English 60A: Contemporary Critical Theory

STUDENTS' RESPONSES TO JANICE RADWAY, CONSTANCE PENLEY, AND LAURA KIPNIS

What popped out at me while reading all three of these articles was the role that the physical body played in the perceptions of the readers of Hustler, romance novels, and zines. (This also made me think of Foucault's assessment of the body.) Both zine and romance readers seemed to treat sex in a highly romanticized way. Meanwhile, there's Hustler, capitalizing on its portrayal of the yucky stuff--which seems to be one of the main reasons why so many people hate it. It's also interesting to think of how damaged Larry Flynt's own body is . . . (Julie Wroblewski)

Why is science fiction, even when it dwells heavily on romance, treated with more respect than romance novels? Is it because romances are seen as incredibly feminine? The zines seem every bit as formulaic as the novels. I also picked up some hints of condescension from Radway. She came in as an outsider and made connections, but remained an outsider by writing about it in such a distanced way. Penley came across as part of the group she was writing about. (Julie Wroblewski)

I think it's definitely valuable to analyze porn, but it bothers me that there is this academic and feminist movement to legitimize it. What would be the reaction if someone made a movie about David Duke? (Julie Wroblewski)

Kipnis has set herself a formidable challenge: how to push her analysis far beyond the standard utterances about pornography. She executes a complex argument that threads its way through issues of class, politics, sexual orientation, and even race--all issues that can and will confound the seemingly removed realm of porn. The issue has been split into more than just the two basic camps of misogynist porn fanatics and staunchly anti-porn feminists. There are the pro-sex feminists, the high-society and high-class porn aficionados, political satirists--the list goes on. She realizes that she can't necessarily speak for all people--she can't even speak for all upper-middle class female academics. I especially commend her for keeping in mind the simple truth that everyone is different. (JP Mohan)

Just promise me that Hustler will never be part of our canon. (JP Mohan)

What next?


revised October 1, 1997
mail to Tim Spurgin