what now?????)
well ...
Apparently chicken little was right because a bunch of really weird (no, i mean like really weird, otherworldly, WTF?, huh? kind of stuff), and some truly, truly heartbreaking things are happening in my life, but you all know i don't post about that stuff, riiiiggghhhhttt ( Read more... )
Apparently chicken little was right because a bunch of really weird (no, i mean like really weird, otherworldly, WTF?, huh? kind of stuff), and some truly, truly heartbreaking things are happening in my life, but you all know i don't post about that stuff, riiiiggghhhhttt ( Read more... )
(Malkovich, malkovich.)
Sex energy and channeling: Perhaps the best example I can give is actors. Very often while doing stage shows, there is a heavy sexual tension that runs through the show. Experienced actors will feed on that energy, and transform and focus that energy into their performances.
When done well, it's amazing. When done badly, it's messy.
Porn is divisive. I think that broadly lumping all porn into one broad category is atrocious. It's prejudicial in the same way that saying "all Mexicans are lazy" or "all homosexuals have a secret agenda" is prejudicial, and just as wrong.
When I talk about porn by itself being boring and a little silly, I'm talking from a filmmaking and technical point of view. There is very little porn that pays any attention to the finer technical aspects of filmmaking such as lighting, sound, story, writing, acting, character development, etc. etc.; it is almost entirely focused on the physical acts of genital or near-genital stimulation.
(Not that there's anything wrong with that. I certainly enjoy genital stimulation as much as anybody, but as a participant much more so than as a spectator.)
But really, it all looks pretty silly. If you try and divorce the "turned on" or "repelled" feelings from the actual images, it's really not people at their best. Think of the orgasm face. It's pretty silly. And the next time you look at porn, try and separate out your reaction to what the image represents from the image itself.
Because when people react to porn, they are not reacting to the picture of what they see, they are reacting to what it represents to them. It becomes personal, and they interact with that representation. Some people get repelled, some people get turned on. And Some people get a mixed reaction.
It's very similar to Serrano's Piss Christ, which was a picture of a crucifix suspended in blood and urine. The work was supposed to be in the same vein as Magritte's Ceçi n'est pas une pipe (This is not a pipe), or Warhol's work with Campbell's soup cans. The idea is that an image of something is not the thing.
Unfortunately, people went so nutso over Serrano's work that violence broke out on more than one occasion, and still is today. The message was overshadowed by the response.
There is a wonderful study called Semiotics that deals with this. I find it pretty absorbing, but I'm weird that way.
So this got sidetracked from porn.
Um.
Boobies?
Reply
I remember that controversy. There was daily TALK about the image, but no mainstream media would actually SHOW it. When i finally got to see it, i was struck by how visually beautiful it was... and also by Serrano's Catholic devotion.
Unfortunately, i'm in the middle of reading What's the Matter with Kansas?, so meaningless irrelevant right-wing cultural controversies like Piss Christ taste very bitter to me.
Reply
And I've been in Iowa for the past year-plus. In the conservative part of Des Moines. Nothing like immersion in pork culture to make one appreciate civilization.
Reply
porn in fact does have the ability to raise the bar of self-knowledge, so to speak, but it also has the potential to limit same -- this is the point i come to as a sexuality educator -- porn can be arousing - good... porn can be fun - good.... porn can be icky - bad ... porn can be so fucking stereotypically imbecilic that it makes you (ok me) yearn to be a pornographer...
and as a sexuality educator, the thing that i always try to communicate to kids is-- and this goes right along with Serrano's work, and What's the Matter with Kansas, for that matter -- when you look at porn, remember that it isn't real -- not just that it's not real people in real relationships (and here i'm not even remotely suggesting that sex should only happen within the context of relationships), but that porn isn't really even ersatz sport fucking ...
so while the knowledge of capacity it can offer might be liberating, what can become hog-tied is one's connection to the essence of what makes us long to connect with others for fucking, or more...
and i think that when we use semiotics to frame such things, we run the risk of doing same... logically systemizing what to me is best served with generous helpings of magic, awe and genuine sweat...
*
kit
Reply
Hog-tied connection to the essence... you do have a way with words.
I am very head-y. I use logic and analysis because it is the set of tools that I have to understand things, and it does have its disadvantages. I very often find myself running out of language to describe things; a limitation of the language itself more than my own limits. And yeah, there is something intangible that happens when you become combobulated with the right person (or people). I tend to avoid thinking of the details of human interaction because I've been isolated for far too long down in the Land of Pigs and Corn with no human contact save for brief encounters with friends.
The reasons for this are complex and probably fodder for conversation rather than posting, but suffice it to say that I've had a lot of time to be analytical, and I'm good at it.
But I also find myself being awfully serious here, and as much as I like intellectual pursuits, I'd rather be romping with fluffy puppies.
Reply
Leave a comment