What is the difference between Art and Porn?
- Thread starter Justanewguy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I think porn can be art. It's just a different type. Sexual depictions can be beautiful. They can be hot. They can be sexy. To me, there is beauty in sex. Even dirty sex. It's natural. I think of art as something that evokes emotions in you. Pornographic art invokes sexual feelings. Lust. It has done it's job. What is the difference that makes sex obscene, yet many other things not? I don't see sex as obscene at all. It's natural. It can be intimate, romantic, primal, rough, kinky, what ever you want it to be. It is nothing to be so ashamed about. Sex/porn can be art too.
The difference is huge, but not always apparent.
From the perspective of a viewer it can be muddled and to be frank anything that explores sexuality can be pornography for some, National Georgaphic magazine springs to mind.
But see it from a design perspective, im currently working on a documentary.
In it ive filmed several interviews that im mixing with other shots, every shot was carefully considered, every angle was thought through.
Now im editing, and when i transition from one shot to another ive got many choices, fade to black then in, blur them together, barndoor effects, flash transition...
The options are many and I consider each one carefully, i test them, i look at what effect they would have on the mood of the documentary, even though we are talking about one second, something that is sure to pass most viewers completly by.
But as a creator Im creating something specific, and thats the difference, Porn is porn because its designed to be porn, even looking and a dressed woman in a porn film is meant to turn u on, by the angles, the look she is giving, the type of light they use, the type of clothes she weares.
So in my opinion its about design first and foremost.
From the perspective of a viewer it can be muddled and to be frank anything that explores sexuality can be pornography for some, National Georgaphic magazine springs to mind.
But see it from a design perspective, im currently working on a documentary.
In it ive filmed several interviews that im mixing with other shots, every shot was carefully considered, every angle was thought through.
Now im editing, and when i transition from one shot to another ive got many choices, fade to black then in, blur them together, barndoor effects, flash transition...
The options are many and I consider each one carefully, i test them, i look at what effect they would have on the mood of the documentary, even though we are talking about one second, something that is sure to pass most viewers completly by.
But as a creator Im creating something specific, and thats the difference, Porn is porn because its designed to be porn, even looking and a dressed woman in a porn film is meant to turn u on, by the angles, the look she is giving, the type of light they use, the type of clothes she weares.
So in my opinion its about design first and foremost.
In the matter of japanese manga, any book where genitals are drawn and censored is porn. In non-porn manga, naked people have some obstruction preventing their genitals from being seen. Like massive amounts of pubes for girls, and for guys there's just a big empty space (An obviously empty space) where a penis would be.
In non-japanese society, porn is something that's intended to be used for sexual purposes, art is something that is intended to be seen objectively by an audience. Meaning that art, no matter how graphic, cannot be porn because the intention of it was not to be erotic.
In non-japanese society, porn is something that's intended to be used for sexual purposes, art is something that is intended to be seen objectively by an audience. Meaning that art, no matter how graphic, cannot be porn because the intention of it was not to be erotic.
I kinda go with this as my general rule. but in the western world, there is kinda this big backlash going on right now and a lot of people are being arrested for child-porn charges because of manga, and I can only hope that people will calm the fuck down soon and realize that some things just aren't what they might appear to an outsider. to an outsider, it's a porn comic, to a manga fan, it's just a manga that happens to have a sexual scene/theme in it.Regiment said:
porn can be art, dependent on how you view art. everybody has their own idealistical vision as to what 'art' is and what they like.. i mean, im a fan of modern art, and if someone puts an old renaissance painting in my face, i yawn and ask where the andy warhol exhibition is. art is just expression of emotion, we all have different emotion, so therefore enjoy different art. sex(porn) could be classed as the expression of lots of psychological reasoning including emotion, people watch porn for reasons, people look at art for reasons. Although i couldnt say they were the same, i.e. a sex tape is a little bit different to a painting 
but they do have their similarites
but they do have their similarites
Porn is aimed solely at arousal, art with erotic themes aims for something beyond that. Whether it then succeed is another matter, but that only determine whether it's good art or bad art.
It is folly to believe that the courts will be able to determine what is (shocking, grim, dark, repulsive) art though, much less what merit said art holds. Yet another reason laws banning clearly fictional pornography, such as the Canadian one mentioned in the OP, should not exist.
It is folly to believe that the courts will be able to determine what is (shocking, grim, dark, repulsive) art though, much less what merit said art holds. Yet another reason laws banning clearly fictional pornography, such as the Canadian one mentioned in the OP, should not exist.
Does it matter?
I think sexually explicit material, whether art or porn, shouldn't be publicly displayed without warning (note: nudity is not sexually explicit).
I think work involving children in sexually explicit situations, whether art or porn, should be illegal (note: again sexually explicit means detailed displays/descriptions of things like penetration).
I think sexually explicit material, whether art or porn, shouldn't be publicly displayed without warning (note: nudity is not sexually explicit).
I think work involving children in sexually explicit situations, whether art or porn, should be illegal (note: again sexually explicit means detailed displays/descriptions of things like penetration).
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.
