[rollei_list] Re: OT Mapplethorpe (was Re: Re:)
- From: Marc James Small <marcsmall@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2010 18:42:05 -0500
At 06:35 PM 3/7/2010, Marvin wrote:
>Aside from the controversy which you mention which had much to do with US
>Politics,( and which I am unable to comment on) Mapplethorpe's success was
>that he presented "pornography" as art. He was able to argue that his
>technical expertise made the photographs art not pornography this was
>further enhanced by the context in which the photographs were presented
>which again determined their genre etc.
>
>Further, Mapplethorp photographed other subjects than nudes, such as
>flowers, which he did so masterfully.
It has been shown since Classical times that
pornographic works can be art. It is the purpose
of the work which can make a point of divergence
between pornography and art, but, in the end,
nudes have been a common element in visual art
since the very Longago -- take, say, the Venus de
Milo by way of an example -- and homoerotic art
is as old -- see K J Dover's GREEK HOMOSEXUALITY
for discussions of homoerotic depictions on Greek
pottery, for instance. So Mapplethorpe came late
to the table if you are suggesting that he proved
anything at all with regards to pornography and
homoerotic representation and art.
Again, this man's view is that Mapplethorpe was a true third-stringer.
Marc
msmall@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cha robh bàs fir gun ghràs fir!
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
