The Fine Line Between Art and Pornography

[stlukesguild]

"Is this porn?" They ask and point to... a reclining nude.

Hmmm?

 

[JohnEmmett]

?

There is a spectrum.

 

[JohnEmmett]

 

[musket]

Yum.

 

[JohnEmmett]

asexual individuals may still experience attraction

but this attraction doesn't need to be realized in any sexual manner

 

[Hermes2020]

"Is this porn?" They ask and point to... a reclining nude.

View attachment 4816

Hmmm?

The sculpture is stimulating from a gay man's perspective, but I wouldn't call it porn.

 

[Iain]

There is no Fine Line between a Sasha Grey video (Porn) and anything you will currently find in a gallery. The above images reminded me of an image on my hard drive.

I know - Pretty gratuitous, what.

 

[JohnEmmett]

There is no Fine Line between Porn and anything you will currently find in a gallery.

what you find in a gallery is clean……

 

[JohnEmmett]

Ron Di Scenza

 

[Artyczar]

The sculpture is stimulating from a gay man's perspective, but I wouldn't call it porn.

Why a gay man's perspective? That seems presumptuous. It can be stimulating or non-stimulating from any perspective.

 

[Artyczar]

There is no Fine Line between a Sasha Grey video (Porn) and anything you will currently find in a gallery. The above images reminded me of an image on my hard drive.

I know - Pretty gratuitous, what.View attachment 4826

My dog used to show us her vagina all the time. Ha ha ha.

 

[Hermes2020]

Why a gay man's perspective? That seems presumptuous. It can be stimulating or non-stimulating from any perspective.

Yes, that makes a lot of sense. I suspect, though, that more gay men will find it sexually stimulating than straight men would.

 

[Maybenartist]

I would say that art and soft porn overlap, but I wouldn't say that art and the hard porn does. Not that I've ever done much research on the subject!

 

[musket]

Not the least bit stimulating to me, but John's blonde certainly is.

 

[Maybenartist]

Not the least bit stimulating to me, but John's blonde certainly is.

That's the fur coat musket

 

[musket]

Nah, that just exists to be removed, or at least opened up all the way, asap. She really is lovely. I wouldn't call it porn, but no question she's been photographed in such a way as to be deliberately alluring.

 

[Iain]

My dog used to show us her vagina all the time. Ha ha ha.

And she looked so innocent!

My ex's dog, a shih tzu, was a serial humper, forever stealing laundry and having his wicked way. One time he stole jeans and got his penis - the glands at the base - caught in the belt loop. My "assistant" could hardly suppress her laughter, while I was tasked to cut the beast free, with nail scissors. I don't know if anyone else here as undertaken such an operation, it's not for the fainthearted, for sure.

 

[stlukesguild]

Rubens... and Titian before him... understood the impact of contrasting naked flesh with fur...

Not only did they grasp the sensual resonance of contrasting textures but they also recognized the use of fur as a surrogate for what they couldn't show: pubic hair.

 

[musket]

I doubt that played a part in the photographer's mind. The fur simply signifies luxury and works well with her hair. Of course the feel of fur is very sensual, but she could have been wearing a linen duster, a down parka or a potato sack and still looked desirable. Her features are very fine but if the guy was going for reverie I would say he failed. She just looks sorta vacant. Her navel and the ridge of her hip are really the focal points. Truly beautiful.

 

[stlukesguild]

Is the Renaissance Nude Religious or Erotic?

A related story from the BBC. Yet I have to question whether the writer/editor knows the difference between Religious art and art based on Greco-Roman mythology.