'' by [[Jason Salavon]]. | ||
| - | + | ==See also== | |
| + | *[[Academic study of pornography]] | ||
| + | *[[Pornographic art]] | ||
| {{GFDL}} | {{GFDL}} | ||
Current revision
Illustration: Laocoön and His Sons ("Clamores horrendos" detail), photo by Marie-Lan Nguyen.
|
Related e |
|
Featured: |
Art/Porn: A History of Seeing and Touching (2009) by Kelly Dennis is a book on the difference between pornography and erotica and the antithesis of seeing and touching.
Excerpt:
- "We can now see that the “sister arts,” the paragone, the hierarchy of genres, and even ekphrasis are all rooted in an opposition between word and image, between an acceptable literary pictorialism and a less acceptable pictorial literacy."
From the publisher
"Do we really know pornography when we see it? Pornography is condemned for being "too close" whilst erotica is defended as "leaving room for the imagination." And the art of the nude is treated as something much more special, located even further away from the potential of arousal.
Art/Porn argues that these distinctions are based on an age-old antithesis between sight and touch, an antithesis created and maintained for centuries by art criticism. Art has always elicited a struggle between the senses, between something to be viewed and something to be touched, between visual and visceral pleasure.
Images compel the senses in ways that are both taboo and intrinsic to art. Contemporary responses to images of the nude embody this longstanding tension. Our fears about the materiality of art when in close proximity to our own bodies exist alongside a regulation of sensory response which dates back to Antiquity.
Art/Porn reveals how - from fondling statues in Antiquity to point-and-click Internet pornography - the worlds of art and pornography are much closer than we think.
Cover image
On the cover is one panel from the Every Playboy centerfold, by decade by Jason Salavon.
See also
