48 thoughts on “Question: Porn or Art?”

  1. I think it leans more towards the art side. If it was a pornographic picture, why cover the goods and hide his face/body. I’m not outright saying it’s art, just that it leans more to that side.

    Reply
  2. Why does it have to be one or the other?

    If art is the expression of the human condition, expression, and experience; pornography, which is simply the manifestation of sexual expression for the sake of sexual arousal, is surely art. Of course not all art is valued the same, but it’s still art, like the picture.

    Reply
  3. Art is in the eye of whoever is looking at it. For some this would be just porn – someone else it could be art.

    It doesn’t do either for me.

    Reply
  4. Well, when done correctly, this pic can be both, because then porn is a form of art.

    Although, I may be a bit biased when it comes to this pic, because I used it in a blog entry for my “Getting Out The Kinks” series called, “Step To Me – WET!”

    http://tre-x.com/blog/?p=175

    And I used it because it’s a VERY HOT pic that helps to explain my point.

    Reply
  5. porn, art -if I had to put a label on it I’d go with porn. Nothing wrong with porn, love it. But Ruben, I don’t think it is so much he’s covering his cock as he’s gettin ready to put one of those fingers up his ass and go to town.

    just my thoughts
    BHcolin

    Reply
  6. Wow!! I love this shot….It’s both porn and art…interelated I guess….either I don’t care… This shot is deliciously addictive!! crazy! any more?

    Reply
  7. The guy in this picture is JD Amos. This picture is the copyright of Colt Studios, when it was owned by Rip Colt aka Jim French. Rip Colt himself did the photography of his models. Although Colt Studios is considered gay porn, anyone who’s familiar with Colt Studios when it was under Rip Colt or is a fan of Colt Studios basically seen Rip’s photography as gay art or at least porn with a more artistic feel….

    Reply
  8. Well, a basic study of art history would say ‘depends’… Dadaism showed us that context is everything when it comes to an object (or photograph in this case) is art or not… this pic in a gallery = art… this pix on a porn site = porn…

    Anonymous above can certainly move onto something else (there are scads of blogs out there) ;-)

    Reply
  9. Art, like beauty, has always been in the eye of the beholder. It’s a subjective judgment based on one’s personal ideas and aesthetic preferences.

    Reply
  10. regardless of it has any artistic merit – one man's art is another man's garbage – this picture is incredibly for porn standards…

    Reply
  11. I’m a professional artist and deal with galleries in NY and across the country. This question is brought up a lot. Hard to answer because it is subjective. Sometimes the answer depends on where the picture is shown – on porn website or in a gallery with other works by an artist that are not as ‘pornographic.” The latter might be considered art. As is, I think most artists who don’t mind erotic content would consider this picture to still be porn, meant mainly for erotic pleasure. Personally, I love the pic and men like this. It still is mainly erotic to me. If the person who made it believe it is art, is it art to him/her.

    Reply
  12. The Courts have determined pornography to be any visual representation of penetration. By that legal definition it is not porn in spite of its sexual and sensual nature.

    Reply
  13. Last year, I remember going to a small photo exhibition in Paris showcasing nude male photography. In fact, there were a few color photos of gay porn stars among all the “tasteful” B&W images. I found that interesting. Whoever put together the exhibition obviously felt that those “porn” pics (the dudes were hot, hung, and hard) were artful in their own way. Then, looking at the other “tasteful” photos, I found I felt the same sexual desire as I did looking at the “porn” pics. I began to see his reasoning.

    Reply
  14. Hey there, You’ve done a great job. I will certainly digg it and personally suggest to my friends. I am confident they’ll be benefited from this site. I am not sure where you’re getting your info, but great topic. I needs to spend some time learning much more or understanding more. Thanks for great info I was looking for this information for my mission.

    Best regards

    Reply
  15. C.A. Tripp said of Michelangelo’s “David” that is was art on a level that might enable a man without particular same-sex attraction to feel what the artist felt when he made it. The question must first be answered is whether this image persuades the viewer to like what he or she does not already love.

    Reply
    • Make that “the question that must first be answered is whether this image persuades the viewer to feel what he or she does not already feel.”

      Reply

Leave a Comment