Porn Studies

by Linda Williams (Editor)

In her pioneering book Hard Core, Linda Williams put moving-image pornography on the map of contemporary scholarship with her analysis of the most popular and enduring of all film and video genres. Now, fifteen years later, she showcases the next generation of critical thinking about pornography and signals new directions for study and teaching. Porn Studies resists the tendency to situate pornography as the outer limit of what can be studied and discussed. With revenues totaling between ten and fourteen billion dollars annually—more than the combined revenues of professional football, basketball, and baseball—visual, hard-core pornography is a central feature of American popular culture. It is time, Williams contends, for scholars to recognize this and give pornography a serious and extended analysis. The essays in this volume move beyond feminist debates and distinctions between a “good” erotica and a “bad” hard core. Contributors examine varieties of pornography from the tradition of the soft-core pin-up through the contemporary hard-core tradition of straight, gay, and lesbian videos and dvds to the burgeoning phenomenon of pornography on the Internet. They explore, as examples of the genre, individual works as divergent as The Starr Report, the pirated Tommy Lee/Pamela Anderson honeymoon video, and explicit Japanese “ladies’ comics” consumed by women. They also probe difficult issues such as the sexualization of race and class and the relationship of pornography to the avant-garde. To take pornography seriously as an object of analysis also means teaching it. Porn Studies thus includes a useful annotated bibliography of readings and archival sources important to the study of pornography as a cultural form. Contributors. Heather Butler, Rich Cante, Jake Gerli, Minette Hillyer, Nguyen Tan Hoang, Despina Kakoudaki, Franklin Melendez, Ara Osterweil, Zabet Patterson, Constance Penley, Angelo Restivo, Eric Schaefer, Michael Sicinski, Deborah Shamoon, Maria St. John, Tom Waugh, Linda Williams

Genres: Sexuality, Film, Nonfiction, Feminism, Pornography, Theory, Research

528 pages, Paperback

First published June 30, 2004

About the author

Librarian Note:
There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name
This profile may contain books from multiple authors of this name

Linda Williams was an American professor of film studies in the departments of Film Studies and Rhetoric at University of California, Berkeley.

Reviews

[Dmitry]

(The English review is placed beneath the Russian one)

Удивительно как можно было написать настолько скучную книгу на столь не скучную тему. Книга примерно походит на другую книгу из области сексуальности - Consumer Sexualities: Women and Sex Shopping, в том смысле, что авторы этих книг постарались придать своим работам максимально академический вид, что, к сожалению, повлияло на простоту донесения своих мыслей, т.е. на простоту самого текста. В рассматриваемой книге текст хоть и не очень сложный для понимания, но читать книгу было очень скучно, да и в целом она мало что даёт к пониманию теории порнографии как сегодняшнего явления. Плюс к этому, некоторые темы, как например, межрасовые участники порнографических материалов, а также гей и лесби порнография будет не сильно интересна гетеросексуальным читателям (если они не занимаются данным вопросом профессионально). В общем, получилось скучно и малоинформативно.

Ах да, самое главное то, что эта книга является сборником статей написанный разными авторами.

It's amazing how one could write such a boring book on such a non-boring topic. The book is roughly similar to another book in the field of sexuality - Consumer Sexualities: Women and Sex Shopping, in the sense that the authors of these books tried to make their works as academic as possible, which, unfortunately, affected the simplicity of conveying their thoughts, i.e., the simplicity of the text itself. In the book in question, although the text is not very difficult to understand, the book was very boring to read, and it does little to understand the theory of pornography as a phenomenon today. Plus, some topics, such as interracial participants in pornographic materials, as well as gay and lesbian pornography will not be of much interest to heterosexual readers (if they are not professionally engaged in this issue). All in all, it turned out to be boring and uninformative.

Oh yes, the most important thing is that this book is a collection of articles written by different authors.

[Ietrio · Rating 1 out of 5]

Being written in a christian country, the authors make an effort to take the pleasure away from all pages. After all sex is about study for the academics and making children for the rest. A beginning nevertheless.

[Muhammad Lutfi Dwi Kurniawan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Buku yang sangat menginspirasi saya dalam melihat pornografi sebagai fenomena kebudayaan. Dari buku ini saya temukan, bagaimana ilmuwan melihat, menanggapi bahkan mengapresiasi pornografi secara objektif. Ini yang saya tidak temukan di khazanah teori di Indonesia. Di Indonesia Pornografi hanya dilihat dari dampak negatifnya, dan seksualitas selalu diartikan pada hal-hal yang menyangkut tubuh wanita. Hal senada juga dibeberkan oleh buku ini, bagaimana yang ia lawan adalah kaum feminis antipornografi, yang selalu melihat hubungan satu arah antara laki-laki dengan perempuan. Semoga paradigma porn studies juga berkembang di Indonesia, sehingga dapat turut menyudahi cara pandang patriarki heteroseksual, terutama untuk peneliti-peneliti gender dan feminis pada khususnya.

[Olivia B. · Rating 5 out of 5]

5 stars based on the Pam + Tommy essay, and the introduction actually written by Linda Williams. This book is still groundbreaking, urgent, and relevant to the media atmosphere. Go Linda Williams Berkeley Rhetoric dept!!

[Bryan]

Couldn’t finish this. Very disappointing. I had high hopes. A lot of the authors are Williams’ students, which wouldn’t be a problem, but many of essays read like students groping for a topic because they had been tasked with publication for course credit. Williams says her goal was to map a history of the genre. I’m left not knowing what to think. How can a volume with such a goal, published in 2004, have no mention of New Wave Hookers in its index? Oh well. I’m stopping in the middle so I could be missing out. I’ve heard Williams speak before, read some of her essays, and, in general, found her enlightened and insightful.

In other disappointing news:

This is probably the last review I’ll post to GoodReads. Or should I call it KindleReads? Aesthetics alone are enough to drive me away whether or not Amazon mines my data. Seeing the Chandlers with GoodReads stickers on their Kindles made me nauseous. GoodReads mines my data and I’m okay with that because I like GoodReads. Or used to. The increasing commerciality of the site has been bugging me for a long time.

For now, you can find my reviews on LibraryThing (http://www.librarything.com/profile/l...). I’ll slowly be adding my old reviews with touch ups in the coming days. This is something I should have done long before now. The one aspect GoodReads had over LibraryThing was its casualness. Its chattiness. Its let’s-hangout-and-talk-about-books-ness. LibraryThing seemed stuffy - a dusty site for dusty books. I rarely purchase or collect books. Data is river just like my consciousness. To hoard things is to make a fundamental error about the nature of life. A site that seemed to enable hoarding was distasteful to me. So was a site that seemed to be aimed at anal retentive library snoots in desperate need of cosmic enemas. This is an attitude towards librarianship I’ve worked my entire career to dismantle. So painfully commercial has GoodReads become that I am willing to believe LibraryThing’s PR that it can be all things to all people: just a place to list what you are reading or your private library catalog. I am forced to admit I previously misinterpreted LibraryThing’s pricing policy. I saw the fees as a barrier, and though nominal, a symbolic gesture of exclusivity. Exclusivity being another fundamental error about the nature of life. (I can’t wait until someone in the future throws in my face all my idiotic pontifications about the “nature of life.” I’m really too old to be making such pontifications.) I missed that the fees were a way to keep LibraryThing ad free, and relatively independent. I trust Tim Spalding more than the Chandlers. That is a vast generalization.

My commitment to open content remains true. The only cataloging I am interested in is happening at Open Library. I am marginally excited about Digital Public Library of America, but also can’t help thinking a digital public library of America already exists and its name is Internet Archive.

I know Amazon owns a big chunk of LibraryThing. All of this is ephemeral. Who remembers Reader’s Vine? I remember Reader’s Vine.

Cheers.

[Sasa · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a very detailed (and sometimes boring) analysis of porn, including some porn from other countries like Japan. While the content of the subject matter is very good, it consists of unnecessarily long and dry language. Porn Studies is one of those pieces that makes an interesting and taboo subject look boring.

[Andre · Rating 3 out of 5]

Well I only read the chapter on the porn star Brandon Lee, so I can only rate that and nothing else. I liked it, it was interesting to read the thoughts as to how Brandon Lee managed to become a gay pornstar in America despite and because of his East Asian heritage and how he is treated differently because of it.

[Paolo · Rating 5 out of 5]

A stimulating and provocative selection of essays on the aesthetics of porn, and worth picking up if only for Nguyen Tan Hoang's lucid piece on queer Fil Am actor Brandon Lee's groundbreaking career.

[mr. kate · Rating 4 out of 5]

Heather Butler's essay on lesbian porn is particularly interesting!

[Fatimah · Rating 5 out of 5]

everything important about gender & film

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a collection of essays of varying quality and interest. I have read only a few, so I can't really rate the entire collection.

[Adam · Rating 3 out of 5]

Surprisingly general and hetero-centric, unfortunately. Expected more, especially considering its focus on an academic audience.