First, I'd like to clarify that I didn't mean that the idea of pornography having potential as literature should be obvious to everyone, but at least should have dawned on the people taking this class. If this is the case, then why are we reading this essay? For me, it was just confirming something I was already aware of.
The argument concerning Blue Velvet doesn't refute the obviousness of pornography having potential as literature; in fact, it really just confirms Sontag's ideas. With Blue Velvet, we didn't argue about whether or not pornography could be literature, we argued whether Blue Velvet, being partly pornographic, was literature, a debate that Sontag clearly supported. And quite a number of people in the class were at least open to, if not actively supporting, the idea that Blue Velvet was art, suggesting that my original point has some merit.
I've seen Sontag's argument for Sci-Fi having potential as literature a couple times, and I feel that this is no different than her pornography as literature argument; really, what I feel Sontag is doing by saying that pornography can be literature is opening the door for anything to be literature, provided it has certain qualities.
Although I feel Sontag had a few points of interest intermixed with her essay, most of it was a close reading of a couple of pornographic works which, frankly, any of us could have done (although probably not as eloquently). And after I did all that work looking up these obscure literary works that she referenced, the conclusion she drew was disappointing.
0 comments:
Post a Comment