Porn as Art or Porn vs. Art

[Josh66]

It's all about the message for me. Art "means something". There is some underlying message that the artist is trying to convey with the work. Without that, I can't call it art...

I'm not trying to impose my view upon others though, as I know they are not universal.

 

[Josh66]

I guess my conclusion is that "pornographic images" can become 'art', but that once they do so they cease being pornography.

That's basically what I was trying to say earlier, when I said that I couldn't call one image art and porn at the same time.

 

[EIngerson]

If the photographer, subject or viewer sees something as art, it's art. The content doesn't decide that.

But doesn't that tread dangerously close to the "everything is art" line?

And if everything is art, then why do we use the word 'art' to distinguish anything?

If you see something as art, who would I be to say otherwise and vice-versa? To answer your question, because "art" is a catch all term. It's nothing more than "the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination." It is what it is and there's no line that separates art from non-art. And there most certainly are no rules to art.

 

[Dikkie]

Can't seem to fully understand what you mean...

Maybe you have to clarify this by adding some photos to support your thread, as arguments, so we can clearly see what you mean.
Preferably close-ups and such

 

[manaheim]

In one of these discussions a while back someone said what I think is the only way to answer this question...

[para] "I can't tell you what the difference between art and porn is, but I can sure as hell tell you which one I'm looking at when I see it."

 

[bentcountershaft]

If the photographer, subject or viewer sees something as art, it's art. The content doesn't decide that.

But doesn't that tread dangerously close to the "everything is art" line?

And if everything is art, then why do we use the word 'art' to distinguish anything?

Art is an abstract construct, not a concrete or physical entity. As such it is beyond the realm of definition and can include ANYTHING. When you limit what art can be you kill the whole idea of art, which is free expression.

 

[Ilovemycam]

They have art that is pornographic and pornographic photos that does not have much art in it.

 

[jaomul]

It depends on the impact it has on your senses. If i walked into a room with my young son and there was a picture of nudity on the wall- if it made me uncomfortable that he could see it I may think its pornagraphic, if not I may think its arty

 

[pgriz]

Could something be pornographic if nakeness or sex acts were not on display? How about a display of garden vegetables arranged to give an impression of a phallus? Then, it is not the subject that is "pornographic" but our interpretation of it. And that, by its very nature is going to be different for each person. I remember one artist that my wife went to school with, who incorporated images of the vagina as a graphic element in her mixed media. It was always kinda hidden, so you had to be at a certain distance for the components to come together visually, and then it popped out at you (sorry, that was not meant to be a pun). She's locate this in the image of a tree trunk, or a still-life, or a landscape, and it was always sufficiently well incorporated into the flow of the image that it wasn't obvious. She had an exhibition of her work at the university gallery, and no-one noticed these elements until the exhibition was taking place, and then some patrons would walk around admiring the pictures and then some were recoiling from the images in horror. Created a huge stir and there was a demand for the "pornography" to be taken down, and of course the university defended the work as freedom of expression in an academic arena. I've tried to find a link to some of that work, haven't yet succeeded.

 

[pixmedic]

back when I installed granite countertops for a living, we did a job at a very nice older couples house. VERY nice house. over the mantle of their fireplace, was a full body nude sculpture of each of them. (only partial arms and legs though, thighs and shoulders) Not sure what the material was. they were probably in their 50's at the time i was in their home, and the wife explained to me that they had them done 20 years ago while they were in their "prime", and have always had them prominently displayed in their living room. they were BOTH still in fantastic shape, and neither one liked to wear much around the house. which was fine by me. They were exemplary specimens of the male and female form.

anyway, it would be very easy to look at those sculptures and see "art". they were very well done, and extremely well detailed. im sure they cost a ton of money.
but, if someone looked at them and became aroused... and...you know....is it porn now? can it be both?
art is subjective right? I see plenty of (what I consider) crappy stuff labeled as art. photographs, paintings, modern sculptures....
is the woman that makes "art" by brushing paint on a canvas with her boobs and butt art? that's what she calls it.

you would probably have an easier time defining something as "porn" than something as "art"... by American culture anyway, I cant speak for other cultures around the world. whats the saying? I don't know art but I know what I like?

 

[bentcountershaft]

you would probably have an easier time defining something as "porn" than something as "art"... by American culture anyway, I cant speak for other cultures around the world. whats the saying? I don't know art but I know what I like?

That's it right there. 99% of art is crap is my opinion, but one man's crap can literally be another man's art.

The problem stems from people equating "art" with "good" and that just isn't correct. If you made sculpture or something, there isn't a scale to measure it's craftsmanship that you have to meet a minimum of to achieve "art". No one from the Art Inspector's Office is going to come to you and say, "Well Bob, I'm sorry, but that's just a couple notches below what we consider art. Better luck next time." The fact is it's all art. All of it. And you can classify it into two categories. There's art you like and art you don't.

 

[runnah]

back when I installed granite countertops for a living, we did a job at a very nice older couples house. VERY nice house. over the mantle of their fireplace, was a full body nude sculpture of each of them. (only partial arms and legs though, thighs and shoulders) Not sure what the material was. they were probably in their 50's at the time i was in their home, and the wife explained to me that they had them done 20 years ago while they were in their "prime", and have always had them prominently displayed in their living room. they were BOTH still in fantastic shape, and neither one liked to wear much around the house. which was fine by me. They were exemplary specimens of the male and female form.

Dear Penthouse forum,

I've always read your letters and never believed them to be true until one night while I was delivering a granite countertop...

 

[DarkShadow]

I think this article is a good read. Is Nude Photography Art or Is Nude Photography Porn?

 

[Trever1t]

Pornography is an Art Form. Nudes are not necessarily Porn. What is the distinction you ask? Porn is an art form of sexual arousal.

 

[rexbobcat]

you would probably have an easier time defining something as "porn" than something as "art"... by American culture anyway, I cant speak for other cultures around the world. whats the saying? I don't know art but I know what I like?

That's it right there. 99% of art is crap is my opinion, but one man's crap can literally be another man's art.

The problem stems from people equating "art" with "good" and that just isn't correct. If you made sculpture or something, there isn't a scale to measure it's craftsmanship that you have to meet a minimum of to achieve "art". No one from the Art Inspector's Office is going to come to you and say, "Well Bob, I'm sorry, but that's just a couple notches below what we consider art. Better luck next time." The fact is it's all art. All of it. And you can classify it into two categories. There's art you like and art you don't.

Do you mean that everything that humans create is art, or everything that exists is art?