Thursday, April 5, 2007

Pornography vs. Erotic art

Pornography refers to representation of erotic behavior (in books, pictures, statues, movies, etc.) intended to cause sexual excitement. The word comes from the Greek porni (prostitute) and graphein (to write). Since the term has a very specific legal and social function behind it, we must make a distinction between "pornography" and "erotica" (i.e. artworks in which the portrayal of the so-called sexually arousing material holds or aspires to artistic or historical merit). The problem is that what is considered "artistic" today, may have been yesterday's pornography. According to our definition above, there's evidence of pornography in Roman culture (in Pompeii, where erotic paintings dating from the 1st century AD cover walls sacred to bacchanalian orgies). A classic book on pornography is Ovid's Ars amatoria (Art of Love), a treatise on the art of seduction, intrigue, and sensual arousal. With Modernity, in 18th-Century Europe, a business production (designed solely to arouse sexual excitement) begins with a small underground traffic and such works became the basis of a separate publishing and bookselling business in England (a classic of this period is Fanny Hill or The Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure (1749) by John Cleland). At about this time erotic graphic art began to be widely produced in Paris, eventually coming to be known as "French postcards." Pornography flourished in the Victorian era despite, or perhaps because of, the prevailing taboos on sexual topics. The development of photography and later of motion pictures contributed greatly to the proliferation of pornographic materials. Since the 1960's, written pornography has been largely superseded by explicit visual representations of erotic behavior that are considered lacking in redeeming artistic or social values. Pornography has long been the target of moral and legal sanction in the belief that it may tend to deprave and corrupt minors and adults and cause the commission of sexual crimes.

8 comments:

art student said...

By the way AT, this exposition on pornography is really cool!

JustineH said...

Work is pornographic only if percieved in this manner by a particular audience and relies on the beholder's own perceptions to cause arousal. What one audience might be aroused by might seem comepletely tame to another. The photographs of nude, fleshy women of a hundred years ago could hardly be called pornography today.

While intent usually counts for nothing in this world and outcome is far more important, it can be a good judge of pornography. If the sole intent of a work is to cause arousal then it is pornography. However, many things fall into a grey area, that while they do indeed aim to incite arousal they also posses redeeming aesthetic qualities. The only question is whether or not aesthetic beauty makes one kind of pornography better than another.

Lolita, one of the greatest books ever written is often cited as pornographic and immoral. While it makes reference to sex with some detail only twice in the book, these references are often shaded in metaphors, puns and witty remarks. At no point in the book is a single obscene word ever used, yet the book itself is thought to be obscene by many. Nabokov wrote Lolita so artfully that one often forgets that the story revolves around a twelve year old girl.

achasey said...

A few months ago I probbably would not have been able to completly distinguish (not that anyone can distinguish them completly) pornography from erotic art. I knew what pornography was and i knew what erotic art was, but even now there are some areas where they seem to overlap. this is because erotic art is art that portrays the idea of sex and arousal but "holds or aspires to artistic or historical merit". to me that sentance seems a bit ambiguous, how can one determine if something holds this merit? it seems that as always, art is in the eye of the beholder. What one person thinks is art may be viewed as a simple intention to cause sexual excitement. even someone who is doing nothing but trying to sexually excite could be considered an artist as long as someone else found something profound in it, giving it merit. It is not surprising then, that waht one would call pornography 50 years ago could be viewed as tasteful erotic art today.

Meng said...

I can tell the difference between pornography and erotica most of the time, but in my opinion there is a very thin line between the two. I actually consider them in the same genre because most people in this society still can't tell one from another nor do they care. "Pornography refers to representation of erotic behavior intended to cause sexual excitement." I can name many that gets off to random images/videos that are considered erotica, wouldn't that actually make them pornography? And what about the late night programs they show on HBO and Showtime? From what I've seen, they artistically show you bits and pieces of body parts and what they're doing without actually letting you see exactly what they're doing. Adult video stores don't actually carry these movies (for obvious reasons), so are they not porn? Can they be classified as erotica if they're still showing it in purpose to getting some people off. There isn't a fine line between the two. It's all up to how you see it really. If my parents or even my bestfriend saw this entry they'd be concerned about what kind of classes I'm actually taking, but to me these images aren't much to be fussing over at all. I guess it also depends on your enviroments and openmindedness.

stephsteph said...

This was a very interesting lecture. When art work crosses the line from being erotic art to being pornographic is when the it is being taken out of context and its aesthetics is taken away. There is a change in its function. I love how most erotic art always pushes the envelope. As time passes by I believe the boundaries of erotic art has been expanding, that fact that erotic art today was seen as pornographic many years ago. Erotic subject are becoming more acceptable. Throughout the history of art we see eroticism in art. It is funny because in my history of photography class we recently covered one photographer’s work of very erotic fashion photographs. In the United States is way more censored compared to Europe. We could take an American Vogue and French Vogue magazine and compare them. It is shocking the difference.

diana.arguello said...

Just like my other classmates have stated “there is a thin line between erotic and pornography” and what one person thinks and feels is erotic art or pornographic could be different then others views. I truthfully, before this lecture didn’t ever think about the differences between the two but, after the lecture it was made easier to make a difference between the two. I think it’s easiest to say that erotic art is a tasteful way to create art that evokes arousal or that depicts scenes of love-making and that pornography is any sexually explicit writing and/or picture intended to arouse sexual desire but, in a cheap and tacky way.


These are some sites that I found that are interesting:

http://www.weam.com/
World erotic art museum in Miami Beach

http://philosophytalk.org/
pastShows/eroticpornographic.htm

It’s a philosophy talk show that talked about erotic art and pornography, they had guest speakers and listeners that called in and gave their views.

A.T. said...

I guess you're right Meng. I imagine if I was taking the class years ago and my parents see this pictures, I'm sure it would've been as difficult for them t understand.

Kristal said...

The most basic human needs almost always consist of sleep, food, excretion, and sex. It's really no wonder artwork would fluctuate to include sex into their subject matter. After reading through the comments I can definitely agree with a few things; like that our perception of what is erotic and what is pornographic has changed with the culture's definition, and how the distinction between the two has become more and more blured.

I found this lecture particularly interesting because I have done a lot of both erotic and pornographic artwork in a more comicbook or charicature style. It's interesting to draw a character known for everything besides their sexuallity in an overtly sexual pose. I figure it was successfuly erotic if when looking at this art the first reaction you see is laughter or looks that are amusedly disgusted.