Libraries – 21st Century Bathhouses?

As I first reported on my blog, libraries across this great nation have decided that the only way to combat the viewing of pornography in the public square is not, as common sense might dictate, to apply filters but, in rather draconian fashion, pull Internet access altogether. As reported on WXYZ.com, the Mt. Clemens library just outside of Detroit, Michigan has dispensed with the information superhighway altogether because of its inability to regulate what its patrons are viewing. Why read Salome or Frank Wedekind’s Lulu when it’s just so much easier to click onto one of the ubiquitous MILF or DILF sites. Supporters argue that pornography has no place in a publicly funded entity like a library and that kids can easily gain access to inappropriate images. Critics argue that important information – information that isn’t even remotely connected to pornography – is being censored and by applying these imperfect tools we are throwing the baby away with the bath water. I say, have you ever spent any time in a public library? Maybe it’s must my monthly cycle of pheromones but from my visits to the library I don’t think kids viewing porn is the problem. I think the fact that they don’t have locker rooms is. Libraries are hotbeds for cruising. Bored, horny college kids, housewives with extra time, hustlers waiting for sunset. These are the characters that populate my local libraries. And with so many government buildings cloaked in a post 9/11 you’ve-given-up-your-right-to-privacy mindset, public libraries are still one of the few places that are camera free. At least I hope so. I had or gave more blowjobs in the Phoenix Public Library than candles on my last birthday cake. You know, we can argue until we’re blue in the face about what we can or cannot do to prevent children from viewing inappropriate images. But with or without filters, the kinds of porn available at your local library has a lot less to do with what’s on the monitor and a lot more to do with the extended gaze from that hot university hunk glossing over some obscure article from Paleontology Today.
--MOC BLOGGER


1 Comments:
Giles Deleuze probably should be looked at in the context of Dennis Cooper more than of Jacques Lacan, but I don't really follow Queer Theory, so maybe I'm not a good source.
But apart from which psychoanalytic school you follow, I think the question of "how (and why) [Paul Morris] makes them, and why they're culturally important" could be a very interesting discussion. To be fair, though, this should also include a discussion of why we like to watch them (and what we're thinking and feeling, and I'm not talking about phalluses here), and why the "performers" participate in them.
I remember being asked at a bar one night if I knew about Treasure Island films. I didn't, at the time, but it's now clear to me that if I had said "yes," the evening might have developed quite differently than it did.
For my part, TIM is "almost" a revival of the electricity of the early-to-mid 1970s. I say "almost," because instead of tempting me to revive that sort of life, I am very aware of what risks the performers are taking, and that, to me, takes a lot of the zing out. I should be thinking "I wish I were down there under all those guys," but instead I'm thinking "Do they understand that they're shortening their lives?" I'm probably not the market TIM is after.
Sorry I can't tell you much about Deleuze, other than that he is a figure of some note in cinema theory circles.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home