What is the difference between Art and Porn?
- Thread starter Justanewguy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
This guy is on to something. I read a newa story a while back about some guys cleaning up a pile of trash, when another very angry guy came out of his house. Turns out said pile of trash was his "Art Work". Pff... it was literally trash...Frozen Donkey Wheel2 said:
Anyways, thats the thing about art, it can, and is, subjective to the viewer.
One is all total non-stop action the other is tease/softcore aka paintings with some nudity, both are art in their own way.
Basically, the difference is whatever people think it is. Both art and porn are exactly the same, but we as viewers basically put meaning into the experience we get from using it.
It's a very dangerous precedent - but anybody who has even the slightest bit of art history behind them will know that art is extremely subjective and can be found anywhere, and that before modern media art was indeed used for sexual titillation, which seems to be the meaning that most people apply to porn.
It's basically criminalizing something because some people with power think others shouldn't be exposed to that sort of thing because it doesn't suit their own sensibilities. These are the type of people that would ban practically everything they personally disagree with, because they live in a world where the only valid opinion on anything is their own.
It's a very dangerous precedent - but anybody who has even the slightest bit of art history behind them will know that art is extremely subjective and can be found anywhere, and that before modern media art was indeed used for sexual titillation, which seems to be the meaning that most people apply to porn.
It's basically criminalizing something because some people with power think others shouldn't be exposed to that sort of thing because it doesn't suit their own sensibilities. These are the type of people that would ban practically everything they personally disagree with, because they live in a world where the only valid opinion on anything is their own.
All porn is art but not all art is porn. I can't have been the first person to say this and it's true. Porn isn't high art, GODS no but it's still art. It all comes down to how open the beholder is. To some people something like Basic Instinct would be pornographic. Other people can sit down to some Buck Angel with a bucket of popcorn and ask when 'the dirty part' will begin.
i don't have 50 gigs of art on my hardrive
i don't browse firefox in private mode so noone knows what art i was looking at
a dead art star is usually more marketable than a dead porn star (sorry necrophiliacs)
a child is like a priceless piece of art
you get in trouble if you touch it
boom-tish
i don't browse firefox in private mode so noone knows what art i was looking at
a dead art star is usually more marketable than a dead porn star (sorry necrophiliacs)
a child is like a priceless piece of art
you get in trouble if you touch it
boom-tish
Well, since anything can be art?there?s no real difference other than your own interpretation. I?ve watched what I?d define as some pretty artistic porn in my time. But just like porn, not all art is good. That?s where something called ?subjectivity? comes into play.
For example, three years ago, I remember an instance when I was reading the graphic novel of Watchmen during our ?reading hour? in my Music class, but my teacher confiscated it and reported me to my tutor because my idiot friend pointed out the sex scene between Nite Owl II and Silk Spectre II in it, and my teacher deemed it as ?inappropriate sexual material?.
If it was anyone else that tried to demean the importance of Watchmen as ?porn? rather than ?art?, I?d punch them in the face. OK, not really, but you get my drift. It was fucking stupid, and there was, like, one panel where you could see her nipple. I wouldn?t masturbate to that.
Not to mention that people have masturbated to nudity way before porn was invented, or more specifically, internet porn, and/or hentai. Not everyone masturbates to just porn. For some people, all they need is a picture of a girl in a tight miniskirt on deviantART to get them going.
Another example: anyone seen the film named Lost and Delirious? Well, short summary: it?s about a fifteen-year-old girl who arrives as a new student at an all-girls boarding school, when she discovers that her seventeen-year-old female roommates are in a relationship. There are multiple sex scenes between the two girls. Some people, including the director, would class it as art, because it explores social issues of the lesbian relationship, as well as how the two girls themselves don?t seem to class themselves as lesbian, and one of them pretty much goes insane when the other one decides to end it, but I don?t doubt that a number of people were waxing their pole when they saw Piper Perabo licking Jessica Paré?s nipples.
A couple of months ago, my friend sent me a link over Facebook to what I?d class as ?racist porn?. Some people would consider this art; I, personally, didn?t see the message in it, which is why I go back to the subject of ?subjectivity? and ?multiple interpretations?. Like how some people think that the Qu?ran is a great moral guide for everyone to follow, while others think it?s a violent, disgusting, and discriminative form of fascist propaganda.
Anyway, the video that my friend sent me ? obviously, this was all staged ? included a white man kidnapping a black woman in his car and taking her back to his house. Then he racially belittled her, before forcing her to eat watermelon while he anally raped her.
So, would that be porn or art? Or both? That?s the thing; there?s no one right answer. I bet some people would even say it?s not racist because it?s a sexual fantasy.
For example, three years ago, I remember an instance when I was reading the graphic novel of Watchmen during our ?reading hour? in my Music class, but my teacher confiscated it and reported me to my tutor because my idiot friend pointed out the sex scene between Nite Owl II and Silk Spectre II in it, and my teacher deemed it as ?inappropriate sexual material?.
If it was anyone else that tried to demean the importance of Watchmen as ?porn? rather than ?art?, I?d punch them in the face. OK, not really, but you get my drift. It was fucking stupid, and there was, like, one panel where you could see her nipple. I wouldn?t masturbate to that.
Not to mention that people have masturbated to nudity way before porn was invented, or more specifically, internet porn, and/or hentai. Not everyone masturbates to just porn. For some people, all they need is a picture of a girl in a tight miniskirt on deviantART to get them going.
Another example: anyone seen the film named Lost and Delirious? Well, short summary: it?s about a fifteen-year-old girl who arrives as a new student at an all-girls boarding school, when she discovers that her seventeen-year-old female roommates are in a relationship. There are multiple sex scenes between the two girls. Some people, including the director, would class it as art, because it explores social issues of the lesbian relationship, as well as how the two girls themselves don?t seem to class themselves as lesbian, and one of them pretty much goes insane when the other one decides to end it, but I don?t doubt that a number of people were waxing their pole when they saw Piper Perabo licking Jessica Paré?s nipples.
I like this answer.Ultratwinkie said:
A couple of months ago, my friend sent me a link over Facebook to what I?d class as ?racist porn?. Some people would consider this art; I, personally, didn?t see the message in it, which is why I go back to the subject of ?subjectivity? and ?multiple interpretations?. Like how some people think that the Qu?ran is a great moral guide for everyone to follow, while others think it?s a violent, disgusting, and discriminative form of fascist propaganda.
Anyway, the video that my friend sent me ? obviously, this was all staged ? included a white man kidnapping a black woman in his car and taking her back to his house. Then he racially belittled her, before forcing her to eat watermelon while he anally raped her.
So, would that be porn or art? Or both? That?s the thing; there?s no one right answer. I bet some people would even say it?s not racist because it?s a sexual fantasy.
Not if no-one knows about it.lechat said:
Well one difference is that no one ever gets embarrassed when someone bursts in on them appreciating a Picasso.
EDIT
EDIT
Ah God dammit! Now I'm going to look slow witted... more so than usual.DoPo said:Ugh, guys
'Tis a necro.
And he's the master of the black arts here! Wait...is...can necromancy be considered art? What is its relation to porn?Itsmee said:
It's all in the pronounciations of the 'Yah's!'
If everyone's saying 'Ja! Ja! Ja!' It's probably porn (german, specifically)
If, on the otherhand, everyone's saying 'Yaahhh', possibly followed with 'darling!' it's more likely to be art.
Serious answer: Honestly, I reckon it depends on how much authority your job offers you and whether you find something personally objectionable that swings the decision.
Edit: Also, there's too much art that's lazier and as meaningless as porn (I'm looking at your Emin and Hirst!) Two bits of a cow in plastic and a bed with bits of shit and semen all over it does not constitute art.
If everyone's saying 'Ja! Ja! Ja!' It's probably porn (german, specifically)
If, on the otherhand, everyone's saying 'Yaahhh', possibly followed with 'darling!' it's more likely to be art.
Serious answer: Honestly, I reckon it depends on how much authority your job offers you and whether you find something personally objectionable that swings the decision.
Edit: Also, there's too much art that's lazier and as meaningless as porn (I'm looking at your Emin and Hirst!) Two bits of a cow in plastic and a bed with bits of shit and semen all over it does not constitute art.
It is relatively simple I'd say. Something crosses into pornography when the primary intention of the creator is for the content to elicit sexual excitement or the primary reaction of the audience is the same.