This course investigates pornographic literature as a body of discursive practices whose "materials," according to the cultural critic Susan Sontag, comprise "one of the extreme forms of human consciousness." The pornography we study is an art of transgression which impels human sexuality toward, against and beyond the limits which have traditionally defined civil discourses and practices—defined, that is, by regimes of dominance and submission, inclusion or exclusion, in the domains of... emotional pleasure. Our examination accordingly includes the implication of pornography in so-called perverse practices such as voyeurism, bestiality, sadism, and masochism, and considers the inflections of the dominant white-heterosexual tradition by alternative sexualities and genders, as well as by race, class, age, mental and physical competence. We also attempt to identify the factors, intrinsic and extrinsic, which align the pornographic impulse with revolutionary or conservative political practices. But our primary focus is on pornography as radical representations of sexuality whose themes are violation, degradation, and exposure.
The university issued the following statement in response to controversy over both the content of the course, readings for which ranged from the Marquis de Sade to Hustler magazine, and its final student assignment: to "create your own work of pornography," in the words of Hope Weissman, the course's instructor. To fulfill the requirement, one young male student showed a video of his face while he masturbated. Ms. Weissman explained that in her teaching style, "I don't put any constraints." [sic]
This Spring semester the College of Letters offered for the second time a course on pornography. The course included a student project as its final assignment. Before members of the class, one female student executed a project in which she invited her classmates to hit her with tiny harmless whips that she provided. Two friends tied her to a board, with her back to the class. She was dressed in slacks but no blouse. At her invitation, some of her classmates did—hesitantly, feebly, and to the general amusement of everyone—gently whip her.No members of the class were at risk. Nothing more serious than ideas were at stake.
[Ed.: The controversy came at the same time Mount Holyoke started offering an uncredited class on strip dancing, which culminated in performances at a local topless bar.]
