Art or Porn: Clear division or false dilemma?

Philosophy and Literature 35 (1):51-64 (2011)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
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 and pornography; or at the least, nothing can be coherently projected as both erotic art and pornography.1I have argued elsewhere ..
PhilPapers/Archive ID
MAEAOP
Upload history
Archival date: 2018-09-02
View other versions
Added to PP index
2011-04-28

Total views
464 ( #14,542 of 65,629 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
29 ( #27,766 of 65,629 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.