byronlawrence Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 "A nude Photo/painting is ``art`` if you'd hang it in your foyer entrance hall. It`s porn if you`d only put it up in your garage, out of sight of the casual gaze of the Parson or Deacon(ess), your personal philosophy be damned" NO. this is a result of your negative stereotyping of 'porn' both these items are porn.. one just has more 'taste'. it could be a difference of how extreme the porn is. you realize TOO. that our idea of old 'fine art' paintings of nudity, and the like was considered the porn of it's day. they didn't have photographs and the very idea of a naked girl was wrong. you think that a naked painting was displayed in public?.. no it wasn't it was hung up in private parlors and studies for the enjoyment of the patron who commissioned the work. it was porn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beeman458 Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 "...no it wasn't it was hung up in private parlors and studies for the enjoyment of the patron who commissioned the work." Is that what is ment by (forgive me) "A one man show." Buddah-boomp! Kishssssss! LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beeman458 Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 "...at some point in time, either the artist or the patron or both, thought that specific naked flesh was a very tasty crumpet indeed." In rereading your original post..... Ahhh come on and say it.... "...naked..." women's "...flesh... got me rockin and a-rollin Rockin and a-reelin Barbara Ann ba ba..... Beach Boys. http://www.lyricsfreak.com/b/beach+boys/barbara+ann_20013663.html Got it bad, got it bad, got it bad, I'm hot for teacher. I got it bad, so bad, I'm hot for teacher. http://www.lyricsfreak.com/v/van+halen/hot+for+teacher_20142736.html It's nice to read we've come so far:) "...tasty crumpet..." indeed:) You can be funny:) Thanks for the morning chuckle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beeman458 Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 Just trying to keep it real. First, a couple of corrections. "Ahhh come on and say it.... "...naked..." women's "...flesh... Should have been. Ahhh come on and say it.... "...naked..." women's "...flesh..." and I'm hot for teacher. Should have been. I'm hot for teacher. VanHalen Doh! Climbing on my soap box and writing with no one particular in mind. Me thinks some takes their porn a bit too seriously and try to make it into something it's not for purposes of legitimacy for their self-gain. Hey, if some guy want's to get a woody, for what ever reason, that's none of mine but please, try calling it what it is, "The Call of the Wild," instead of couching it in some sort of artistic double speak. No moral judgement of right of wrong in my below: Please, before promoting pornography, take into consideration the emotional and physical harm it does to young girls (daughters and sisters) and women (mothers) as well as the social costs to society at large which ends up paying the bills for the harm the porn industry, around the world causes; child porn, sex slavery, snuff flicks, disease, drug addiction, suicide, on and on and on ad infinitum. It's not a victimless behavior or a zero sum game of free choice with limited boundries and no losers. Please, take a moment and think about it. Stepping off soap box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jake_tauber Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 Yikes, Ellis. An Aristophanes reference? Personally, every time I go the the Met in NYC, I get moist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted September 29, 2006 Author Share Posted September 29, 2006 The guards have noticed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h._p. Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 "The longer I hang out here, the more I learn, the more I realize how Art is really nothing more than a bunch of egocentric BS." I don't know that I'd go quite that far, Thomas, but I'd certainly agree that there are some people who confuse their own taste with some imagined standard of quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beeman458 Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 "I don't know that I'd go quite that far, Thomas,..." H.P. A question? How might you characterize the overall genre we lovingly refer to as art? The reason I ask, if in real terms it's nothing more than intellectual entertainment, than shouldn't it be afforded similar respect? Maybe we're all suppose to be amazed and with proper counseling, I too will again become an automaton and get with the overly amazed collective:) I wasn't amazed in art school either but dutifully (we do that when young and fresh out of the military) went with the program. I'm now, of the last couple of weeks, seeing art, or the act of producing art as less of an intellectual pursuit on the high order which some have chosen to place it and beginning to see it in a more pedestrian vein such as one might find rugby or cricket; something one does to while the time away. To me, art (professional leanings aside) has become like any other endeavor of entertainment in that we've "gotta" do something with our time. Whether one chooses to play a violin or make violin bows; fish or cut bait or hang out on Photo.Net, "ya got's" to do something. Even if one just sits "in" the curb of life, doing nothing and that's all they're capable of doing, then they're doing something as we still have to do something. The point of my above, so as to try and prevent misunderstanding from occurring, I'm happy making art. I'm not challenging the act or purpose of making art, nor challenging the position porn has been placed as I'm challenging the high position of authority which some "seem" to try to take with their written tone as if art is something special, above and beyond all other pursuits of entertainment. Porn, it's porn. What's there to discuss? If one affords it a "high fallopian" status (credibility) and makes believe there's something more there then what's really there, (content), denying the realities of the issues (death, slavery, drug addiction, suicide) then what's been done is to deflect away from the original intent of porn ("Get your motor running...) and make it into a zebra of a different strip; something intellectually honest and worthy of being given a position of legitimacy. :) Just asking. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beeman458 Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 Doh!, "fallopian" is suppose to be "falootin." Oops! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathancharlesphoto Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 Forum discussions on this subject (and there have been very many of them) seem to me to miss the essential distinction between eroticism and pornography. There is no reason why eroticism cannot be a perfectly valid theme for art (one of the most popular) or an equally valid technique to get the viewer to take an interest in an artwork primarily about something else. The main question is what <i>apart from eroticism</i> is characteristic of pornography. IMHO there are 2 negative aspects of eroticism that I would use as pointers to pornography: (1) unoriginal / routine / "production line" eroticism with no additional emotional or aesthetic impact; (2) expoitation (real or implied) of the subject for the sexual gratification of the viewer. <p>Clearly there will be shades of grey - a picture can be slightly, moderately or extremely pornographic. Criterion (1) could equally be applied to "purely decorative" as a criticism of flower pics and sunsets - I guess this is where the "good taste" of the original question comes in. Criterion (2) is where the religious / ethical dimension comes in and is of great importance (<i>not</i> the puritan "all sex is bad" banner)<p>I would judge many nude or "glamour" photos on this site as being pornographic to a degree but that doesn't mean they are terrible - just rather unoriginal, shallow and boring (like many landscapes etc.). Some do seem to be exploitative (and I would personally include all those of models who have had breast implant surgery just to get modelling work). <p>It's obviously a matter of opinion but we can be clearer about the exact questions we considering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinconroyfarrell Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 In other words, Jonathan, if you do not like it, well, then it is pornography. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinconroyfarrell Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 In other words, Thomas, pornography is BAD! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beeman458 Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 "In other words, Thomas, pornography is BAD!" It is if it's tied into..."(death, slavery, drug addiction, suicide)". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathancharlesphoto Posted October 1, 2006 Share Posted October 1, 2006 Kevin - unless you deny the reality of value judgement we all have to classify things to our best (but inevitably limited) ability. On the subject of erotic photography part of the judgement is on the picture itself - is it interesting, beautiful, original, emotionally engaging etc.? - and part is on the situation in which we perceive it to be taken - is it by someone struggling to present a personal vision or a routine job for primarily commercial reasons?<p>The intention does not correlate well with the result: there are many photographers producing attempts at erotic art which I find pretty tedious and there are many commercial erotic photographers who create work I appreciate (even if this is heavily biassed by the attractiveness of the model). I think the word "pornographic" is generally meant as a negative label but there can be good pornography and there can be bad art. There is certainly plenty of pornography dressed up as fine art and that is the subject of the original question. You just have to make your own judgement about the content and intention of each picture.<p> Most people would agree that <u>in general</u> the more explicitly sexual the photo the less artistic and more commercial the intention. Eroticism/romance is, however, an important part of most peoples lives and so equally important in art. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flaneur Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 Thanks for your red dot on my RIPE photo. What is it they say "any publicity is good publicity". I was reading your comments about being exposed to pornography on this site - tell me, how does one inadvertently get exposed to it - surely one must select the NUDES gallery to see these images. Does that mean you have been perving in the nudes gallery?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathancharlesphoto Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 I guess Anne's comment is aimed at the dreaded red spotter Bill Press and has got onto the wrong thread by mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byronlawrence Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 porn in and of itself isn't bad. a statement saying so is like saying movies are bad. it is just to broad a statement. and hence ignorant. yes,, there are extreme forms of porn that are bad, but how much of it have you really seen? personally that is. I bet you have never seen a snuff film.. and the only way most people would even know what they were is from that movie '8mm' (I think), and a couple others. and while terrible stuff does happen in this world, one should label everything as bad just because some portion of it is. I don't go labeling all sorority girls as sluts waiting in a meat market to be a trophy wife do I? no I don't. because even though I knew several that were like that I also knew several that weren't. anyway this is an old thread now. and I just wanted to post one more thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garymeyer Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 Anne asked...tell me, how does one inadvertently get exposed to it - surely one must select the NUDES gallery to see these images. Does that mean you have been perving in the nudes gallery?? Now see, that's where people simply don't understand how PN works. Let me suggest you go to Gallery/Rate Photos and start rating photos. You results will vary but I hit the first nude after four pics. You do not have to go to the NUDES gallery. Can people not understand that and get off the point that they can be avoided simply by not going some where to specifically look for nudes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flaneur Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 It's true - I don't understand how PN works. Surely it is a matter for the administration then - to devise a system where people of a delicate disposition can happily rate photographs without encountering imagery which offends them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garymeyer Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 Anne, I agree it seems that some simple administrative fix could be developed but whenever nudes are discussed the rhetoric ratchets up so quickly that rational discussion goes out the window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabriel_metzger Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 I don't agree with this statement. Porn has nothing to do with fine art. And what do you think 'fine art' is? I don't think paintings are certain photographs are fine art. Art is taking what we have in the word and creating an image, a statue, and is an extensive of human life, creativity, just experience, etc. -Gabriel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beeman458 Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 "Porn has nothing to do with fine art." As a guy, I find porn more normal than not. That being said, I find porn a negative in humanity because it serves an egocentric basal purpose (a one man show and the sexual enslavement and objectification of women) as opposed to improving the human condition and their spirtuality (setting one free to follow their bliss if you will.) With the above in mind, without knowing it, to me, your comment becomes a verbal landmine. How? Sans a definition of art and what constitues "fine art," sadly, one can't successfully exclude porn from any artistic category. I say "sadly" because of my bias towards the subject matter; porn. Woops! :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinconroyfarrell Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 Well, there is a conflict within us between our primal urges and our will to overcome them. Culture is at war with nature. Pornography is the honest depiction of human lust, whether it is pornography by Michelangelo or a commercial film. Pornography is the visual presentation of the unchanging natural in man: sex. The dark truth about sex is that it is predatory. People exploit each other and use each other as objects. What is more, we enjoy using and being used in this way. Lust is a necessary componant of human life. There could be no life without lust. Romantic love is an illusion with which we veil the stark power of lust. Pornography breaks this illusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabriel_metzger Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 Sex doesn't have to be predatory. I'm interested in art because of where the subconscious mind of humans goes. Does it go anywhere or does it stay still? -Gabriel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the green fairy Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 Fine art is porn:<p><img src="http://www.horsefleshproductions.com/IMG_1614.jpg" width="489" border="0" height="650" /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now