What's wrong with porn?

[shereads]

This is an adjunct to Dr. M's thread. ("Adjunct" is French for "The other porn thread.")

Why do we view pornography as a lesser art form? Why are we usually so careful to refer to the quality stuff as erotica instead of "really good porn"?

I read someplace that the word pornography came into use in the Victorian era, to describe the naughty bits at Herculaneum and Pompeii. Gentlemen and scholars viewed those sexually explicit mosaics and wall carvings without apology; it was only ladies who had to be protected from pornography - but they were also not supposed to stare at Michelangelo's David.

Would the David be pornographic if he had a woody? What gives?

Setting aside the obviously odious kiddie porn and the nastier fetishes, and considering pornography as the term was first used, what's wrong with making people feel good? It requires talent to entertain. (Unless you are entertaining your 4-year-old nephew, which requires watching "Home Alone" three times.)

Porn entertains and also elicits a physical reaction. Exceptionally good porn moves us in more memorable ways. Why apologize?

 

[Grushenka]

Nothing's wrong with porn. That's just my opinion. However, to answer your question I think the answer's simply B.C. and A.D. "Before Christ" there was no porn. Phallic images were common throughout the Roman empire, a good luck charm. Those so-called pornographic images discovered in the ruins of Pompei were in people's homes, not just on brothel walls. 'Pornography' was rampant in all the arts.

A.D. (over a number of centuries via the establishment of the institution of the Roman Catholic church) stomped out sex for the sake of sex.

As for literature, porn or erotica is genre, just doesn't make the cut (like detective novels and sci-fi). I'm not saying these can't be literary, it's just the state of the beast(s). But porn/erotica has the sex thing working it against it more than not.

 

[shereads]

Those so-called pornographic images discovered in the ruins of Pompei were in people's homes, not just on brothel walls.

I wonder if Pompeii and Herculaneum were the Vegas and Reno of the Roman Empire, and those mosaics were in the equivalent of Elvis' penthouse. Or did all Romans decorate the dining room wall with a mural of satyrs fucking?

 

[Grushenka]

I wonder if Pompeii and Herculaneum were the Vegas and Reno of the Roman Empire, and those mosaics were in the equivalent of Elvis' penthouse. Or did all Romans decorate the dining room wall with a mural of satyrs fucking?

Yes, it was common throughout the empire. Roman graffiti was rampant with sexual imagery and language. Dinnerware and bed linens were decorated with such.

Gambling was an addiction throughout the empire's history, but I would not label Pompei and Herculaneum as you do. Seaside areas were apt places for villas and resort type life, but 'ordinary' life took place too. Much of the found art is from ordinary middle-class homes.

 

[shereads]

Yes, it was common throughout the empire. Roman graffiti was rampant with sexual imagery and language. Dinnerware and bed linens were decorated with such.

Gambling was an addiction throughout the empire's history, but I would not label Pompei and Herculaneum as you do. Seaside areas were apt places for villas and resort type life, but 'ordinary' life took place too. Much of the found art is from ordinary middle-class homes.

You know your stuff. Thank you. I want to see those places. The topic fascinates me.

Have you read the Robert Harris novel? Pompeii

Interesting choice of pov: an aqueduct engineer is sent by Rome to investigate strange disruptions of Pompeii's water supply. (Cue foreboding rumble.)

 

[Grushenka]

Have you read the Robert Harris novel? Pompeii

I want to see all those places too. And I don't mean just in Italy (Roman ruins are available in England, Vienna, Tunisia, Romania, etc.)

Harris' novel is on my 'to read' list. I highly recommend Stephen Saylor's Sub Rosa series. They are mystery novels set in ancient Rome and feature various well known real people and events. He has a classical history background and it's evident his fiction is backed by facts. You'll get a great sense of 'real' life in ancient Rome via his books. I read a lot of 'real' history, but I love stuff like Saylor's books too. I also very highly recommend the HBO-BBC series "Rome".

 

[Pure]

i think, however, that one may find periods of greater and lesser concerns of governments with morality, including allowing sexy, written stuff or pictures.

perhaps the control of porn is linked to controls on women, and these certainly were NOT invented by Xtians, who are not *right now* executing anyone for adultery as in colonial times.

i believe this clamp down on morals has happened at various points in Chinese history.

 

[oggbashan]

There's no difference.

What one person classes as erotica, another will see as pornography.

Some books, advertisements etc. that many societies consider normal are hard porn by other societies' criteria, even something as simple as a picture of a fully clothed human.

Og

 

[Somme]

Now that this is all sorted I need a cuppa tea.

 

[Grushenka]

perhaps the control of porn is linked to controls on women, and these certainly were NOT invented by Xtians, who are not *right now* executing anyone for adultery as in colonial times.

I hope it was obvious I was speaking of 'western' history, and European at that, plus what's filtered down to the U.S. However, if ancient Rome was anything at its core, it was patriarchal (in the deepest sense of the word); women had virtually no rights from the founding of the republic to the demise of the empire (but for exceptions here and there, more so among the upper/patrician class). Still, anything to do with sex was not considered pornographic or evil in any way that is so to 'modern' people. Midway in its history 'Rome' had strictures and laws re. marriage and adultery, but they had nothing to do with morality as we know it; the concerns focused on property and patriarchal rights. So, at least in ancient Rome, where 'porn' as we know it was not even a concept, the control you speak of was not linked to control on women and definitely came to fruition (if you'll allow a bit of sarcasm) with the Christians.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

(Talking about porn here as opposed to erotica....)

There's nothing wrong with porn as entertainment. It's when it pretends to be art that it runs into trouble.

The usual knock on porn is that it's flat and formulaic and superficial. You might say that porn is to literature as XXX video is to legitimate film. To create an acceptable adult video, all you have to do is record two people fucking. Similarly, to write acceptable porn, all you have to do is describe two people having sex, so it doesn't take a lot of creativity or talent.

Also, most people would say that legitimate art deals with truth. Porn doesn't. Porn is more like propaganda or kitsch or cliche. It's very conservative and very predictable.

 

[Grushenka]

There's nothing wrong with porn as entertainment. It's when it pretends to be art that it runs into trouble.
...
Also, most people would say that legitimate art deals with truth. Porn doesn't. Porn is more like propaganda or kitsch or cliche. It's very conservative and very predictable.

Brilliant statements, nails on the head so to speak. Yes! porn as kitsch is so right, I like that. Also why I prefer the stuff on Lit. to Henry Miller .

 

[Frank Noir]

There's nothing wrong with porn as entertainment. It's when it pretends to be art that it runs into trouble.

The usual knock on porn is that it's flat and formulaic and superficial. You might say that porn is to literature as XXX video is to legitimate film. To create an acceptable adult video, all you have to do is record two people fucking. Similarly, to write acceptable porn, all you have to do is describe two people having sex, so it doesn't take a lot of creativity or talent.

Also, most people would say that legitimate art deals with truth. Porn doesn't. Porn is more like propaganda or kitsch or cliche. It's very conservative and very predictable.

Very good points.

I'd say the two have different purposes: Art is supposed to communicate something about life and the human condition. Porn is supposed to turn you on. And when it does, it's good porn.

Kinda like art music as opposed to dance music. If it's got a good beat, it's good dance music. Doesn't mean it will outlive Mozart, but it works on its own terms.

 

[elsol]

(Talking about porn here as opposed to erotica....)

There's nothing wrong with porn as entertainment. It's when it pretends to be art that it runs into trouble.

The usual knock on porn is that it's flat and formulaic and superficial. You might say that porn is to literature as XXX video is to legitimate film. To create an acceptable adult video, all you have to do is record two people fucking. Similarly, to write acceptable porn, all you have to do is describe two people having sex, so it doesn't take a lot of creativity or talent.

Also, most people would say that legitimate art deals with truth. Porn doesn't. Porn is more like propaganda or kitsch or cliche. It's very conservative and very predictable.

Dr. Mab just answered what's wrong with porn.

Porn can only be this... flat, formulaic, superficial, with no need for creativity or talent.

Do you want to have your work associated with something that anyone who can complete a sentence could do? Basically, if you write porn... you're the literary equivalent of the guy who mops up the jack booths at the porn store on the fringe of town.

And this ladies and gentlemen is why I am a Porn Writer!

Low expectations and plenty of upward mobility.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Kinda like art music as opposed to dance music. If it's got a good beat, it's good dance music. Doesn't mean it will outlive Mozart, but it works on its own terms.

Yeah. And all this doesn't mean porn has to be bad just because it's porn. After all, Lawrence Welk and Guy Lombardo were dance music, but so was Duke Ellington. Just because porn can be flat and unimaginative and get away with it doesn't mean it has to be, and there will always be writers who are able to transcend any genre.

Look what happened to science fiction, for example. When I was a kid, sci fi was pretty much just a step above comic books in sophistication. But in the hands of some very talented people, a generation later it became a full-fledged literature in its own right. I'm waiting for something similar to happen to porn.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Yeah. And all this doesn't mean porn has to be bad just because it's porn. After all, Lawrence Welk and Guy Lombardo were dance music, but so was Duke Ellington. Just because porn can be flat and unimaginative and get away with it doesn't mean it has to be, and there will always be writers who are able to transcend any genre.

Look what happened to science fiction, for example. When I was a kid, sci fi was pretty much just a step above comic books in sophistication. But in the hands of some very talented people, a generation later it became a full-fledged literature in its own right. I'm waiting for something similar to happen to porn.

... It becomes Erotica at that point, doesn't it?

And who says porn can be flat and unimaginative and get away with it? Not me, that's for sure. Not even for free...