Review of The Differences Between Erotic Art and Pornography

This essay will look at the differences between erotic art and pornography, discussing different philosophical views such as Scruton to conclude on whether erotic art and pornography are separate and to what degree. Both erotic art and pornography involve nudity and sexual desire to some extent. However, both have different aims and purposes, making them distinguishable, which will be discussed in this essay. Erotic art has the aim to please its viewer aesthetically, whereas, pornography aims to please its viewer sexually. This means that erotic art can be seen as beautiful and visually satisfying, whereas, pornography has no beauty and is simply accessible to produce sexual arousal.

The main difference that determines what is erotic art and what is pornography is that pornography appeals to our physical needs of sexual desire and aims to arouse the audience whereas erotic art is more aesthetically pleasing and is more subjective to the audience, possibly provoking a range of emotion from delight to curiosity. Pornography has a simple goal to elicit sexual desire whereas erotic art depicts this sexual desire with more meaning and more focus on aspects such as the beauty of human form or age. Pornography greatly involves a physical attraction between the individuals within the pornography and the viewer which is used alongside the fantasy which is being played out to the viewer to stimulate sexual desire and provoke thoughts of sexual intention. Erotic art, however, does not share this main aim and instead uses detail to bring attention away from a basic physical attraction and brings more attention to the interesting ways in which sexual desire can be depicted, provoking thoughts of interest and originality.

Erotic art may stimulate a sexual response to some extent, but this is limited compared to pornography as the audience can only gain this response through imagination, their own personal experiences and emotions. This restricts the arousal as the desire is imagined whereas, in pornography arousal is the purpose and the sexual acts are being acted out with the intent of arousal. The distinguishing factor of erotic art using mainly the audience’s imagination and pornography needing very little imagination is significant as it adds to the factor that erotic art is more subjective to the viewer and can be viewed in a much more innocent manner than pornography. Pornography can pull its viewer into a fantasy that takes little thought and requires no imagination. Pornography does this by presenting “us with the object of lust rather than a symbol of it.” Doing this allows satisfaction of sexual desire before the viewer can appreciate it as their thoughts are being steered by what they are watching instead of being allowed to wonder.

Kant’s theory of disinterested pleasure states that pleasure at the beauty of art does not produce desire from the viewer as we “take pleasure in something because we judge it beautiful, rather than judging it beautiful because we find it pleasurable.” This supports that erotic art and pornography can be distinguished as art does not produce sexual desire and pornography does. The audience of erotic art will take pleasure in it because it is beautiful, whereas, the audience of pornography will find the pornography pleasurable and hence be tricked into naming it beautiful. He also states that disinterested pleasure does not associate with social norms as it does not involve reality. This displays how erotic art has a more artistic design which is aesthetically pleasing in comparison to pornography’s lack of sophistication and effort towards making sexual desire seem interesting or meaningful.

Kenneth Clark, an art historian, states that the nude is not the subject of art, but a form of art. This means that instead of the nude being simply described in the image, it is not represented directly making it more of a proposal than a direct portrayal. Clark believes that for erotic art to be aesthetically pleasing, it must be designed rather than described. This allows for an idealisation of the human body, making it less realistic than pornography which has the sole purpose of arousal, and allowing for different purposes such as evoking interest in the artwork or producing feelings of empathy. Clark also distinguishes between the naked and the nude which is closely related to distinguishing between erotic art and pornography. Clark refers to how we associate the word naked with guilt and embarrassment and think of it as a shameful word that should not be thought about. Society norms portray nakedness as dishonourable and promotes that people should have little respect for the naked. The word nude on the other hand, is associated with a state of beauty, grace and wellbeing. When the word nude is used it is usually thought of alongside purity and art. Those who are nude can stand confidently, whereas, those who are naked stand in humiliation. This conveys the difference between erotic art and pornography as those depicted in erotic art are seen as being nude and those presented in pornography are thought of as naked.

Roger Scruton believes that pornographic art does not exist. He believes that pornography is incapable of beauty due to its purpose of arousal, whereas, art can be erotic and beautiful as it involves the viewers imagination instead of their sexual fantasy. Erotic art allows the viewer’s imagination to expand and involve their own thoughts and personal experiences with the artwork, whereas, pornography tells the viewer what the fantasy is and leaves no room for imagination as it is being acted out for them. Scruton distinguishes between erotic art and pornography through their intentions. Erotic art evokes pleasure of the imagination, whereas, pornography arouses pleasure of sexual desire. Scruton believes that erotic art is the meeting of human beauty with artistic beauty, meaning that it is aesthetically pleasing and produces an interested response from its viewer of the human form. This distinguishes it from pornography which manipulates human beauty to stimulate a sexual response.

Scruton discusses the difference between animals and humans as animals have drives and needs, whereas humans have Eros and choice. This is important when discussing erotic art as separate from pornography as it explains that humans can appreciate the sexual desire without needing to involve themselves in it. Human beings have individuality which allows for the subjectivity of erotic art as each individual will think and feel differently when viewing it. Pornography, however, is universal and each individual will feel the same sexual desire when viewing it. This shows that erotic art and pornography can be distinguished as erotic art is personal to each viewer and can elicit different emotions, thoughts and experiences based on the complexity of the art and the different focuses which each artist decides to utilise and pornography is more conventional, provoking the same response from each audience with each piece of pornography.

Another thing that distinguishes erotic art from pornography is the objectification of the female form in pornography as no interest is evoked from the face and it is seen as simply another body part, whereas, in erotic art there is importance placed on the faces and they are able to evoke thought and wonder from their viewers outside of a sexual desire. Scruton compares two artists, Titan and Boucher, analysing the faces in their erotic art.

In Titan’s, “the face individualizes the body, possesses it in the name of freedom, and condemns every covetous glance as a violation. The Titan nude neither provokes nor excites, but retains a detached serenity- the serenity of a person, whose thoughts and desires are not ours but hers.” Scruton approves of Titan’s erotic art as it meets the aim of provoking interest and having meaning that pornography does not. Instead of producing sexual desire, Titan’s erotic art produces thought and curiosity about the individuals who have been painted which successfully distinguishes them as part of erotic art and not pornography.

However, “Boucher’s nudes are not individualized by their faces. As a matter of fact, they all have the same face, which is not a face at all, but an assemblage of parts. The lips just slightly apart as though in anticipation of a kiss; the clear eyes under lowered lashes; the oval contours filled with flushing cheeks that swell like sails in a summer breeze – all such features, brilliantly displayed from every angle and in every light, carry a single meaning, which is that of sexual appetite.” Scruton disapproves of Boucher’s erotic art as there is less attention brought to the context of the painting and more focus brought to the femininity and desirability by having the same mediocre female role in each painting, making it easier for the paintings to be sexualised by focusing less on the same face and more on the body, turning it into a more pornographic painting.

Modern day erotic art can be seen as harder to distinguish from pornography since the nude selfie has been born. Controversy over the nude selfie being erotic art or pornography is apparent as one article talks about the artistic manner in which Kim Kardashian captured her nude, pregnant body as she shows off the beauty of pregnancy. Another article explains that Kardashian’s nude selfies cannot be considered as pornographic as her expression and composition do not prompt arousal but evoke a humorous and empowerment for women to be confident in their bodies without sexualising them. However, another article talks about the pornographic nature of it. The article states that Kim Kardashian is self-objectifying through this nude selfie and attacks the view that it can be constituted as art, naming it selfish and without creativity to produce any thought or imagination. Although there is controversy based around distinguishing between modern day erotic art and pornography, the main factors of what makes erotic art not pornographic remains the same, however, can be subjective to the viewer. The nude selfie can be classified as erotic art if it does not hold the pornographic intention to produce sexual arousal and instead aims to be visually pleasing and thought provoking. Individuals may classify a piece of erotic art as pornography due to their own sexual desires but this only emphasises the artistic nature of the erotic art as it has caused the viewer’s imagination to expand and become concerned with the art, whereas, pornography forces the sexual desire onto the viewer and paints the picture for them so as they do not require their imagination.

In conclusion, one can distinguish between erotic art and pornography as erotic art does not show sexual desire but depicts it in a manner that is visually pleasing and able to evoke a range of thoughts and emotions from its viewer. Pornography, on the other hand, simply shows sexual desire with the intent of evoking sexual arousal from its viewer. It has no deeper meaning and brings no attention to the beauty of the human form, instead showing physical attractiveness to meet the needs of physical drives.

References

1. Amelia Milne. NO LONGER A PASSIVE SUBJECT: THE REVOLUTIONARY POTENTIAL OF THE NUDE SELFIE. : Stephen Donatelli, New York University Expository Writing Program 2018 ; 2017.
2. David Gerber. Global Competition: Law, Markets, and Globalization. : OUP Oxford; 2010.
3. David T. Mitchell, Sharon L. Snyder. The Body and Physical Difference: Discourses of Disability. : University of Michigan Press; 1997.
4. Douglas Burnham. Immanuel Kant: Aesthetics. https://www.iep.utm.edu/kantaest/ (accessed 23 November 2018).
5. Donald W. Crawford. Beauty. https://ndpr.nd.edu/news/beauty/ (accessed 23 November 2018).
6. Jerrold Levinson. Contemplating Art: Essays in Aesthetics. : Clarendon Press; 2006.
7. Jonathan Jones. Why Kim Kardashian’s pregnancy selfie would turn Titian on', The Guardian.
8. Leon F. Seltzer. What Distinguishes Erotica from Pornography?. https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/evolution-the-self/201104/what-distinguishes-erotica-pornography (accessed 21 November 2018).
9. Marina S O, Sit Still Look Pretty?. https://www.patheos.com/blogs/eatingpeaches/2016/05/sit-still-look-pretty/ (accessed 21 November 2018).
10. Nead, L., 2002. The female nude: Art, obscenity and sexuality. Routledge.
11. Peter Lamarque. Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Art: The Analytic Tradition, An Anthology. : John Wiley & Sons; 2018.
12. Scruton R. Photography and Representation. : Critical Inquiry; 1981.
13. Victoria Anderson. Sorry, Kim Kardashian. Feminist tells mainstream critic gawking at naked pregnant selfie to get a grip', The National Post.