The Times: “A piece of Prehistoric pornography”
The Telegraph: “Could be seen as bordering on the pornographic.” (quoted without attribute)
The Guardian: “Erotica through the ages”
The Irish Independent: “Porn from prehistory”
The Independent: “Erotic art for cavemen discovered”
So, the Venus of Hohle Fels is declared ‘pornographic’ by the quality press. How predictable and depressing. Presumably that’s how these journalists are used to assessing images they find on the internet…
Apart from the difficulty of speculating on the uses and reasons behind something 35,000 years old, surely this object is more likely to be a fertility object of some sort rather than ‘masturbatory accessory’ as they seem desperate to imply.
Have these journos never heard of the Venus of Willendorf, of which this object would seem closely related to?
What is even sadder is that the World’s Greatest Media have focussed entirely on this one, rather unattractive object, when in fact there have been other far more beautiful objects found at Hohle Fels, and which give even more an insight in the creativity and artistic impulses of human beings in the neolithic period:
The head of a horse:
(This is exquisite. If you’d rather look at an ugly figurine with big tits, go for it)
(the above two from: archaeology.about.com)
Humour, skill, artistry.
And yes, sex is important too, but the relentless obsession…?
Gets tired. Move on press people.