Is a painting about sex (as in this post) pornography?
Can pornography be art?
8.5 x 14 cm, oil on wood
a multi-disciplinary dialog
Posted by Karl Zipser on January 29th, 2007
Is a painting about sex (as in this post) pornography?
Can pornography be art?
8.5 x 14 cm, oil on wood
21 Comments
Do the stylistic limitations of this painting mislead me to feel uncomfortable about this… already close relationship?
Karl, I only think of something as pornography if someone is being abused in creating it. This painting (is it one of yours?) isn’t pornography as far as I’m concerned.
So, it there a title?
I like David’s answer about what would make art cross the line into porn. No, this painting is not porn, but as many debates have shown, the definition of porn can vary depending on the community in which it is being discussed. There’s that whole notion of community standards right? So it becomes a public concern not just an individual’s definition.
I actually don’t even see this painting as that sexual or erotic. It has an adult fairy tale feel to it. Almost as if the woman is taking the man for a walk in the idyllic landscape - she is just using an unconventional leash :)
If the singular purpose of a visual product is to cause sexual excitement than, in my view it is pornograhy and not art. But if it stimulates other senses as well, it is art.
Karl Zipser I feel there is a difference between eroticism and pornography, being the first sensual beauty and the second explicit animalism…
Although I am a bit uncomfortable looking at this type of painting I am not saying I don’t enjoy it, I think is great! I would be really careful though about hanging it on my wall. It does appear to me as an over 18 painting and just wouldn’t hang in the house with kids around… so it would be a shame to hide it in the closet for private adult viewing…
The painting itself is beautifully painted I love the stylized figures, the landscape looks just like Hanneke’s renaissance background on the baby painting. The couple look married to me, like they have known each other for centuries and are still in love. I see a desire to be dominated there, am I right?
Looks dreamy and erotic, like an artist intimate desire and freedom…
Leslie, the leash is maybe not so unconventional :)
I agree with Richard…
And in this painting in particular, while I find the people interesting and visually strong, it’s the background that cause me to linger and study the painting further. There’s very little sexual connotation here at all for me. Perhaps it’s the ‘fairy tale feel’ that Leslie mentions….there’s more of a feeling of whimsy here, rather than anything sexy.
The edge of the rock and the water dividing the background to the couple is interesting.
Not all sharp edges are worn-off?
I am at work and my student is a few minutes late. I keep looking at the door so that she does not surprise me.
The picture is small enough to hang it someplace private.
I’m fascinated by the man’s seeming indifference.
what captures me about this painting is their gaze. As they seemingly disappear into one another thru their eyes, the background relates the soft comfort they feel in each other,as all things cease to exist beyond them. A moment captured in time, certainly not pornography.
A beautiful picture
I agree with Michelle about the gaze being especially interesting. He’s like Carina Fernhout’s Adam of a few days back, looking somewhere poorly defined.
Does anyone else see a smiling profile in the upper cliff “face”?
I did notice the smiling face earlier. Forgot to mention it. Hectic time getting all my work done before going out of town
Karl
I see this painting as a social statement about men, both modern and ancient. I’ve heard stories about what the apple represents in the Adam and Eve tale. The “matter of fact” look on their faces suggest normalcy. It tells a story. There is nothing upsetting about this painting in my view. Erotic, Nakedness, Sexiness, are just but some of the things we arrive with when we are born. Did I miss the artist’s name?
Oddly enough, Michelle, I see the gaze of the two going right past one another. In fact, I thought instantly that while they were almost certainly pleased with what was happening, they both were pretending to be unaware of the event. This is so particularly with the male; the female seems also somewhat slyly pleased.
As for the question about pornography and its definition — I am reminded of a critic/artist who said that every life drawing class is filled with sexual tension.
Wow! that was a revelation. The only tension I feel in life drawing is about my own ineptitude. Pornography, like beauty, might be in the mind of the beholder. Or perhaps I’m just out of touch<snort>
A wonderful painting, Karl, evoking all kinds of questions and ideas and smiles in me.
If an image is manipulated to deliberately titillate the viewer sexually, then it can be called pornography. I think it really depends upon the perspective of the viewer. What is art to the artist could be pornography to a viewer and what is art to the viewer was really planned to be pornographic to the artist.
I think this image is a great example of the tension between the thin lines that separate art and pornography. In my view, this image is artistic and is classified under ‘art’. I think it is very beautifully executed notwithstanding the fact that the leash used may be unconventional to some but definitely exposes another point of view (pun unintended) – not too sure if my wife would agree.
The following review by Jerry Saltz on John Currin (who in recent times started to paint pictures that distort the line between art and porn) is also worth reading and is relevant to this discussion…
http://www.artnet.com/magazineus/features/saltz/saltz12-18-06.asp
Karl,
AF’s emblematic painting of Paradise made me rethink Leash.
Equality? Same height, same pose, same brows, eyes, noses, lips, necks, nipples, etc.
Do you consider these two figures to be two unique individuals or emblems of their gender? Given their resemblance their bond is tricky, isn’t it?
Leslie,
Regarding the issue of porn/art, I feel that you have something to say that you are holding back. I’m not certain, it is only an impression.
Angela,
I’ve been thinking about your question, “I see a desire to be dominated there, am I right?” all week. It intrigues me, but I don’t come up with a clear answer one way or the other. If you wrote to Hanneke regarding a still life, “I see a desire to be a strawberry there, am I right?” the answer would be more obvious. How does one know if one has a desire to be dominated? Is it a useful trait, or something to try to grow out of?
Birgit,
Don’t let your students catch you looking at dirty pictures.
D, Richard, Bob, Chantal, Sunil, David, Steve and Michelle,
Thanks for your insightful comments. I read them with fascination. I don’t feel the need to add anything, aside to say I appreciate that you took a look.
Its in “The Eye of Beholder”;
If deemed offensive - do not look or turn away. If thine eye offends thee pluck it out! At least you can have a look with the other one….
If okay by You - Enjoy the moment.
I think that pornography and art do meet at certain moments. I had a conversation with a close friend once about how painting brought out my most violent animalistic self at times because it is so physical and instinctive. I think that pornography brings out those same feelings in a person. Art that has the ability to remind us of this is no different than porn. Think of Francis Bacon. Now he was quite a hot one.