Is this art or porn? *NSFW*

[bhanu]

Hey guys,
Well I am 19 yrs old artist and I have something seriously bugging me.

Please take a look at this pic , its a sketch by me.


what comes to your midn when you look at this?
ACtually this peice created a furore at my home , when my dad found this in my sketchbook , he right away claimed it was pornography and tore it away and threw it , I took it out of the dump, cuz I dont think this is porn , there was no sexual intention behind this peice.
SO what is the difference between art/erotica/ porn?
I really need some opinions here.
thanks.

[Seedling]

It's porn, dear. If you want to draw people fondling their naughty bits, that's cool, but don't try to tell yourself or your parents that it's something it isn't.

Illustrative arts aren't just about what you think your art means. Illustration is about the communication of ideas to others. If your audience (whoever looks at the piece) sees something inappropriate, then that's all it takes: the picture is inappropriate.

I know that being a teenager makes sex the most interesting topic by default, but you don't need to risk a good relationship with your parents by drawing sexually explicit art just yet. After all, you have your whole life ahead of you without parents to delve into such subjects.

[Gloominati]

It's porn, dear. If you want to draw people fondling their naughty bits, that's cool, but don't try to tell yourself or your parents that it's something it isn't.

exactly!

I mean, c'mon dude of course this is porn! There is no reason for anybody in this world to think that it is anything else. Sure, this is a sketch and perhaps you want to take the finished piece into another direction (what I doubt) but this sketch is SO much porn!!

[Kian]

its both. Art because you drew it, and porn, because its porn I wouldnt feel bad about it though mate. I'm also wondering why your dad would be even bothered seen as you're 19.

[Puck]

If it wasn't for drawing people fondling their naughty bits then I never would have started this whole art caper! Maybe I'm really a pornographer.

I think it's art - but don't kid yourself into thinking there was no sexual intention behind it. Art can be very sexy and still be art (I can't count how many Renoir art books I have absolutely ruined!) - but like every emotional response people can have to your art you've got to be conscious of it and in control of it. It's no good to say "I didn't mean it to have that connotation" - because that means you didn't think about it properly before you did it.

But seriously, you're 19? You should have entire sketchbooks dedicated to rude drawings by now. Heck, by 15 I had worked my way through the many brothels of Sydney, painting prostitutes until I finally ran out of series 2 brilliant pink. Like Renoir said “Je peint avec mon bitre” (I paint with my prick)

[Mungus]

Is this porn or art? (Mapplethorpe)

(warning, sexual content)
http://images.google.com.vn/images?h...=1&sa=N&tab=wi

My dad threw a wobbly when he discovered my Star Wars orgy, everyone in George Lucas' known universe getting rampant with each other, (and at the time I didn't even know Luke, Leia and Darth were related, so i guess it was really risque)
I got a Death Star-sized smack in the temple for that one

[JAG.]

yeah man.. thats porn. theres a VERY clear difference between artistic nudity, and dirty porn. even though some cosider artistic nudes ''soft core porn'.. theres still a difference.

you COULD manipulate this into some artistic art, but what makes it porn is whatever shes doing down there with her hand and the expression on her face. clearly.. its not 'art', its just naughty.

and as was stated, if the viewer sees it and exclaims 'PORN!'.. its probably conveyed that way, whteher intentional or not.

if you wanna draw porn, then just admit it to yourself and fap away.. - JAG

[Mungus]

Yeah, of course it's porn - you concentrated 100% on the "walking fingers" and 0.03 % on her feet,

oooh, i feel a paintover coming on

[Kahl]

Yeah, of course it's porn - you concentrated 100% on the "walking fingers" and 0.03 % on her feet

As a woman, I'd like to compliment you on the attention paid to her face. She does seem to be quite happy. And nothing in the definition of porn says that it isn't necessarily art...it can be both.

I'm not sure, at your age, how much of your family's indignation is a cultural thing...I grew up with an imbalanced mix of parents. My father was a scientist, very logical but also a hippie, so very free thinking about life in general. My mother, however, was a prudish woman, with strict religious morals. I had to hide basic anatomy and life drawing books from my mother because the nudity alone would cause an uproar with her...nothing sexual in them, but Pen be damned if I drew a naked penis! Now my father on the other hand, bought me a sketchbook and told me to keep it under the mattress and to draw whatever the f#@% I wanted in it...because to him I was just exploring the world and my art.

If you still live with your family, I don't think you should disrespect their sensitivities, but if this is the nature of art you want to explore, find a way to keep it hidden from them....but, for whatever my opinion is worth, you should never apologize for your art unless you are truly sorry you had created it-- and this should be rare if ever. Art is an expression...albeit in this case, perhaps a very biological one, rather than emotional...but its a personal thing.

[DSillustration]

It's porn, dear. If you want to draw people fondling their naughty bits, that's cool, but don't try to tell yourself or your parents that it's something it isn't.

I couldn't disagree more!

Exploring sexual themes in your work does not make it pornography.
A lot of artists have been criticized for this very thing, and we still think of them as artists, not pornographers.
Egon Scheile being a perfect example:




Then there is always Mapplethorpe:


or Jock Sturges:


Personally, I think it depends on the artists intention as to whether or not it is pornography... not the audience's reaction.
The law, on the other hand, has different opinions on the matter depending on where you live.
Some countries make absolutely no legal distinction between art and pornography, its simply a gradation between the two.

All that aside...
I think this is a surprisingly beautiful drawing.

[asoir]

Egon Schiele FTW!

[Flake]

Heh, I was wondering when Schiele or Klimt would make an appearance in this thread..

[DavePalumbo]

surprise how much "it's porn, end of story" there is in this thread. maybe his art is too edgy for you

and yes, Egon Schiele was actually the first thing that came into my mind when I saw the drawing. Look him up if you don't know him.

[sve]

My thoughts: it's an erotic art. It's still explosive in our time. We have a taboo, you know. We don't talk, don't show, don't exhibit. The roots of it are very deep, I suspect...we might find something like human complexes and envy on the bottom of it. And too high value put on "innocence", which means ignorance. Still art like this has a place in real life too, not only in private collections. Japanese artists were very open about this. They knew it is an essential part of life. We can be silent about it, but talking about it is much more honest.
There is no naughty parts in human body, it is beautiful.
But... if you don't want people to scold you... it is easier to draw above waist.

[Hyskoa]

Porn you say?
*looks around*
THIS IS AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAART. *kicks*

[blacky]

The original meaning of porn is "bad taste"
so if this where porn that it would merely be for the uncharming look in her face. (As much as I'm concerned)

[fedezz]

First of all, bhanu, that's an awesome piece of art. You should really be proud of it. I'm very jealous, in a good way , of your linework.
That said, Mister Dan Dos Santos, thanks a lot for such a fantastic post!!!!

If your audience (whoever looks at the piece) sees something inappropriate, then that's all it takes: the picture is inappropriate.

WTF??? Who says the audience is everyone, or even his parents?? There's no such thing as 'appropriate for everyone' Art. Stating the contrary is like ignoring all that's known about visual communication. I can guarantee you that my grandma would freak out with 99% of the art posted on this site (creatures, weird people and stuff). SO according to your view, 99% of CA is 'inappropriate' (whatever the hell that means, anyway).

[Hunger]

Pornography sometimes shortened to porn or porno, is the explicit representation of the human body or sexual activity with the goal of sexual arousal. It is similar to, but distinct from erotica, which is the use of sexually arousing imagery used for artistic purposes only.

Wikipedia's words isn't absolute, but that is a good description of porn imo.

In the sketch you posted I see a girl masturbating. Now that may not be the idea you were going for, but that is what I see. And for me that is porn.

Your dad cannot say it isn't art though.

[entdroid]

The open minded opinions in this thread inspired me to do this sketch:



I'm sorry for it's sloppiness.
Btw, great drawing bhanu!

[Seedling]

Egon and Schiele made porn worthy of highbrow art galleries. That art is also porn does not make it garbage.

WTF??? Who says the audience is everyone, or even his parents?? There's no such thing as 'appropriate for everyone' Art. Stating the contrary is like ignoring all that's known about visual communication. I can guarantee you that my grandma would freak out with 99% of the art posted on this site (creatures, weird people and stuff). SO according to your view, 99% of CA is 'inappropriate' (whatever the hell that means, anyway).

Oh, quit having a conniption fit, would you? The impression of the audience matters entirely to the success or failure of a piece of art that is intended to communicate. If a piece of art is intended for audience A but not for audience B, then it doesn’t matter what audience B thinks – EXCEPT in special cases, such as for example where audience B is the parent of the artist and is in a position to make life really difficult for the artist emotionally and financially.

[tensai]

many artists have explored sexuality and bodies and subjects exploring their own sexuality. i love the sketch - great face and great dipping action. i'd buy it from you in a sec.

i say let's finish what dan dos santos started and turn this into the great erotic art thread.

jenny saville (one of my favourite painters)


come on, 'show me yours'...

[asoir]

[2100]

Yummy topic~

Anyone every heard of a John Currin?
http://www.artnet.com/magazineus/fea...tz12-18-06.asp

[fedezz]

Seedling - sorry, but through smashing my head against the wall in countless opportunities I've learned not to get involved in discussions with manichean people.

tensai - niiiiice idea man. Here's my contribution:

Jan Saudek


Joel Peter Witkin

[2100]

that horse reallllly disturbs me....

[DavePalumbo]

Wikipedia's words isn't absolute, but that is a good description of porn imo.

In the sketch you posted I see a girl masturbating. Now that may not be the idea you were going for, but that is what I see. And for me that is porn.

Your dad cannot say it isn't art though.

that's funny, because by the exact same definition, I'd say this drawing is erotica. Is this drawing made for you to beat off to or is it made for artistic purposes? Being as it's a beautifully stylized drawing, I'm going to go with artistic purposes.

If a piece of art is intended for audience A but not for audience B, then it doesn’t matter what audience B thinks – EXCEPT in special cases, such as for example where audience B is the parent of the artist and is in a position to make life really difficult for the artist emotionally and financially.

What are your thoughts on Manet's "Olympia"?



caused a near riot at the Paris Salon in, I think, 1865? It was intended for that audience, though not accepted by them. Not because of nudity, but because of the woman was a prostitute. In a Victorian society, a painting of a nude woman with allusions to sexual promiscuity (as oppose to, say, Botticelli's "Venus", which is a non-sexual goddess) was shocking and, as you say offensive. Similar to how you may feel about a drawing of a girl getting herself off. I'm pretty sure that having the entire Salon turn on you could be emotionally and financially disastrous to an artist in the mid 19th century, yet this painting has endured (and yes, certainly the controversy has helped) for 150 years. It's considered by many art historians to be a landmark painting which lead the way for artistic revolution. Is it inappropriate? Is it pornographic?

[masque]

The original meaning of porn is "bad taste"
so if this where porn that it would merely be for the uncharming look in her face. (As much as I'm concerned)

actually, "porno" is the combinative form of the Greek word for "harlot," and "graphos" for writing, so the meaning of the word (as originally coined in the mid-1800s) is "writing about harlots," or, more loosely interpreted, "pictures of whores," which would make a great deal of work by some very famous artists "pornography."

it's a frikkin' label, nothin more, applied by sexually repressed and morally hypocritical judgementalists to make themselves feel holier than thou. i suppose some idiots would apply the label retroactively to any image depicting a sex act (frequently and more accurately referred to as erotic art), but that's just art-history revisionism.

that Wikipedia definition is so fukkin' funny "sexually arousing images for artistic purposes only." yeah right. like only eunuchs can really appreciate "erotic art."

[D.Labruyere]

isn't all art really good porn?

[blacky]

[QUOTE=masque]actually, "porno" is the combinative form of the Greek word for "harlot," and "graphos" for writing, so the meaning of the word (as originally coined in the mid-1800s) is "writing about harlots," or, more loosely interpreted, "pictures of whores," which would make a great deal of work by some very famous artists "pornography."

Oh, ok
was just referring to the use of this word in Russian, where you can claim a book or theatre-play to be pornographic, due to its poor quality in plot and class for example.

[Mr. Indigo]

Hmmm. . . . I think that there is a lot of denial in this thread. . .

bhanu, if we are defining pornography as art that intends sexual arousal, then please explain to me how your sketch is not pornography. Sincerely. I want an explanation.

To me at least, you sounded shocked that your father thought "porn" right away. Did you really intend to sound this way? Were you really shocked?

Everybody is free to see what they want, whether it be truth or, something else. However, perception does not change reality. In fact, perception is based off of reality, not the other way around.

The truth should be shouted from rooftops.