Is it ART or is it PORN?

[View Blog]

 

 

 

I received this rejection letter in the mail yesterday, and have been thinking quite a bit on this point. My art obviously aims at pushing boundaries here, and if anything i am surprised it has taken this long to receive such a letter. So in a sense, i am probably more glad than not that this came; for i think it is overdue.

 

Where are our boundaries for this as a society as a whole?

What is the point of no return where something acceptable as art becomes pornography?

 

What i think is even more interesting though, is the fact that the person who sent me this makes it quite clear that they would have liked me to change my art to suit their likings. Shouldn't we be encouraging artists to pursue self-discovery? Isn't there more than enough conformity in our lives as it is? Should we be pushing for conformity in the artistic realm as well?

 

i will end my post with a quote from Chuck Palahniuk's Choke:

 

WHATEVER LIGHTING THE PHOTOGRAPHER USED was harsh and made bad shadows on the
cement-block wall behind them. Just a painted wall in somebody's basement. The mon-
key looked tired and patchy with mange. The guy was in lousy shape, pale with rolls
around his middle, but there he was, relaxed and bent over with his hands braced against
his knees and his poochy gut hanging down, his face looking back over his shoulder at
the camera, smiling away.
"Beatific" isn't the right word, but it's the first word that comes to mind.
What the little boy first loved about pornography wasn't the sex part. It wasn't the
pictures of beautiful people dorking each other, their heads thrown back, making those
fake orgasm faces. Not at first. He'd found all those pictures on the Internet even before
he knew what sex was. They had the Internet in every library. They had it at all the
schools.
The way you can move from city to city and always find a Catholic church, the same
Mass said everywhere, no matter what foster place the kid was sent, he could always find
the Internet. The truth was, if Christ had laughed on the cross, or spat on the Romans, if
he'd done anything more than just suffer, the kid would've liked church a lot more.
As it was, his favorite website was pretty much not sexy, at least not to him. You
could just go there, and there would be about a dozen photographs of this one dumpy guy
dressed as Tarzan with a goofy orangutan trained to poke what looked like roasted chest-
nuts up the guy's ass.
The guy's leopard-print loincloth is tossed to one side, the elastic waistband sunk into
his tubby waist.
The monkey's crouched there, ready with the next chestnut.
There's nothing sexy about it. Still, the counter showed more than a half million
people had been to see it.
"Pilgrimage" isn't the right word, but it's the first word that comes to mind.
The monkey and the chestnuts wasn't anything the kid could understand, but he sort
of admired the guy. The kid was stupid, but he knew this was something way beyond
him. The truth was, most people wouldn't even want a monkey to see them naked. They'd
be terrified about how their asshole might look, if it might look too red or baggy. There's
no way most people would ever have the nerve to bend over in front of a monkey, much
less a monkey and a camera and lights, and even then they'd have to do about a zillion sit-
ups first and go to a tanning booth and get their hair cut. After that, they'd spend hours
bent over in front of a mirror, trying to determine their best profile.
And then, even with just chestnuts, you'd have to stay somewhat relaxed.
Just the thought of auditioning monkeys was terrifying, the possibility of being
rejected by monkey after monkey. Sure, you can pay a person enough money and they'll
stick stuff into you or they'll take pictures. But a monkey. A monkey's going to be honest.
Your only hope would be to book this same orangutan, since it obviously didn't look
too picky. Either that or it was exceptionally well trained.
The point was, there'd be nothing to this if you were beautiful and sexy.
The point was, in a world where everybody had to look so pretty all the time, this
guy wasn't. The monkey wasn't. What they were doing wasn't.
The point was, it's not the sex part of pornography that hooked the stupid little boy. It
was the confidence. The courage. The complete lack of shame. The comfort and genuine
honesty. The up-front-ness of being able to just stand there and tell the world: Yeah, this
is how I chose to spend a free afternoon. Posing here with a monkey putting chestnuts up
my ass.
And I really don't care how I look. Or what you think.
So deal with it.

 

[Human Artist Vending Machine LTD]

I wouldn't think zombies would have porn..or care about that stuff..hunger..with-out getting fat..and constant walking..and humming..No one judges zombies but only fear them..long as you can run and use a hammer and nails..and learn to shoot people in the head..your good..till your tired..

[1cgqtuoblpeqc]

further, i am as a parent very anti-censorship, and have discussed this mildly with both diane and angie (and snooky but he was too busy enjoy the car ride to the PO to pay attention). My stance, as a parent (and otherwise) is very much anti-censorship. i grew up in a house where we had freedom to watch what we liked and listen to what we want, etc. my parents were quite conservative in many regards, but in what access we had to materials they were far more liberal than most of the other kids i knew. for me, this was a great experience and i want my daughter to have the same. a lot of the other parents, even the more liberally minded seem to be surprised when amanda talks with them about my ideas of censorship - and we've had an episode at the library where some stranger once came up to charlotte while she was browsing books and took her book away and told her "that one isn't for kids." to me, that kind of mentality is frustrating at best, and seriously disturbing to my inner core.

 

that is my stance on censorship.

as i said to theresa in the lit group before,

i tend to have strong beliefs;

even if they do get me into trouble more often than not. ;-D

[1cgqtuoblpeqc]

@nancy: the fact that they were looking forward to working on my zombie project but not receiving what they deem as pornography (there was an earlier postcard expressing their wishes, but the person who sent this is has got a rather strange sense of humor, so i took it as that - humor. i had no idea they were serious. i don't want to reveal them publicly because i do want to offer them some measure of respect. i think the fact that before i crossed their line twice, their first wish was for me to discriminate my art for them.

zombies +, nudity -

 

i am not into censoring my own works for others. but yes, i have done as they wished and removed them from my address books.

[1cgqtuoblpeqc]

as DVC once said, "they say shock tactics don't work anymore."

[Amy Irwen]

aahhh yes, the age old discussion about art....I have worked in a Museum for 5 years and it's was a fine line between what was considered "Art" and what wasn't...and it all boils down to the "eye of the beholder"... we had some great art regarding abuse, but some patrons could only black and red; not what was hidden behind...

It's good that this person let you know how they felt and I think it was more that they are not ready to see what is hidden behind the art...

My nickels worth of input...Amy

[Nancy Bell Scott]

SH, I imagine it was upsetting to receive a letter like this.  I don't know who sent it to you but would like to make a simple observation in case it helps in some way:  To me this is an honest and straightforward expression of this person's wishes.  He/she does not come across to me as trying to change your art or as making any kind of statement re: art and/or pornography.  It is an expression of this person's wish not to receive what you have been sending to this person.  Reading it, I see nothing more than that.  If it were me, I would respect this person's wishes and move on.  No one is going to want to be involved in every possible corner of the art world there is; it wouldn't even be possible.  I don't think this has anything to do with artistic freedom.

Just my opinion, for what it's worth.

[DKeys]

As Marcel Duchamp said, "A painting that doesn't shock isn't worth painting". You admited you go for shock value in your art. That this person had such a strong reaction means you have accomplished your goal. A negative reaction is better than no reaction and you are obviously prepared to deal with the consequences. I think it's important to challenge the depiction of women in the media and as you said where is the line between art and pornography and when and where is censorship appropriate? It is kind of like the question of when is nude nude?While these types of pieces aren't particularly my taste or what I might want to see when I skip eagerly to my mailbox, I completely respect that this is the expression of your truth, exploration etc. I'm surprised an artist would find something like this so offensive. Thanks for posting this SH, it brings up a lot of good questions.