> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:owner-
> heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of michaelP
> Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 9:58 AM
> To: heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: autoporn
>
> Apart from the noble rene, most of the posts on this list and generally in
> the media, concerned with the matter of the disgusting events
> eventualising
> in Iraq have been concerned to speak of and show the rights and wrongs
> (and
> it is wrong and bad etc) of the tortures and humiliations, the shame and
> blame, etc, and of increasing the proliferation of the awful stories as
> reportage and sensation and suffused with moral outrage and righteousness.
> This is, in its own way, fine and in its self righteous as righteous be,
> but... But, when this reappears on a philosophical list without
> (proximally,
> for the most part) any real attempt to display the phenomena in (say) a
> phenomenological or (say) an analytical manner, i.e., re-appearing as just
> bare (repeated) reportage/sensationalism/moral-outrage, then it seems to
> me
> to be veering abysmally close to the proximity of pornography. Has no-one
> read Ballard's 'Crash' or 'The Atrocity Exhibition'? It seems we are
> mesmerised and even excited by torture and humiliation (or at least by
> stories of such) and thus seem unable (by being transfixed) to look at in
> any other way than by moralistic rejection or prolific sensationalised
> publicity (embrace). One might expect this from the media and the so-
> called
> PITS, but on a philosophy list...?
>
> At the moment, it seems, according to the very media responsible for much
> of
> its appearance and profusion, pornography (just porn available and
> innocuous, just like corn) is OK, normal(ised), popular... What does the
> team think? Is it OK to re-produce the porn of torture
> (reportage/displaying
> graphically/delving/swamping)? Or do we want to perform an other
> comportment
> with respect to the phenomena?
Hi MichaelP,
The answer is self-evident. Don't you think?
Bob
>
> regards
>
> michaelP
>
>
> --- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
