Linda Williams (1) (1946–)

Couldn’t finish this. Very disappointing. I had high hopes. A lot of the authors are Williams’ students, which wouldn’t be a problem, but many of essays read like students groping for a topic because they’ve been tasked with publication for course credit. Williams says her goal was to map a history of the genre. I’m left not knowing what to think. How can a volume with such a goal, published in 2004, have no mention of New Wave Hookers in its index? Oh well. I’m stopping in the middle so I could be missing out. I’ve heard Williams speak before, read some of her essays, and, in general, found her enlightened and insightful.… (lisätietoja)

Williams argues that filmed pornography went through a trajectory in the twentieth century of increasing attention to the problem of women’s pleasure (or of how to represent women’s pleasure), which meant that pornographic films went from narrativeless “stag” films to narratives that, if not great storylines, actually attempted coherence. Stags didn’t feature “money shots” (male ejaculation) as late 20th-century porn did; she argues that the male money shot is often a stand-in for female orgasm, which lacks the same type of visual evidence. As she points out, the term “money shot” unites commodification and sexuality as well as visuality. Twenty years on, I can’t help but want another chapter about internet pornography, gonzo porn (in contrast to the feature films she argues were at least responding to, if not incorporating, feminist critiques in that they no longer depicted rape as pleasurable for the victim), and the apparent return of the non-narrative stag-type film that’s just a bunch of sex acts.… (lisätietoja)