Is pornography a legitimate form of art?

[TheAlamo]

FIRST OFF PLEASE DO NOT LINK TO OR POST ANY KIND OF MATERIAL THAT IS PORNOGRAPHIC IN NATURE. This thread is intended to discuss the issue in the title, not post or describe pornography itself. Please adhere to the forum rules and keep this in mind.

With that out of the way, is pornography a legitimate art form? First, a definition of pornography is necessary for this discussion to work. I am not simply talking about "erotic" art or art that displays human sexuality. I am talking about images, videos, or text where the principle objective in creating it is to arouse.

I honestly do not know where I stand on this issue. I am interested in hearing your arguments.

Poll coming!

 

[Perfection]

I'd say pornography is like architecture in that for something to be good pornography we do not judge it soley by artistic merits (as we do art) even though aesthetics play an extremely important role in its proper execution.

As such I vote no.

 

[holy king]

"unique" porn definitely is art, i dont see why it wouldnt be.

as for assembly line porn productions, well, answer the question whether industrially produced goods can be art and you got your answer to that one.

 

[GenMarshall]

Ummm....


...NO!!!!

Not something I want hanging on my wall.

 

[holy king]

i dont want byzantine iconography on my wall, but that hardly disqualifies it as art.

 

[azzaman333]

It can be art, but most of the time it isn't.

 

[Abaddon]

"There is an art to shovelling ####"

There is art in everything.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

^ There are arts councils and courts that disagree with that last statement.

 

[Lillefix]

If a urinal can be art, then so can pornography.

 

[Lord Baal]

Of course it's legitimate. That doesn't necessarily imply that it's worth watching. Just because its primary purpose is to arouse does not imply that it isn't art, anymore than the fact that a plays primary purpose is to get arses in the seats and make money off ticket sales discounts it as art.

 

[Agent327]

Pornography is an inherently vague term. Art does not shy from nudity, unless it's religiously inspired. Generally speaking pornography isn't art and art - by definition - cannot be pornographic. Yet even pornography can be art and nudity is not pornography - despite what certain "authorities" seem to think. Finally, art can also be pornography, either because of the vagueness of the term or - intentionally - simply for the shock effect.

 

[JollyRoger]

Pornography could be art, but so far I have yet to run across of an example. Still searching . . .

 

[Lillefix]

Pornography is an inherently vague term.

We discuss art and pornography, and you single out pornography to be the vague term. That's amusing.

 

[Till]

Porn is certainly an art, if art is meant in the sense of craft.

You could make the case for it also being an applied art (it has the utility of getting you off), and a fine art (it is created for its aesthetics and judged by its beauty).

But as art is such a vague term, it's pretty pointless argument to have unless someone provides a definition.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Pornography and art are both extremely subjective. However, I don't think anyone should have difficulty understanding that pornography in which even one of the participants is either underage, nonhuman, or not participating absolutely 100% of his/her own free will is NOT art - it's criminal.

 

[Plotinus]

No, I disagree with that. Being criminal doesn't mean it's not art.

I think that much of the reason why people are reluctant to admit that pornography can be art - or that graffiti can be art, or that other less than desirable things can be art - is that they take "art" to be a value-judgement. To call something "art" is, in some way, to endorse it. I don't agree with this; I don't think that calling something "art" necessarily involves any endorsement. I don't see any reason why graffiti or pornography, even abusive or abhorrent pornography, cannot be art - or for that matter that abhorrent propaganda, such as the films Goebbels commissioned cannot be art. They might even be good art (good qua art, not good qua expressions of morality). Just as a joke can be funny even if it is offensive - it can be good considered simply as a joke, but bad overall as a thing to say. Similarly, the question whether pornography is art or not is quite distinct from the question whether it is moral or legal.

 

[Agent327]

Indeed. Many artists have become criminalized, not because of making bad art, but because their art is somehow perceived to be subversive or, more on topic pornographic. It doesn't mean it's bad art if it offends - either private persons or public authorities. It might me considered bad art on the grounds of it lacking craftmanship, but private or public taste are not criteria for artistic standards.

Art isn't the vague term here - though what is considered art may be up for debate. What's considered pronography, however, differs from nation to nation, yeah, even from community to community, and from era to era.

And indeed, Leni Riefenstahl's Triumph des Willens is art (it's magnificently filmed) - as well as graffiti is (although not all graffiti is good art, since in all art forms there are good and less good artists). The same applies to pornography: there are good and bad pornographers, professionals and amateurs.

We discuss art and pornography, and you single out pornography to be the vague term. That's amusing.

Yes, we discuss it.

And it is you who singles out pornography - which also tells me you haven't actually read what I wrote. (That's not discussing, nor even amusing.)

 

[Bill3000]

I voted "no" because I think porn can either be or not be art. The main purpose of pornography is sexual gratification. Such a work can have aesthetic worth, but it's not necessary.

 

[Earthling]

I think usage/idiomatics has something to say here, namely I agree with those above saying the implied definitions are somewhat mutually exclusive. It would be something like

Depicting nudity etc... in a way that's art is not pornography.

So by implied definition pornography is nudity etc... that's not actually artistic, hence not art.

 

[Zack]

Of course it isn't.