The American Heritage Dictionary defines "erotica" as "literature or art concerning or intended to arouse sexual desire."  It defines "pornography" as "written, graphic or other forms of communication intended to excite lascivious feelings."  If you grind these two definitions through an online translator, they would seem to mean the exact same thing.  But, paying attention to the subtleties of each sentence…they’re far from it.

"Literature and art" is quite a higher title than "written or graphic forms of communication" (implying that erotica is inherently "Art" while pornography is merely "Communication"), and "concerning or intended to arouse sexual desire" is a much more scholarly and artistic purpose than "intended to excite lascivious feelings."  "Sexual desire" can even be construed as spiritually-based longing, or even the study of sex in general, whereas "lascivious feelings" seems to be a careful euphemism for "hard-ons."

All right then, let’s go with the American Heritage Dictionary’s all-knowing definitions of the two terms, and let’s assume my interpretation of the subtle differences in those definitions is correct.

Where do you draw the line between erotica and pornography?  Isn’t one person’s Art another person’s Smut?  Isn’t one person’s turn-on another person’s reason to go green at the gills?  When does artistic treatment drain into shoddy exploitation?  It’s not exactly a new question---every year, people argue that comic books aren’t art, that science fiction isn’t literature…in short, that things that are popular, effective in their goals (however narrow those might at times become) and extremely accessible aren’t worthy of a lofty title.

Pornography/erotica, though, seems to have a rougher go at it.  Only severely conservative groups truly believe comic books to be a vile and dangerous influence on the population of America---but take an errant edition of Frank Miller’s experimental Sin City noir comics and stack it next to Betty and Veronica, and the fur will fly before a page is turned.

Sex enjoys (or is sentenced to) such a sensitive position in our society that often the fine distinctions between "pornography" and "erotica" are completely ignored…anything pertaining to sex is simply labeled porn, nicknamed smut, and condemned as sordid.  Others argue that successful pornography is, indeed, Art---those with the opinion might be labeled as the few glossy-eyed romantics lingering in the "porno industry", or blushing intellectuals attempting to justify their fondness for tapes with names like "Lust in the Dust"…but are these easily teasable representatives any less comical than their opponents, who might often consider sex with the lights on to be a depraved sin?

It seems easier to side with the American Heritage Dictionary and call porn, porn, and erotica, erotica, and let the customer make their own decision as to which is which.  Booksellers can happily continue to group "erotica" (often a strange melting pot of short-story collections, nonfiction writings on sex, and copies of the Kama Sutra) along with the so-called science fiction, fantasy, and mystery sections, while not disturbing their copies of "Asian Cunt Patrol" and "Hot Nudies 16-Month Calendar" in the mysterious back room (ASK CLERK FOR ASSISTANCE, 18+ ONLY).

The art-minding public will only have to hope that truly transcendent works concentrating on sex will rise above their genre-labeling (whether as "pornography" or "erotica") and be embraced as literature, just as "Brave New World" can today be found in Fiction Instead of Sci-Fi.  Not a very likely scenario---but the moral landscape of America has never been set in stone…as the fact that nobody was shocked by Jennifer Lopez’s daring display of her bare ankles at last year’s Grammy Awards will attest.

By the way, the Word97 thesaurus function, when asked for synonyms of "pornographic," produces "obscene, lewd, prurient, indecent, vulgar, smutty, salacious, dirty, immoral"---a fairly straightforward condemnation---whereas "erotic" receives much less clear judgment in two categories:  "amorous (and a few other synonymous adjectives thereof), romantic…and carnal, aphrodisiac, erogenous, (now sliding into more familiar negative adjectives) lecherous, lewd."

Opinion, it seems, is everywhere.