Pornos and profs and queers, Oh My!
Editorial
Move over Shakespeare, this aint your parent’s English class.’Studies in Critical Theory: Queer Theory,’ a class offered last spring by the OSU English department has recently drawn fire from segments of the community for its frank use of sexually explicit materials in dealing with gay and lesbian issues.But is it pornography?Ian Barnard, the professor on loan from San Diego State University who taught the class, doesn’t seem to think so: “I think pornography is something that… is intended to arouse people… these films weren’t pornography,” Barnard has said.He does, however, acknowledge that some of the films he used in a separate class, ‘Queer Film and Video,’ were – horror of horrors! – pornographic in nature.And you know, so what?First of all, Barnard apparently explained to students on the first day of class exactly what they would be studying over the course of the quarter. Some chose to stay, others chose to leave.In other words, he gave them fair warning.Secondly – and we cannot emphasize this enough – it’s all a matter of context.Let’s all join hands and say it together: “Context, context, context.”Neither we, nor any of the course’s detractors, ever attended a single lecture given by professor Barnard. As such, we are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.Call us old-fashioned, but we find it very difficult to believe that an OSU professor – even a wacky Californian – would use pornographic materials as teaching aids for the express purpose of titillating his audience. This is Ohio State, not Hollywood.Additionally, we have to wonder if the films homosexual orientations aren’t the reason everyone is suddenly feeling a tad bit uncomfortable. After all, it’s no secret that we have enormous hang-ups in this country when it comes to honest discussions of human sexuality. You can blame it on our puritanical ancestry, Jerry Falwell, or the new CBS fall lineup, but the fact remains that every time the words “penis,” vagina,” or “penetration” are spoken in the same time zone as our mother, we cringe. We should carve it into the walls of the grand canyon in letters eighty feet high for the flying saucer people to find: WE SPENT WAY TOO MUCH TIME PREOCCUPIED WITH SEX. They may infer from this what they will.The point is, we have to let go of these prejudices if we are to allow a straight-forward, honest discussion of sexuality. And let’s face it, there’s no better place for this to start than English class. Really, would we remember Joyce or Poe if their work hadn’t been infected with the genius born – at least in part – by their twisted sexual repression? Pornography is in the eye of the beholder, and it’s the emotional baggage that the consumer brings with them to the product that counts. After all, celluloid, or books, or compact disks are not – cannot be – intrinsically good or bad. It’s what we do with them, how we react to them, to what use they are employed, that causes consequences. For either good or ill.And whether it’s “Queer Theory,” “Robert Mapelthorpe,” “The Color Purple,” or “Huckleberry Finn,” we have to put our faith in the professionals entrusted with opening our view of the world. A view which is meant to extend beyond the realm of our experience. After all, isn’t that what an education is for?
