The BBC and Alternet treat us to yet another "clever" and "enlightened" column about how low-quality and stupid porn is: "You and I... we're just too urbane and sophisticated to REALLY enjoy such lowbrow dreck, right?" (nudge nudge, wink wink).
Yeah, right. Like we've never EVER read or heard the "for RESEARCH purposes only ga-hyuck ga-hyuck" line before.
Personally, I find James's posturing much more annoying and offensive than any porn I've ever seen (well, almost any).
The cute little "American" thrown in his mishmash of demeaning adjectives makes me even less kindly disposed to James or his transparently admiration-seeking puff piece. Charming how, among his handy cliches, he resorts to the handy old standby - the crass, lowbrow American stereotype.
James's dismissal of the arousing effects of porn says more about his diminished libido than the quality of the genre.
Porn's an easy target, and usually nobody's willing to stand up and publicly defend it - who wants to admit to the world that they masturbate while watching others perform sex?
But eventually, after all the opportunistic public detractors have faded from the public's memory, porn continues to flourish and grow in popularity. In fact, yesterday's porn is inevitably elevated to the status of today's cultural treasures - witness Betty Page, Russ Meyer, D.H. Lawrence, Geoffrey Chaucer, etc., etc. Do we even need to mention the Greco-Roman era or Japanese pillow books?
People have never voluntarily lost interest in porn and never will. The popularity of hack writing, on the other hand....?