fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | People Photography | Join Upload & Sell

1              end
  

Archive 2011 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.

  
 
seanfoulkes
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.


Umm, because football isn't socially taboo for a vast majority of humanity? That wasn't hard.

In a utopian-minded society that might be a good philosophical standpoint on human sexuality and objectification, but in the world we live in, porn is put on a pedestal of negativity. Sorry to say it, but YOU are not going to change society's mind on the matter.

There's also the basic idea that pornography stems from prostitution,and, all the "oldest profession in the world" arguments aside, have socially evolved to a standpoint that prostitution is degrading to women, being that it puts women in a position that their only useful attribute is their borne ability to have intercourse with the male dominant.

THAT is why pornography is different than sports photography. Sports glorifies basic physical dominance and superiority in competition, but very rarely do you hear the argument that it is an overall negative thing for society to glorify physical superiority and competitive nature.

Using your logic of "all aspects of a photograph are present regardless of objectifying sexual subject matter" in regards to pornography, then you could also use your logic to argue for compassion for child pornography, because those images, at their base, are images of the naked human figure. Of course child pornography has nearly universal opposal, as it takes advantage of young people that in general aren't ready to make decisions as profound as exposing their bodies sexually before they are even physically ready for the act in the first place.

Which is pretty similar to the idea that pornography diminishes women to pure sexual objects with no apparent worth other than their ability to sexually stimulate the male dominant. Both ideas have merit, as a young woman's sociological environment has just as much to do with her decision to purse a pornography career as her internal psyche does. I'm saying that it's not just an internal choice for her decision to take part in pornography. The popular social mindset that women are inferior to men, and as a result are largely sexually objectified, play a large part in a young girl's development, and saying that it is purely her decision and not in any way the responsibility of her social environment is ignorant.

Art nude photography doesn't usually objectify women as sexual objects, it tends to glorify the human figure and female sexuality as a positive aspect of an image. PORN as an industry relishes and grows on the simple fact that a LOT of people want a straightforward way to objectify something that arouses them and excites them sexually.

I don't judge any photographers for making money with erotica or porn images. But when your photographic career revolves around the creative drive to create images as purely sexually arousing as possible (assuming that the most desirable porn sells the best), I find it hard to believe that the main focus on creating those images is to create art. PORN consumers as a whole don't always want art. They want sexual gratification. Most people don't go to art museums for sexual gratification.

Porn as the modern world knows it, is a large money-making fringe entertainment economy that capitalizes sexual gratification. That's why pornography moved to videotape in the 80's, and in the last dozen years the vast majority of porn sold has been low-budget amateur film and images. Ever seen the P.T. Anderson film Boogie Nights? That movie wasn't about glorifying pornography as art. It was a satire.

The way I guess I relate to pornography as I see the photographic community as a whole like Hollywood, and PORN is straight-to-dvd films. Sure, they both are films, they both contain many similar aspects (lighting, actors, plot), but in the end, the straight-to-dvd films featuring professional wrestlers shooting ninjas with UZI's, although arguable as art, is created at the highest levels solely to capitalize on a consumers desire to purchase and watch a movie, not to appreciate film as art.

And THAT is why most people consider ART and PORN differently.



Jul 17, 2011 at 07:28 AM
wilmsenm
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.


It has a lot to do with perception and your personal background. What's a nude art study to me, might be porn to someone else and vice versa. Some people love being offended and they seem to forget about the option to simply not look at what they don't want to see. You can't get wound up about something you didn't see right?
Oh well
Martin



Jul 17, 2011 at 08:10 AM
MrAdventure
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.


wilmsenm wrote:
It has a lot to do with perception and your personal background. What's a nude art study to me, might be porn to someone else and vice versa. Some people love being offended and they seem to forget about the option to simply not look at what they don't want to see. You can't get wound up about something you didn't see right?
Oh well
Martin


That's a strange argument...that kind of perspective could be used to justify a person spewing racist, hateful things and simply say " if you don't like it, don't listen".

There is a clear line between art and porn. We all know it, unless your standard of artistry is truly low.



Jul 17, 2011 at 08:34 AM
charlesk
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.



There is a clear line between art and porn.

No, there isn't. If there were, you would be able to clearly define it in a way that everyone (or nearly everyone) would agree with. But I feel pretty confident that you cannot do so.

And by the way, there is also no clear line between what is considered a "racist, hateful thing" and what is not, either. There are statements that most people would consider "hateful", and statements most people would consider not, and a whole lot of gray area in between.



Jul 17, 2011 at 08:44 AM
MrAdventure
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.


charlesk wrote:

There is a clear line between art and porn.

No, there isn't. If there were, you would be able to clearly define it in a way that everyone (or nearly everyone) would agree with. But I feel pretty confident that you cannot do so.

And by the way, there is also no clear line between what is considered a "racist, hateful thing" and what is not, either. There are statements that most people would consider "hateful", and statements most people would consider not, and a whole lot of gray area in between.


Dream on...and I mean that in a nice way. There are lines, the same lines have been around before we were born.standards have fallen all around us.



Jul 17, 2011 at 08:48 AM
charlesk
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.



Dream on...and I mean that in a nice way. There are lines, the same lines have been around before we were born.standards have fallen all around us.

You are of course free to believe what you wish. But I note that you responded emotionally and did not even attempt to craft a definition of the "clear line between art and porn" that you claim exists. Doing so would have been a lot more convincing than telling me to "dream on".

As for "standards", there are people who would consider 95% of what's posted on this board to be "immoral" and "unacceptable" -- even pictures of pre-schoolers in bathing suits. Standards are just opinions.



Jul 17, 2011 at 08:50 AM
Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.


Pfiltz wrote:
Click a link or skip over it, and move on.

Easy.



A nice sentiment, sounds simple enough, but there is one issue with such simplicity. The NSFW lable and the linked image is used equally for nude art images as it is for porn. There is no way to distinguish which is which until after you click the link. As Sean elequenty states, and I feel the same way:

And when I come to FM.com to view some of the amazing fashion, family portrait, wedding, modeling, and gorgeous nude art images, I do not want to be tip-toeing my way through porn.

Please note: the above is a full sentence quotation that captures the full essence of what is being said by Sean, not a "phrase-byte" used to attack him. This is what is meant by quotation in full; capturing the full meaning and not distorting the intended words of the person being quoted.



Jul 17, 2011 at 08:55 AM
KABeach
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.


MrAdventure wrote:
There is a clear line between art and porn. We all know it, unless your standard of artistry is truly low.


I will strongly disagree with this statement. The line between Art and Porn is only strong for an individual, not for either the porn or the art communities.

All we have to do is consider the situation with Robert Mapplethorpe - His gallery show banned in Cincinnati as porn and yet shown in NYC as Art.

Many of his images could easily be placed in the Erotica category and if shown in this forum would be quickly deleted.




Jul 17, 2011 at 08:59 AM
Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.


MrAdventure wrote:
That's a strange argument...that kind of perspective could be used to justify a person spewing racist, hateful things and simply say " if you don't like it, don't listen".

There is a clear line between art and porn. We all know it, unless your standard of artistry is truly low.


**********************

Mr. Adventure,

I agree with you 100%. However what complicates the matter is that Western society has been adversely affected by 400+ years of Puritanism which seeks to remove any sense of pleasure or excitment in anything. These individuals go to the same extreme in this endevor as the permissive liberals go in tearing down any and all boundries even at the sacrifice of civil society itself if need be. This is a normal human reaction. Both extremes are equally destructive. Unfortunately, that there are Puritans in the world, is the basis for the flawed logic that is used by permissive liberalism to justify their statement that everything is relative and/or opinion.

Clearly the reality is that there is a proper ballance and honest human logic will come a reasonable center ground. The issue of course is there's plenty of flawed logic out there in both extremes. And often those same individuals that choose one exteme or the other, ignore or exempt themselves from the notion of common courtesy because they refuse to acknowledge the center ground to begin with.

True Puritans are not represented in our current debate because they find even the internet or any form of free idea exchange offensive.

Best Regards,
Andre



Jul 17, 2011 at 09:09 AM
Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.


seanfoulkes wrote:
Umm, because football isn't socially taboo for a vast majority of humanity? That wasn't hard.

In a utopian-minded society that might be a good philosophical standpoint on human sexuality and objectification, but in the world we live in, porn is put on a pedestal of negativity. Sorry to say it, but YOU are not going to change society's mind on the matter.

There's also the basic idea that pornography stems from prostitution,and, all the "oldest profession in the world" arguments aside, have socially evolved to a standpoint that prostitution is degrading to women, being that it puts women in a position that
...Show more


Extremely well thought out and written. Thank you.



Jul 17, 2011 at 09:12 AM
seanfoulkes
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #11 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.


+1 on Mapplethorpe.

His work is probably the best example sexually provocative nude photography as a form of expression. Most of Robert's images literally SCREAM at you. Not going to lie, the when I saw images from that exhibit displayed in a lecture of about 300 people, I was physically uncomfortable. But his images are, in my mind, definitely not pornography. Blatant provocative eroticism, yes, but there is definite meaning behind it.

From what I gather, it is specifically not intended to get you sexually aroused. But to force you to contemplate your own personal perception of human sexuality. In effect, Mapplethorpe's body of work raises the exact question I created this thread for.



Jul 17, 2011 at 09:12 AM
KABeach
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.


Sean,

However, just keep in mind - this forum is like a private art gallery. There is an owner who determines what is and is not acceptable to be shown and a group of "art consumers" who decide if the owner is making the correct decision (either by staying, complaining or leaving the forum). The goal of the owner is to keep the majority of the consumers happy and returning for more.

In the end, this isn't the general public - we, as the consumers, help the owner determine what is and is not acceptable on the forum. Our opinion is simply one of the thousands who view this forum every day. The final decision is often based on the simple math of compliments vs complaints...

Cheers,
Ken



Jul 17, 2011 at 09:20 AM
saaketham
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #13 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.


As far as I am concerned, a naked woman is a naked woman. It is up to me to feel aroused or consider it art. Nobody can define where the line is, IMHO. So, if Mr. A can post nude photos in the name of art, Mr. B can too even if it may not seem like art to some. Using crass titles that one normally uses to google for porn, however, clearly shows the intent of the poster - cheap soft porn mentality.


Jul 17, 2011 at 09:23 AM
Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.


seanfoulkes wrote:
+1 on Mapplethorpe.

His work is probably the best example sexually provocative nude photography as a form of expression. Most of Robert's images literally SCREAM at you. Not going to lie, the when I saw images from that exhibit displayed in a lecture of about 300 people, I was physically uncomfortable. But his images are, in my mind, definitely not pornography. Blatant provocative eroticism, yes, but there is definite meaning behind it.

From what I gather, it is specifically not intended to get you sexually aroused. But to force you to contemplate your own personal perception of human sexuality. In
...Show more


Woa, his work is raw! I've not heard of him before and I just checked out some of his work. The artistic intent is clear enough. Provocative and challenging of our attitudes? Most certainly.

I agree strongly with your second paragraph with regards to Mapplethorpe's work. By its nature, the topic, if discussed via a photograph, can be quite uncomfortable.



Jul 17, 2011 at 09:28 AM
Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #15 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.


saaketham wrote:
As far as I am concerned, a naked woman is a naked woman. It is up to me to feel aroused or consider it art. Nobody can define where the line is, IMHO. So, if Mr. A can post nude photos in the name of art, Mr. B can too even if it may not seem like art to some. Using crass titles that one normally uses to google for porn, however, clearly shows the intent of the poster - cheap soft porn mentality.



Intent vs. affect and purpose in viewing. You address only the affect.



Jul 17, 2011 at 09:32 AM
Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #16 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.


KABeach wrote:
Sean,

However, just keep in mind - this forum is like a private art gallery. There is an owner who determines what is and is not acceptable to be shown and a group of "art consumers" who decide if the owner is making the correct decision (either by staying, complaining or leaving the forum). The goal of the owner is to keep the majority of the consumers happy and returning for more.

In the end, this isn't the general public - we, as the consumers, help the owner determine what is and is not acceptable on the forum. Our opinion is simply
...Show more


Ken,

You have a point.

In a normal art forum the director of exhibits reviews everything before-hand to make those judgments. Here on FM things are reviewed only after the posting and the volume of matrial is too much for Fred to moderate in full.

The FM people forum used to be much more art oriented and there was little if any porn. For that reason, the FM people forum was attractive to me. As time has gone on, the sheer volume of nude images on the forum has increase and almost all of the increase has been in the form of porn. It's a sad development.

Regards,
Andre



Jul 17, 2011 at 09:38 AM
charlesk
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #17 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.


saaketham wrote:
As far as I am concerned, a naked woman is a naked woman. It is up to me to feel aroused or consider it art. Nobody can define where the line is, IMHO.

Precisely. An image and how it is interpreted are not the same thing. Honest viewers must acknowledge the role that their own background and values plays in how they see that image. Those who claim that there are objective standards -- which invariably they claim to know yet can never define -- are engaging in self-delusion.



Jul 17, 2011 at 09:44 AM
KABeach
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #18 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.


Andre Labonte wrote:
The FM people forum used to be much more art oriented and there was little if any porn. For that reason, the FM people forum was attractive to me. As time has gone on, the sheer volume of nude images on the forum has increase and almost all of the increase has been in the form of porn. It's a sad development.



And yet, this is a topic that comes up regularly on this forum. This is the old "In My Day, Kids had more respect" type of argument...

Here is a thread from around the same time you joined up:

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/299929/0?keyword=porn#2521153

Overall, while the faces and names have changed, I don't think the overall content is very different from when I joined.



Jul 17, 2011 at 09:57 AM
Mark Henninger
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #19 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.


tl;dr


Jul 17, 2011 at 10:10 AM
tonyfield
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #20 · ART vs PORN. Let's get this over with.


MrAdventure wrote:
There is a clear line between art and porn. We all know it, unless your standard of artistry is truly low.


Interesting statement to make. Since this line is "clear", is there anything that has been posted on FM that is porn? Would you provide a link to those postings?

Or could any one else provide links to postings in which "porn" is clear?

tony



Jul 17, 2011 at 10:58 AM
1              end




FM Forums | People Photography | Join Upload & Sell

1              end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account