If someone drops a revealing magazine in the woods and no-one ever jacks off to it, is it still porn?
If someone drops a revealing magazine in the woods and no-one ever jacks off to it, is it still porn?
It's like saying that a monkey is covered in fur, has a tail, four fingers and a thumb on each hand, etc., versus the ethical it seems porn-art debate.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Man From Nantucket
Some interesting responses in this thread, enjoyable... thanks.
It is a little like asking if pop is good music (or music at all). Do we go with majority rule for consensus? Is that the right thing to do? are we arguing between right and wrong? Opinion versus fact...who decides.
Consensus decides...Quote:
Originally Posted by GemOfTroy
Well Boo to that. I rebel with all my heart.Quote:
Originally Posted by Absurd
Well whatever I'm taking a break from this topic, I feel like I'm not getting what I want to say out clear enough, but I'm not trying to be rude to Vois.
Can anyone actually prove that lots of so-called "art" wasn't meant to titillate in any way?
Did Botticelli have an entirely Platonic relationship with his Venus, or was he at least a little turned when fantasizing about the most beautiful woman in the human collective imagination? As a corollary, what's the market like for nude models who are 300 pound, 75 year old women?
Heh, as long one is talking porn, you don't really need a proof - it is meant to stimulate and satisfy an excessive desire.Quote:
Originally Posted by xerx
Egon Schiele's nudes could be a good case in point too. Their nakedness isn't exactly what one could call incidental.Quote:
Originally Posted by xerx
Talk to Jenny Saville.Quote:
Originally Posted by xerx
Yes. People want to assume that there is a line between porn and art. This is a bug created by the realm of words but the map is not the territory. Reality is always a lot more nuanced than we can capture with words.Quote:
Originally Posted by xerx
And I would say where people draw that line is based on their subjective impression on something. You may have some personalities that see what the consensus sees as tasteful art as smutty pornography and you may have some personalities that see what the consensus sees as base pornography as delicate and elegant works of fine art.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquagraph
Some people feel like there needs to be some objective guidelines to this, because I could see the case that without some objective guidelines there is no external validation to there appreciation of something as "art". I tend to agree, but I would say the actual objective guidelines are not so set in stone like if something satisfies X criteria then it is ART and if it doesn't its PORN. The objective guidelines or more like just acknowledging that it is purely subjective and external validation arises from harmonies that naturally and organically arise as a result of mutual appreciation of something as being "art".
This same rule I think applies for pornography, but the fact is most pornography is regarded by society to not be worthy enough to be called "art" and thus the naturally occurring consensus relegates it to be classified as pornography... with occasional "outliers" in society regarding things different, the two extreme cases being what I mentioned in the first paragraph of this post. Each of these extreme cases push and pull on the consensus and create conflict and society evolves more towards conserving their original values and consensus or moving outside of it to a new understanding.
Now what I was saying about music, is similar. I think there is a division between shallow entertainment and fine art, in a similar way people feel the need to define boundaries on what is really worthy, endearing, and appreciable versus what is just something they use to get off and relieve tension. Many people hate Justin B. because they think he's essentially "porn" (metaphorically speaking) that's being marketed to towards a niche market (pre-teen girls) in order to bank in on loads of cash. What makes it more diabolic in some people's eyes is that this market is relatively young, innocent, and impressionable so they haven't experienced enough to discriminate great art from cheap smut. They see it as exploitation that is so virulent and dominates so much of the market that its essentially drowning out the natural evolution of better art that would naturally arise and its raising an entire generation that used to a particular "thing". Try explaining to a pre-teen girl why Justin B. sucks and this other music is art and you will be regarded as being a "looser" in there eyes and stiff old person who doesn't understand the youth and all of that. This is a marketing device, scoffing off challengers to some established concept of "cool" as just "jealous losers or has beens" rather than seeing them as actual contenders. This effects of such marketing actually impacts the youth and directs their sensibilities towards an end.
Now that's all nice and good and natural, but consider the fact that quite possibly these marketing executives may not actually even like Justin B.'s music or care the slightest, in fact they find the fact almost laughable this audience likes it. It's like serving up a plate of crap to people at a resteraunt as gormet cuisine and then laughing behind their backs as they eat it because they don't know any better. The sad fact is this actually influences the evolution of society. There lazy opportunistic methods to make easy money, comes at the expense of backwards evolution of art -- where things get dumber and more vapid.
Once again like I said its hard to say what is actually art objectively, but one can still have their personal convinctions and preferences on the matter subjectively. What I find deplorable is those that purposefully direct society in a direction against their own perferences and convinctions because its easier and more expedient to profit in the short term while leaving society in a direction they personally find is in a worse direction.
I find it deplorable in terms of art, marketing, and relations with other human beings... and that's one area that I'm pretty committed to as a principle or ideal I hold.
Yea I know tldr, but it felt good to write it out -- you don't have to read it, but hey it kind of relates to the OP.
I've been asked to pose a few times, but always declined. I didn't like the idea of being naked in front of so many people, (or in one case having photographs put up for exhibit) not so much out of shame, but um, this probably sounds weird -kind of out of pride and ownership, as in I didn't want just anyone being able to look at me - I wanted to be more selective. There's just something distasteful to me about being too open to too many people whether with my personal life, past, thoughts, or my body. I'm sure nobody really cares - I mean, even when I post things here or elsewhere that I find to be somewhat (or quite a lot) revealing, I doubt many even read it or remember it, but idk, the open-ness itself makes me feel weird sometimes like I'm devaluing my own experience. Gah that's hard to explain. Anyway. . .Quote:
Originally Posted by Fireyed
"the secret of being a bore is to tell everything." - voltaireQuote:
Originally Posted by squark
Voltaire believed in God - Absurd.
Sartre started near his death...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Absurd
Strange is how i feel i get you when so many others seem to miss the point (maybe they don't). Ah well, losses to be had.
Well, I must be way too stupid for some people to read me, so I don't really blame any one. Both Voltaire and Sartre were artists, though...Quote:
Originally Posted by GemOfTroy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Absurd
We are all artists ;)
I'll take your word for that...Quote:
Originally Posted by GemOfTroy
We are all porn models.Quote:
Originally Posted by GemOfTroy
I'm not going to ask what is your porn name, Aqua.
art: girly pop song music love feeling or feelings of angst/rage/hate/sadness for another person (primary intent is to invoke complicated feelings)
porn: turns you on (primary intent is to invoke sexual pleasure)
both can exist at once, but how often are we really that lucky as humans? =p
We are all everything and nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquagraph
When the discussion reaches this level, all talk is moot.Quote:
Originally Posted by GemOfTroy
Quote:
Originally Posted by soapofsappho
I'm currently writing reviews and articles for a dude who published a collection of erotic poems. It's not necessarily his art that verges on porn, but other issues I discuss in my articles. The last one was about stuff like Ai no corrida (which qualifies as an erotic art film - the hardcore/unsimulated type), Nymphomaniac, and 50 Shades. This question is so well-suited.
Porn is mainly about arousal (any extra tools/devices are subordinated to the main purpose of turning folks on and helping them get off).
Art is mainly about representation and the creation of aesthetically coherent and impactful fictional worlds and if it verges on pornography, this is just a secondary aspect.
Well art can be anything I find inspiring and fills a space in me, energetically. I do know it when I see it but others might not agree. Hardcore porn is, um... I used to find it interesting and explored it thoroughly, but it doesn't stimulate my emotions, my brain, or imagination. That is the difference for me. :/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jI9kQCw3cE
Art is boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Words
http://www.lovethispic.com/uploaded_...8-All-Lies.jpg
If it gives you a boner, its art.
arousal. That isn't to say it's a definitive delineation between the two.
Arts actually a bit of a ridiculous concept. The definition is so inherently ambiguous that it can encompass practically anything for the sake of protecting it as free speech regardless of whether it's something that should or shouldn't exist in a society.
a friend of mine once made a distinction between men she wanted to fuck and men she wanted to embalm.
the idea being, a choice b/t more visceral versus aesthetic/mental pleasure.
obviously many men might fit into both categories but if she had to, she would choose "would i keep this guy alive and around to sleep w/, or would i just keep him dead and preserved as a perfect specimen?" there was a lot at stake in that (hypothetical) decision-making lol
anyway, i think the difference between porn and art is which you want to "fuck" more, versus which you want to "embalm" more
Porn is used for masturbatory purposes