Pornography Part .5: Victorians Invented Pornography

When I wrote, yesterday, that Victorians invented pornography, I wrote a sideways truth.

Art and literature we call pornography today, existed long before Victoria, Albert and the Empire upon which the sun never set. Artistic treatments of explicit acts have been found among ancient cave paintings. Writers wrote erotica on clay tablets before the Egyptians painted hieroglyphics on tombs. Artistic interpretations of the human form and activity antedate Victorians but the Victorians made it dirty. They took a greek literary term meaning writings about harlots to label subject matter they deemed obscene and invented modern pornography.

Prior to condemning erotica, Victorian aristocrats and and nouveau-riche industrialists filled galleries and libraries with the stuff. To protect investments, pornography priced beyond the reach of the man on the street retained its status as art and being art, remained and remains social acceptable.

You can check my facts at Wikipedia tomorrow. Today Wikipedia are blacked out in protest of SOPA and PITA, bills that threaten to bring Victorian censorship to the Internet.

Posted in Pornography | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

Pornography Prologue: Take 7

Several years ago, looking for an excuse, perchance, to surf some Internet pornography, the idea came to write an article or series concerning the dysfunctional relationship between society and pornography.

It seemed a good idea at the time.

Pornography permeates our media. Has done since the Victorians invented pornography.

Controversy surrounds pornography. Some consider it a destroyer of youth. Others a bulwark of free press.


Not one person can define, clearly, where pornography begins and art ends. Facing that question, the highest court in the land retreated behind nonsense.

“I shall not … attempt … to define … [pornography] … perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it …” 

Thanks Potter. “I know it when I see it.” No ambiguity there. Helps a lot.


Ignoring the explicit intent of libidinous arousal, pornography becomes a genre that, weighed intellectually or as literature, evokes every emotion.

Certainly those who hate sex in general, same sex sex and nudity feel outrage and anger to see what they hate plainly depicted in print and on the screen.

Tragedy must fill those who love sex when, as they consistently do, pornographers overtly weld sex to violence.

When, again common, pornography depicts women in poses and roles suggesting they are no more than receptacles for the desires of men, advocates of sexual equality must feel sadness that the neurosis continues.

Yet those easily moved to laughter see that, beneath the arousal and passion, sexual activity in pornography, as in life, amuses with comedy akin to slapstick: How does she, from that position, manage to look into the camera?


Given the richness of the topic, why have years passed, empty waters flowing beneath an incomplete bridge, since the idea for an article or seven emerged? Fear and loathing. Fear that writing about pornography exposes the hidden attitudes, at once outside social nicety and conservative. Loathing the topic deserves more words and cognition than a lazy writer feels comfortable committing to. 

Finally, the research. Unwritten, the articles justify seeking, studying and annotating pornographic works. All in the name of good journalism. To publish cancels the reason, transforms what was yesterday a noble pursuit of knowledge into just another old perv staring at delicious body parts.

Enjoy the sacrifice. The research shall be missed.

(to be continued – maybe)

Posted in Pornography | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Fast Poem 32: Frustration

Times like this.

A line floats beyond grasp;

at tongue’s tip but too far from lips

or pen to save.

It scurries to shadows,

like diseased vermin;

hides behind inconvenient walls,

close but out of reach,

mewing and chirping;

reminding that no other line,

should another bother to come to mind

today,

tomorrow

or another day

will do so well,

be so good, 

as the one that got away.

Perhaps I should retreat to rhyming poetry,

hide my mediocracy

behind dusty, classic forms.

Heroic couplet?

Dadum dadum dadum dadum da-ay

Tado tado tado tado ta-ay.

Dadoo dadoo dadoo dadoo da-be

Tada tada tada tada ta-be.

Weary sounds.

Worn boots stomping concrete streets;

marching behind Nostalgia’s baton;

parading to remember hell as glorious;

to summon sense of life whetted clear by fear of death;

to recover for a moment black elation faded

by years of day in, day out , banal comforts;

blurred by responsibility mundane as Monday.

No other line that comes to mind today,

tomorrow

or another day

will do so well as the line mewing

and taunting in the shadows,

as the one that got away.

Posted in Fast Poem | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

A Bit Of Imaginary Silliness

If you belong to a social network you have likely seen tag-requests, a post with a list of things with a paragraph or two in which you are named and invited to create a similar list. The tag-requests float through the sites like chain letters.

A while back, quite awhile back in fact, a poet I read, Melfamy Melfamy tagged me with a tag-request.

Normally, I do not respond to chain letters, digital or otherwise, but I enjoy Melfamy’s poetry. I read but seldom make comment praising his work. Hoping to atone for not providing deserved, encouraging feedback, I decided to respond to his tag-request.

The tag-request urged me to write seven things about myself and chain the tag to seven friends. Following you can read my attempt at first half of the request. I fear I cannot fulfill the second half. I do not have seven friends I feel comfortable chaining to.

I found the first half challenging enough. I and other alter-egos were not raised to discuss ourownselves. My initial attempt to publicly expose seven personal tidbits took, as you can see, a weird twist or three in short order. 

In truth, you really only need to know one thing about me. Like Dionysus, I was not born but erupted from a thought filled forehead.

Unlike Dionysus, I do not attract singing swarms of swirling, twirling women who, overwhelmed by my presence, offer themselves to goatish paramours and in throes of ecstatic bliss, scratch loyal, human lovers to bits.

Additionally, unlike Dionysus, the forehead from which I sprang belonged not to Zeus but to a hick farm kid known to local women as somewhat tall and somewhat gentle with strange eyes and equipment falling well within the measurement of normal. (1)

In the wee hours before dawn, from beyond the silvered glass called mirror, I peek at this curiosity from which I sprang and whisper to him he must watch his weight (2) … as if one could miss it. 

In passing decades since first I looked out from behind his eyes. I’ve watched his beard, beneath which he hides a slightly weak chin, become more salt than pepper. (3) A result of long-term exposure to corporate, florescent panel lighting, blonde, tastefully groomed to social expectations, hair dulled to cubicle beige. When he escaped at last, sunlight, open skies, age and wisdom brightened beige not to expected Danish gold but to the cumulus white of childhood. (4)

I sense from my place behind his eyes the number of  his days and from them know the number of my days (being a voice for inner dialogue, his days are my days), and the measure of my universe. He passed beyond life once while we, his voices watched helplessly. We, that is he, tasted utter nothingness beyond ego and language. Reluctantly dragged by medical hands back to the living light, he never forgets that neither he nor I nor our universe can survive. (5)

He suffers a peasant attitude; his personal albatross; limiter of life and opportunity; an artifact found in the luggage of immigrants and passed down, father to daughter, mother to son.  From first wail he learned the Great things in life, opportunities that knock, deeds of knights and kings, lovers from outside the village and world changing ideas, “Ain’t for us. We don’t do that. Look around. Those things, other people do ‘em. Be  happy with what you got and get back to work.” (6)

He grokked dysfunctional speakers, parent, teacher and preacher, accepted peasant obligations with blind obedience but without joy and happiness. They pretended and promised, one of the obligations they accepted, but without genuine joy and happiness.

His awareness that neurological poison tarnishes synaptic paths and pollutes subconscious whims and desires does not provide antidote. Knowing does not undo damage. Imprints etched in the virgin panels of his undefended, infant mind solidified in time. 

Rewriting ancient imprints and life-games requires therapy and psychedelic excursions; remedies ironically belonging to the list of things that “… are not for us … ” (7)

Finis.

One or three things about me and seven more concerning the owner of the forehead from which I jumped. 

This exercise produced a few stories, memories adopted to the non-confrontational Zeitgeist of the twenty-first century, post-post-modern spiral toward the neo-Dark Ages. Should I overcome inherent laziness, perhaps, before February brings the false thaw, I can share those as well.

Posted in About the Blog, Story | Tagged , | Leave a comment

The Semicolon

In his blog, A Few Assorted Tips, Seth Godin, at tip number 5 suggests “It’s almost never necessary to use a semicolon.”

I do not disagree but does he intend we not use semicolons merely because they are not necessary?

Those of you who read me know I love semicolons. Where others use dashes to weave related thoughts tighter, pause prose and mimic, in-line, poetic line breaks, I employ semicolons.

Is it necessary? Not a bit. On either side of my semicolons lie complete sentences, or at worst phrases easily sentenced. With little effort I could replace my semicolons with conjunctions or full sentences. I admit some readers, those put off by odd punctuation, may find conjunctions and full sentences less contenious.

But at the moment, I love semicolons.

My mind rolls sequential thoughts not quite needing conjunctions but sharing something surrounding thoughts do not share. I use semicolons to join them. 

I most often think in prosody, not prose, and use semicolons where, if I were writing a sonnet, I would begin a new line or insert a caesura. 

In blog posts, I attempt a conversational tone; since I tend to cram thoughts together when I speak, I feel using dashes or semicolons clarifies by providing necessary pace.

Which is all find and good but somewhat bunk.

The real reason I use semicolons is, I think they are fun, for now. I like them more than dashes. 

Like Seth Godin, I think the semicolon is “…almost never necessary…” but I decided to make it my own, to give the semicolon my rules and use it in my prose form to indicate connected breaks.

And, like baby ducks, semicolons are cute.

Posted in Observations, Writing | Leave a comment

Fast Poem 31: Lament on a Cubicle Creature

Sit at your cheap desk

hands on your keyboard

your fingers type words

that nobody reads.

Marketspeak buzzwords,

positioning statements,

defining a product

that nobody needs.

Telephone vibrates you out of your flow,

paragraphs flee from your mind.

Fumble your pocket but voicemail picks up

and it’s gone.

Mundane in the key of boredom.

Must be something more than boredom.

Daydream and endure the boredom.

Read what you’ve written.

Remember the artist

you buried to marry

her beautiful eyes.

Everyone loved her

and she fed your ego;

adulate lovemaking,

sky shaking sighs.

Poetic flashbacks appear in your mind;

reality paints them dull grey.

You pay the price everyday of your life

and she’s gone.

You thought to get by with great sex.

Marriage needed more than great sex.

Better clear your mind of great sex.

Back to your cheap chair

your eyes find your schedule,

you’re late for a meeting:

hors d’oeuvres and fine wine.

Finger food beckons

a drink then some flirting,

adopting her standards,

forgetting your whine.

Mundane in the key of boredom.

Must be something more than boredom.

Daydream and endure the boredom.

Posted in Fast Poem | 2 Comments

Confusion of a Probably Atheist

An experiment in rambling conversational monologue.


I wrote weak drafts of this post four times in weeks past and again today; a fifth attempt to stay on topic while my pen meanders off target like an over-eager hunting dog chasing stale idea-scent that when written, like dreams chronicled before coffee, bore writer and reader alike.

And here I go again, pen fluttering like milkweed seed wafting in Morning’s siren song breezes. Unless I rein this stream of semi-consciousness in, I shall find myself, tomorrow, scribbling draft number six.


Awhile ago a man approached, introduced himself and within five short minutes of inquiring small talk asked me if I was an atheist. I hesitated for a nano and responded, calmly, “Probably.” As I heard my answer, my jaw dropped. I take pride in knowing myself. I take pride in candid honesty. “Probably?” did not sound like either.

Why I responded “Probably.” put a seed of disconcert in my head.


I like to know why I think and say what I think and say. When I do not, I look in to turn mystery out. I think about what I think to discover why I think what I think and how I came to think what. It’s like getting high. Inhaling iterative introspection safe behind the covered windows in my room; achieving altered consciousness; blocking tire on pavement hissing din of reality; ignoring time and stacking material concerns on a corner shelf to collect dust.

Within me dissolves without me.

Eventually, I grow hungry, re-emerge, grab a snack and review things about me I know after but did not before my trip through pensive shadows.

I employ two vehicles to traverse the Inside: writing and contemplation. or writing and meditation for those of you less Nordic and more Zen. In this case I employed, for the most part, the soothing act of writing with fine-nibbed pen on foolscap. Results below.


I admit I felt unprepared to respond to a request to label myself and enter undesired theological discourse but to ignore the question was not an alternative. Although any answer threatened to open doors I preferred left locked, he did ask and deserved an answer. Conscious Thought, flat-footed and caught in the beam of approaching headlights, froze. Grabbing the controls, Sub-conscious Mind flipped a coin to decide between fight or flight.

Tails.

Flight.

The softish answer to the question “Are you an Atheist?” emerged in less time than it takes to read this. Foregoing delays required to include Conscious Thought, Mind chaired a panel of inner stakeholders to discuss possibilities, omit obviously unimportant elements and shelf minor influences. The executive action took less time than it took for Conscious Thought to register one gold-finch flight from feeder to tree.

Mind and enpaneled experts devised a plan; sought safety in non-committment, prepared an appropriately evasive response and simultaneously suppressed emotion chemically evoked by glandular reaction to an ever-so-slight whiff of resentment that a stranger would be so bold as to request self-labeling of atheist or non-atheist.

During the blink of wordless panic in the real-time world the expert panel and Sub-conscious Mind set aside chocolate eclairs and double-double lattes long enough to decide that anyone who could ask, “Are you an atheist?”, would label me Atheist, but in an act of selfish, cowardly consensus deemed it best not to answer “Yes.” The distinguished panel of experts produced and delivered to Mouth and conscious Mind, in that order, four opinions and a decision to blurt, “Probably.”


I shy from labels as a rule.

People live complex lives. We can know little of people’s Minds and how they work. Labeling someone, or ourselves, we substitute label for unseen complexity. If we mistake the map for the territory, begin substituting labels for reality, we eliminate motivation to explore the character of people. Sociologists say we stereotype. I think we build barriers to knowledge.

Yet, we are people and people label things. Labeling seems as much our nature as hunting seems the nature of felines.

The labels, Atheist and Theist, occupy a sphere of subjectification I do not. Atheist and Theist fail to interest me because, to dredge up a Groucho Marxism, “I never wanted to belong to a club that would have me as a member.”

I suspect both labels limit. Atheists limit themselves from the awe, wonder and mystery of God. Theists limit themselves from the awe, wonder and mysteries of Nature and Universe.


Each of us develop unique realities molded from cognitive potential and personal history. We create versions of the universe from intersections of singular sapience and sui generis experience.

In my little world, Gods, Nature, and Universe require direct, personal contact; contact achieved though cautiously fashioned Weltanschuung incongruous with prevailing authorized editions and involving rites and rituals that, unlike mainstream institutions, I keep private.

I assumed, likely my first mistake, that the-man-who-asked would inquire to my choice of sect if I answered, “No.”

I feared he would evangelize, likely my second mistake, if I answered “Yes.”

I also did not want to respond “Yes, I am an atheist.” because it was Thursday and on Thursdays “Yes. I am an Atheist.” tells a lie.

I do not like to lie.

This mess of messiness messing up conscious reason left no option except to answer as directed by Sub-conscious Mind and stakeholders, “Probably.”


There you have it. The babbling innerlogue of a Probably Atheist.

Or not.

Posted in Observations, Story | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Fast Poem 30: I Love Work

I am best when I have work to do.

Work is my drug of choice.

Work obliterates the

painful reality of neo-tyranny.

Work dulls the unbroken monotony

of soul choking bureaucracy infected society.

I get high knowing someone needs me

to get things done ASAP

and when I rise

I need not decide

how to fill my day.

Work is my drug of choice.

I am best when I have work to do.

Posted in Fast Poem | Tagged , | 2 Comments

Corporate Silos – No hay nor corn

Facebook has made changes again. Corporate Silos are in the blogs again.

Most address privacy concerns but privacy concerns only distract us. We lost privacy when we obtained credit cards and agreed to pee in cups to get paid for our talent. 

How much less private can it get, really?

The real threat? Corporate silos, whether with intention or not, establish an environment  for censorship.

For twenty years we enjoyed Free Exchange of Information on an, open, distributed Internet .

New kinds of debate emerged. New stories linked to background. Study results linked to raw data – ideas transformed and branched in unprecedented ways. 

During the decade that saw a few holding companies take control of almost all television stations, radio stations and newspapers, Free Press was reinvented on the Internet. A rapidly enriched audience, outside the pale of advertising influence, discovered a frontier filled with information, ideas – not all to our liking but some eye-opening, which is the point of Free Press.  

Corporate Silos threaten Free Press on the Internet. They may not mean to. They have a goal to accomplish: generate profits – satisfy stockholders. If they fail, they go away. Protecting the Free Exchange of Ideas is not in their job description. If Free Press gets in the way, it goes away so they do not.

Worse, social-network silos create an environment ripe for a few companies to seize control of the Internet and implement policies that reduce it to something resembling cable TV: a thousand channels and no genuine choice.

Corporate Silos dictate tastes and values – motivated by revenue opportunities and subject to the tastes and values of other, outside corporate policy makers. Individuals are not the primary, if any, part of the algorithm. Stuck in the silo, individuals begin to forget about the rest of the world. Prime time television weaves a convenient and comfortable cocoon. Reality TV supplants ideas and insight.

We’ve enjoyed a two decade renaissance of idea. It would be a shame to see if fade away.

Corporate Silo describes a social-network site, like Facebook or Google +, who get people into the silo and try, like television stations, to keep users activity inside the silo. They control user experience through interface and filters. In some cases they censor content in and out of the silo.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Doing the Right Thing Wrong

August 9, 2011

Some people see dead people. Some people see stupid people. I see the Tower of Babble – every day – everywhere.

People speak and write, cajoling and persuading with words; words that do not mean the same thing to the persuader and the persuaded.

We all speak the same language here?

Or not. This may be a personal quirk – faulty wiring arcing in the recesses of neurosis. Or it may be reality.

Some days I sit in awe totally amazed language works at all. We (at least I) forget we come to conversation with private collections of words and phrases. We bring dictionaries filled with definitions all our own. It seems a miracle that mostly we get, if not exactly then close enough, what other people want us to get.

Consider – I started reading an article about the right thing and got the right thing wrong.

How could I get something as important as the right thing wrong? Not a right thing or that right thing or the what-bad-people-don’t-do right thing, but The Right Thing.

How can something as important as the right thing not signify the same right thing to everyone?

I did not disagree with the author in conscience but the thing that is the right thing in my head follows a completely different orbit; inhabits a completely different star system than the thing that is the right thing referred to in the post.

Seth Godin posted an article explaining why we cannot expect business to make ethical decisions (because people, not businesses make ethical decisions). He refers to ethical decisions as doing the right thing. I’d read half the article, struggling to connect the dots, before realizing my right thing was the wrong right thing for the article. Fortunately, the context explicitly defined what Seth meant by doing the right thing – that is, doing what is good for community.

Kudos to writers who define terms in context. Too many writers and speakers assume phrases ignite identical cognitive responses in each audience member; a cognitive response identical to that of the speaker/writer.

Once I read what he meant by the right thing, dots connected. I grokked his message and as usual, agreed with his conclusions. But why did he need to define the right thing for me? It seems natural (to me) that we define some concepts outside the enigmatic complexity of language – concepts, like the right thing, that affect everyone – individuals, communities and cultures – to the core. Why do we allow symbols of our most important ideas margin enough to evoke different responses in every mind?

We all speak the same language here?

Or not. We cannot avoid the ambiguity.

All our words, context to context, situation to situation, profession to profession and person to person consistently change connotation. The word God in my head, no matter how much you wish it wasn’t so, evokes scope and character different than the same word in your head. When I read Free, Freedom, Free Press or Free Lunch my synapses fire different sequences than yours.

The ubiquitous flux of language, perpetual shifting of nuance by situation and disparity of definition between people from diverse backgrounds should put us on constant alert for linguistic confusion. Yet, people surge forward without clarification and casually jump on bandwagons when words sound right. Later, when we feel betrayal because intention and interpretation did not sync, we explain it away.

“I did not know it would be like that.”

“It was not what I signed up for.”

And then we do it again.

People acquire enemies and waste debate not because they disagree with premise but because words look wrong. A phrase may unintentionally leave a bad taste. More often, when usage confuses, we go defensive, focussing energy on criticism instead of comprehension. Battles and feuds follow, fueled by conflict of lingo.

Accepting the ambiguous nature of language leads to uncommon awareness. Understanding the way meaning changes as circumstance changes brings responsibility. It falls to those who know how language works to promote precise usage. Beware. Pursuing accurate language leads to unpopular paths. People who fail to grok inherent ambiguity in language resent those who ask for clarification and react as if insulted that we should ask for explanation.

Sometimes I swear I can almost hear them think …

How don’t you know what I mean? Did I stutter?

Or are you stupid?

We all speak the same language here, don’t we?

© 2011 Chrome Poet

Posted in How to Read Poetry, Words | Leave a comment