Is Pornography Art?

[Cruel_Sandwich]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 3:02am

Do you consider pornography to be art?

To me, I would say yes. My own definition of art is anything that is created. Period. By man. By nature. Everything. Therefore, it would be hypocrisy to think that pornography is not art.

What do you think?

[nitsua]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 3:07am

I think pornography can have artistic value.

[LePetiteFromage]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 3:15am

Updated On: 1/24/09 at 03:15 AM

[Urban]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 6:33am

Depends.

"Behind the Green Door" I'd say could argued is art to some degree, "Anal Angels XI"... not so much.

[WindyCityActor]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 7:43am

Porn and Art are in the eye of the beholder.

[smartpenguin78]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 8:40am

Pornography by definition is "obscene" material with little or no artistic value.
So if you judge something to have great artistic value then it is not pornography.
The use of the term is normally applied (often for political reasons) to deny artistic value of a given piece.
Sexual content (no matter how graphic) does not make something pornographic (although there will of course be people who will try to say it does).

I disagree with the "anything that is created" is art contention, it is too deconstructionist to me, I do think that anything has the potential to be art- art is defined in the significance one gives to it.

art: (from dictionary.com)
1. the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.
2. the class of objects subject to aesthetic criteria; works of art collectively, as paintings, sculptures, or drawings: a museum of art; an art collection.
3. a field, genre, or category of art: Dance is an art.
4. the fine arts collectively, often excluding architecture: art and architecture.
5. any field using the skills or techniques of art: advertising art; industrial art.
6. (in printed matter) illustrative or decorative material: Is there any art with the copy for this story?
7. the principles or methods governing any craft or branch of learning: the art of baking; the art of selling.
8. the craft or trade using these principles or methods.
9. skill in conducting any human activity: a master at the art of conversation.
10. a branch of learning or university study, esp. one of the fine arts or the humanities, as music, philosophy, or literature.

[WickedGeek28]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 10:16am

I think that a lot of the ideas of what art is are due to teachings labeling almost any piece of student work as "art." It's a useful teaching tool that I use with my students, but it can definitely alter perceptions.

As the idiom states, "Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder," and I believe that.

[Roscoe]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 11:05am

>>My own definition of art is anything that is created. Period. >>By man. By nature. Everything.

So by your own definition Auschwitz was just a big art gallery.

[Jane2]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 11:19am

"I think that a lot of the ideas of what art is are due to teachings labeling almost any piece of student work as "art." It's a useful teaching tool that I use with my students, but it can definitely alter perception"

Having been an art teacher, I always maintain that what is created from nothing is art. Granted, all art is not good art, but it's art.

[Elphaba]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 11:19am

and Cruel, was 9-11 art?

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 11:35am

My own definition of art is anything that is created.

Then what is not art? If you believe everything is art (which I'm sure is another vain fabrication), then why does the word exist?

[lovelyspotlight]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 11:49am

If you look at the Museum of Sex...I think you see some art. I mean, there are naked people posed suggestively, so it's pornography, I think. But at the same time, the photographs can be beautiful. I would tend to say, though, that most pornography is - if art at all - a very lesser form.

I mean, I suppose there is thought put into the filmography and directorial aspects. But I certainly hesitate to esteem it as "art."

[Roscoe]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 11:54am

If it's in focus, it's pornography. If it's out of focus, it's art.

Billy Kwan

[Jane2]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 11:58am

A great deal of our world is art. Take our buildings. Who designed them? Architects. Take your landscaping-landscaping designers. Furniture had to be designed by artists. Clothes are designed by artists. I could go on, but yes, a great deal of life is art.

Updated On: 3/7/08 at 11:58 AM

[chris d]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 12:11pm

the whole "what is art" debate will always exist, even in my own head. right now, I feel that Art is something that should inspire people. It's creative expression, but also a form of communication. Porn is creative, but doesn't express much, and could be seen as either a product of, or cause of, broken communication.

[nitsua]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 1:00pm

Pornography is made to excite.
Art is made to inspire.
Sometimes it does both.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 2:44pm

Take our buildings. Who designed them? Architects. Take your landscaping-landscaping designers. Furniture had to be designed by artists. Clothes are designed by artists. I could go on, but yes, a great deal of life is art.

I would say the majority of people would recognize that some of those things could be art while others aren't. For example, how often do people stop to admire a parking garage? Or the detail on a McDonald's uniform? Or the bench at a Dairy Queen? While some buildings, furniture, clothes, landscaping, etc. could be classified as art, much of it is made merely for the most basic functionality. Doesn't mean it's "art".

[Jane2]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 2:48pm

You sound as if all art must be beautiful or admirable.

All the things you mentioned had to be designed by an artist with pencil and paper, or nowadays, on a computer. It can't be done by just anyone. It takes an artist. I stand by my opinion.

[trinaaron]

Posted: 3/7/08 at 3:36pm

"I would say the majority of people would recognize that some of those things could be art while others aren't. For example, how often do people stop to admire a parking garage? Or the detail on a McDonald's uniform? Or the bench at a Dairy Queen? While some buildings, furniture, clothes, landscaping, etc. could be classified as art, much of it is made merely for the most basic functionality. Doesn't mean it's "art"."

And I could argue that the design of these things in fact is the result of a specific movement in art and philosophy (Modernism, more specifically form follows function). Does it apply to everything ever created? Of course not. But I kind of like the idea that if any concept of design is applied in the creation of a thing, it can, on a VERY basic level, be considered art.

[ILoveMyDictionary]

Posted: 3/8/08 at 12:41am

In order to answer the question "Is pornography art?" we first have to define art, and defining art is as hard as answering the question what is the meaning of life.
The debate is never settled.

[nitsua]

Posted: 3/8/08 at 12:45am

I'll take Oscar Wilde's definition: "All art is useless".

Porn's definitely useful, therefore, it can't be art.

Does that settle it?

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/8/08 at 10:17am

If everything is art, then there is nothing to separate art from non-art, thus without the existence of having distinction or comparison, nothing is art.

You sound as if all art must be beautiful or admirable.

No, I am not that ignorant. I know the polite thing to say is that everything is art and anyone who makes anything is an artist. I think that is admirable, idealistic, and completely untrue. Tracing the design of a screwdriver to some specific movement in art history or architectural design does not specifically mean that the "designer" of that screwdriver is an "artist". It could mean a technological concept found success, was copied for years, and will continue to be copied until the next design comes along. Whether or not the new design will be considered art will remain to be seen. But no, I do not consider everything in the world art. Especially when it is a forced expression of a vain ego.

[Jane2]

Posted: 3/8/08 at 10:25am

" I know the polite thing to say is that everything is art and anyone who makes anything is an artist. I think that is admirable, idealistic, and completely untrue."

Well, I guess we agree on one point since I never said that.
It's all subjective and a matter of opinion.

[trinaaron]

Posted: 3/8/08 at 11:00am

"Tracing the design of a screwdriver to some specific movement in art history or architectural design does not specifically mean that the "designer" of that screwdriver is an "artist". It could mean a technological concept found success, was copied for years, and will continue to be copied until the next design comes along."

I would say that a screwdriver itself is engineered rather than designed. However, the logo of the toolmaker which might be imprinted on the screwdriver was likely created by a graphic designer and therefore could be considered a form of art.

Is pornography art? Sure, in the same way a corporate logo is. Does it really have any true artistic value in terms of what most of us think of when we talk about "art"? Not really. But where is the line between erotica, which can be quite beautiful and thought provoking, and porn, which is not.

[SNAFU]

Posted: 3/8/08 at 11:04am

"Especially when it is a forced expression of a vain ego."

So 90% of Picasso's work is not art then.