Switch to: References

Citations of:

Art and pornography

Journal of Aesthetic Education 43 (3):pp. 107-116 (2009)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Drawing the Line: Art Versus Pornography.Hans Maes - 2011 - Philosophy Compass 6 (6):385-397.
    Art and pornography are often thought to be mutually exclusive. The present article argues that this popular view is without adequate support. Section 1 looks at some of the classic ways of drawing the distinction between these two domains of representation. In Section 2, it is argued that the classic dichotomies may help to illuminate the differences between certain prototypical instances of pornography and art, but will not serve to justify the claim that pornography and art are fundamentally incompatible. Section (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Concepts of Pornography: Aesthetics, Feminism, and Methodology.Kania Andrew - 2012 - In Jerrold Levinson & Hans Maes (eds.), Art and pornography: Philosophical essays. New York, USA: Oxford University Press. pp. 254-276.
    I discuss a recent notable attempt to sharply distinguish pornography from erotic art, and argue that the attempt fails. I then turn to methodological questions about how we ought to go about defining ‘pornography’, questions which lead quickly to others about why we want such a definition. I believe that philosophers of art can make important contributions to this definitional project, but only if their contributions are informed by recent work in feminism, philosophical analysis, and art history.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Art or Porn: Clear Division or False Dilemma?Hans Maes - 2011 - Philosophy and Literature 35 (1):51-64.
    Jerrold Levinson conveniently summarizes the main argument of his essay "Erotic Art and Pornographic Pictures" in the following way:Erotic art consists of images centrally aimed at a certain sort of reception R1.Pornography consists of images centrally aimed at a certain sort of reception R2.R1 essentially involves attention to form/vehicle/medium/manner, and so entails treating images as in part opaque.R2 essentially excludes attention to form/vehicle/medium/manner, and so entails treating images as wholly transparent.R1 and R2 are incompatible.Hence, nothing can be both erotic art (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations