Why Pornography Can't Be Art

Philosophy and Literature 33 (1):193-203 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Claims that pornography cannot be art typically depend on controversial claims about essential value differences (moral, aesthetic) between pornography and art. In this paper, I offer a value-neutral exclusionary claim, showing pornography to be descriptively at odds with art. I then show how my view is an improvement on similar claims made by Jerrold Levinson. Finally I draw parallels between art and pornography and art and advertising as well as show that my view is consistent with our typical usage of the term “pornographic art.”.

Author's Profile

Christy Mag Uidhir
University of Houston

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-04-15

Downloads
3,137 (#1,952)

6 months
142 (#19,186)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?