"Artistic Pornography"

[TheFlyingCamera]

I've been thinking about this and I've decided that the idea that 'art' cannot be 'porn' is a load of b******s
Cate

Cate-

I agree- look at that Caravaggio painting I posted to this thread. That's both. High art and not-so-subtle eroticism.

 

[Peter De Smidt]

Cate-

I agree- look at that Caravaggio painting I posted to this thread. That's both. High art and not-so-subtle eroticism.

I agree with Cate as well, but that painting...yuck!

 

[blansky]

Just to add more confusion to the debate, we can perhaps correlate the concept of porn and art, or eroticism and art, with the concepts of love and lust, and our body's responses to them.

If art stimulates a cerebral reaction and porn merely a physical reaction, they're sort of in the same league as love vs lust. Probably by definition, although hard to define, we would say that love is a highly revered quasi cerebral response to something, and lust a supposedly less than virtuous (although generally more fun) reaction to a stimulus. This of course correlates with the highbrow reaction we have to art and the more earthy response with that nasty old porn.

I would argue that both love and lust can occur at the same time. (By saying I love to lust after women does not apply here). One can love their mate and be very full of lust (lustfull) after a couple of glasses of wine, good lighting and the room service tray is placed outside. The combination of the two is perhaps even be more fulfilling than just lusting after your secretary and nailing her in the executive washroom.

So I believe that indeed one can appreciate art and porn at the same time and perhaps both at the same time are indeed more fulfilling than looking at just art alone.



One problem I've tried to square away is my argument that lust is just a base reaction (reptilian brain) response that needs no higher thinking to be performed. Although we are drawn to it like flies to watermelon, we still, damn it, have to use our higher brains to qualify it. Is it safe? Is it legal? etc.

I've always been fascinated with the time/age problem as well. I look at a naked beautiful 25 year old woman and lust after her. I'd ravage her in a heartbeat. Would I feel the same way if I saw the same woman and she was 60. Same woman. Different illusion. What if she was 18? Yeah I jump her. 16? Hmmm.. better not. 14? Damn. Whats wrong with me. 10? Oh my God. I shouldn't even be looking. But it's the same "woman", just a different illusion.

So what I'm saying is that even with lust and with porn, although reptilian in nature, there is still higher cerebral thought processes occurring during the viewing. I guess the question is are these thought process high enough to be given the label of art.

Carry on.


Michael

 

[catem]

So what I'm saying is that even with lust and with porn, although reptilian in nature, there is still higher cerebral thought processes occurring during the viewing. I guess the question is are these thought process high enough to be given the label of art.

Carry on.


Michael

'Porn' is lust without love, so I suppose you mean, is it possible for it to be art, and therefore w*****g on a higher plain?

If it makes you feel better....frankly I still think its (self-delusional) b******s.

Cate

 

[Claire Senft]

Dearest Cate, concerned am I that you not wear out your * key. Love C****e.

 

[catem]

Thank you Claire. It's bearing up well.

It's true I'm using it far more than is normal for me; it must be something to do with the subject matter of this debate

Cate

 

[blansky]

'Porn' is lust without love, so I suppose you mean, is it possible for it to be art, and therefore w*****g on a higher plain?

Cate

Exactly.

How may times have you been in a gallery and the person working there prattles on about this work "saying" this and that and you just walk away flashing the universal stroking gesture, rolling your eyes and shaking your head.


Michael

 

[Bromo33333]

Exactly.

How may times have you been in a gallery and the person working there prattles on about this work "saying" this and that and you just walk away flashing the universal stroking gesture, rolling your eyes and shaking your head.

Most art openings I have attended, conversations seem to be about anything but the artwork being displayed. :rolleyes: In some cases I would have much preferred what you experienced.

Reading artist statements, now that can generate some of the reaction you talk about ...

 

[Peter De Smidt]

Distinguishing 'higher' from 'lower' pleasures has a long history, from early Hedonism, through JS Mill, to....Blansky The problem is that if pleasure is a good, then why are high brow pleasures somehow better? You can either hold that highbrow pleasures give more pleasure, better pleasure, or they entail another type of good that's not reducible to pleasure. Each of these options faces rather considerable difficulties.

 

[Bromo33333]

Distinguishing 'higher' from 'lower' pleasures has a long history, from early Hedonism, through JS Mill, to....Blansky The problem is that if pleasure is a good, then why are high brow pleasures somehow better? You can either hold that highbrow pleasures give more pleasure, better pleasure, or they entail another type of good that's not reducible to pleasure. Each of these options face rather considerable difficulties.

The difference for me is that one form of pleasure (I think of as "low") is primarily concerned with sating an appetite. The "higher" form feels more like growing and becoming better in some way. I suppose it would be most analogous to the difference between 'mindless sex' and 'love.'

There is a great book called [Amazon Link:]The Pleasure Trap that has an interesting premise that focuses mostly on overeating, but seems to be applicable in other areas with well known "appetites" and the possibilities of excess.

 

[Salmonoid]

*Warning* Do not read if you are easily upset.

This is a very important subject for visual artists let me start by acknowledging some obvious and universal facts (things that are ignored by much of those contributing to this thread).

1. All sex is pleasurable. (heterosexual, homosexual, monosexual, s&m) This simply is how we're designed as sexual beings. It is very mechanical, and we are not vastly different from one another. Rub Y, get X. That simple.

2. Pleasure can be destructive. Just because something is edifying in one context, in another it can harm and destroy. For instance, fire does a wonderful job of roasting asparagus to that perfect softness/crispness to make it a pure pleasure, but fire all over the kitchen, or all over the forest is a terrible producer of death and destruction. Examples: Abuse of drugs is pleasurable but it leads to self destruction. To much alchohol leads to death on the highway and destruction of your liver. Licentious living leads to sexually transmitted deseases.

3. Sexuallity serves the essential function of reproduction of the human species. This is a very good thing. Nuff said.

4. Children are dependant on a stable environment, and need protection from those who can easily harm them. Healthy and lifelong heterosexual relationships are the most complete and healthy relationship for raising children who become healthy adults. Our society wishes to deny this so that we can excuse our adidiction to sexual pleasure at the expense of the healthy reproduction of our species.

5. Men are aroused visually. Women much less so. This is were pornography comes in.

6. Pornography is addictive to many males, and will lead to the foresaking of spouse and family for self gratification. It is a well established fact that all sexaul preditors are users of pornography first. Sexual arousal leads to sexual acts, most of which are destructive of healthy marriage, and nurturing of children.

Now I certainly hope that no one here would argue with any of they truths. If they offend you, you should ask yourself why reality bites. I would also hope that you would not produce art which leads to destructive sexual behavior, but would aim for a more edifying goal. Stop being an animal, and be human.

Rev. Timothy Gordish

Father of an adopted child who was the product of fornication, neglected by her mother, abused by a boyfriend and used for child pornography. We are currently dealing the the devasting effects of her early sexualization.

 

[Roger Hicks]

What if she was 18? Yeah I jump her. 16? Hmmm.. better not. 14? Damn. Whats wrong with me. 10?

This has long intrigued me. The pervert is the man who does NOT find a beautiful 14-year-old girl attractive. Or, alternatively, the pervert is the man who does find the beautiful 14-year-old girl attractive, but refuses to accept that no matter how beautiful she is, if you're over about 15, the only decent thing is to leave her alone, admire her from a distance, and either never let her know or (if you know her well enough, which has to be pretty well -- and includes knowing her parents well too), to say, "If I were 15 or 16, I'd fancy you something rotten."

Cheers,

R.

 

[Bromo33333]

This has long intrigued me. The pervert is the man who does NOT find a beautiful 14-year-old girl attractive. Or, alternatively, the pervert is the man who does find the beautiful 14-year-old girl attractive, but refuses to accept that no matter how beautiful she is, if you're over about 15, the only decent thing is to leave her alone, admire her from a distance, and either never let her know or (if you know her well enough, which has to be pretty well -- and includes knowing her parents well too), to say, "If I were 15 or 16, I'd fancy you something rotten."

Cheers,

R.

Actually, simply refrain from saying anything along those lines at all implying that you would find her attractive. No matter what, since nothing good would ever come of it.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Actually, simply refrain from saying anything along those lines at all implying that you would find her attractive. No matter what, since nothing good would ever come of it.

Yers and no. In 56 years I have met two young girls -- both the daughters of friends -- to whom I have said this. Both were extremely mature for their years, and by the age of 14 were probably as wise/grown up/whatever you will as the average 20-year-old: IQs off the end of the scale, that sort of thing, and VERY dismissive (vocally, in conversation with their parents and me) of boys of their own age. At that point I see little harm in saying, "Oh, come off it, ___________. You're a very attractive girl. If I were 40 years younger I'd ask you out immediately."

Cheers,

R.

 

[Bromo33333]

[...] At that point I see little harm in saying, "Oh, come off it, ___________. You're a very attractive girl. If I were 40 years younger I'd ask you out immediately."

That's very different. The other thing you said sounded like a dirty old man .. this sounds more like a mentor.

 

[bjorke]

've always been fascinated with the time/age problem as well. I look at a naked beautiful 25 year old woman and lust after her. I'd ravage her in a heartbeat. Would I feel the same way if I saw the same woman and she was 60. Same woman. Different illusion. What if she was 18? Yeah I jump her. 16? Hmmm..

Gosh Michael, this is a surprising turn for your studio business

------------------​

Personally I see no problem with lust w/o love, largely because 'love' is so incredibly amorphous as to defy definition. Despite the occasional sign that there really is a G*d, I usually look at everything through the lens of evolution and see most of these moral conflicts as reflecting the behavior of primates that evolved living in small bands now living in large societies. We don't worry about these sorts of things in social groups smaller than the Dunbar number — it's only in groups large enough to afford anonymity (media like TV and the 'net can add this to even the tiniest hamlet these days) where people start worrying about effects like 'lust without love.'

I see a lot of correlation between 'porn' and 'art' and other aspects of culture: we can play football or hockey without actually going to war to defend our tribe. We can run on the elliptical machine and enjoy it without actually being pursued by a predator (not counting the predations of Father Time). We can enjoy the sweetness of a Tiramisu without really needing to eat, because we've already got plenty. And yes we can enjoy a host of lustful stimuli without having to actually create children, provide long-term care for their other parent, and all the other associations one can cite as 'love.' The Primate of Rome may not approve but I find it not particularly harmful or surprising.

 

[bjorke]

The other thing you said sounded like a dirty old man .. this sounds more like a mentor.

They get trickier as they age

 

[Roger Hicks]

That's very different. The other thing you said sounded like a dirty old man .. this sounds more like a mentor.

Which merely demonstrates the scope for misunderstanding on the internet, as compared with face-to-face. If you know the person in question, you know what you can say, and in what language: again, this is both culturally specific and specific to the person/situation. I had known both these girls for years, and their parents for a decade in one case and three decades in the other. One is now a research scientist at Pfizer, while the other is currently trying to choose which of the Hautes Ecoles to attend. These are the French equivalent of the Ivy League, but with more guarantee of success when you leave.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Bromo33333]

[...] We can run on the elliptical machine and enjoy it without actually being pursued by a predator (not counting the predations of Father Time). [...]

Brings us t the quote:

Eat right, exercise regularly, die anyway. ~Author Unknown

 

[catem]

However, Roger, I would counsel against any such comments, for your own sake. At 14 anyone over 20 might as well have false teeth, a bald head, stoop and deaf aid. The effect on the girl is I have to say (I remember one or two similar comments) most likely to be puke-inducing (using their sort of parlance), and the most harm is likely to be done to your pride (probably in your absence).

Cate

 

[Bromo33333]

However, Roger, I would counsel against any such comments, for your own sake. At 14 anyone over 20 might as well have false teeth, a bald head, stoop and deaf aid. The effect on the girl is I have to say (I remember one or two similar comments) most likely to be puke-inducing (using their sort of parlance), and the most harm is likely to be done to your pride (probably in your absence).

Cate

I realized I was an adult when at 30, I was in a store, and a kid pointed at me and said (all I overheard was) "...No, no mommy, that old guy over there!"

At that point I figured I was of the "never trust anyone over 30" crowd, and Recalled the cheesy "Logan's Run"

 

[Aggie]

Getting back to what this thread was about, and the book that the owner of this thread has sited and posted a link to.... At the end of all these lofty debates who are we to tell the author of the said book what to name it? Also at the end of all this discussion is not the subject no matter what it is debated to be in the artistic realm still pornography?

Another twist, since religion has been brought into this, do all of you respect the cultures of other countries you travel to? Would you be so outspoken about all of this in a muslim country? there are many many groups, relgions, and such that have differring views. Do we have the right to tell a Muslim how to live their religion? In the end of all of this is it not respect for others beliefs, and culture?

 

[dmr]

... some obvious and universal facts ...

1. All sex is pleasurable. (heterosexual, homosexual, monosexual, s&m)

Consensual sex is usually pleasurable.

Forcible sex, sex under duress, coercion, violence, is not. It can be scary and traumatic!

As sexual beings, we also develop likes and dislikes. We like things certain ways, and we don't like things certain ways. Some sex acts for some people are not pleasurable, but uncomfortable.

 

[Roger Hicks]

However, Roger, I would counsel against any such comments, for your own sake. At 14 anyone over 20 might as well have false teeth, a bald head, stoop and deaf aid. The effect on the girl is I have to say (I remember one or two similar comments) most likely to be puke-inducing (using their sort of parlance), and the most harm is likely to be done to your pride (probably in your absence).

Cate

Dear Cate,

Probably true. Both comments are years in the past. But both girls are some way from 'average': I suspect that their reaction was nearer, "Poor old fellow, but he means well."

Cheers,

R.

 

[Claire Senft]

I would like to nominate Hicks and Blansky as Pontiff candidates for Apug.
Do I hear any seconds?