1
The Artistic Side of Porn & the Pornographic Side of Art
A case study on creators and consumers of art porn/ porn art on Tumblr
(My own creation, when using the deep dream generator on Google, thanks to my interviewee Androscoped I learned about this tool, the actual visual is from:
http://gaymannews.com/wp- content/uploads/2013/05/Donato-Reyes-and-DO-gay-porn-Men-of-UK-0-1024x585-600x342.jpg)
Emmy Bruinzeel
Student number: 10180907 MSc Sociology
Track: Gender, Sexuality and Society First supervisor: Gert Hekma
Second supervisor: Margriet van Heesch August 15, 2016
2
Acknowledgements
First of all I would like to thank my interviewees for their openness and trust. Without you I could not have written this thesis about porn and art. Your input was essential to my research. Through the visuals you shared/produced I was able to, not only understand the topic I chose to study better, but I was also able to develop new thoughts about how porn can be beautiful, how porn and art combined can create new meanings and can be used politically. I now understand the importance of porn art/ art porn for some people in their daily life, how they try to express themselves through sharing. It opened my eyes.
I would also like to thank my supervisors Gert Hekma and Margriet van Heesch for their helpful feedback. Especially Gert who helped me during the full process. Whenever I had questions or doubts I knew I could ask Gert for help and he would give me new ideas, different books to read, etcetera.
Last but not least I would like to thank my dad, Dick Bruinzeel, for always correcting my English and full support. I am really grateful that I have these two parents who believe the study I am doing is important, so also a thank you to my mom Inge Ververs. I hope I did made proud.
3
Content
Introduction ... 4
Art and porn as an expression of time ... 7
History of Pornography ... 18
Combining Art and Porn ... 26
Methods ... 28
Tumblr ... 32
Motives for opening a Tumblr account ... 33
Tumblr accounts and community... 34
Tumblr compared to other social media ... 37
Benefits of Tumblr compared to “real life” ... 39
What is art porn/ porn art? ... 40
What are we looking at? ... 50
Conclusion ... 62
Bibliography ... 64
Appendix ... 67
Personal information interviewees ... 67
Interview Questions Porn Art/ Art Porn ... 73
Visuals ... 77
4
Introduction
In October 2015, the UN urged Japan to ban sexual representations in manga. They were viewed as child pornography1. This specific type of Manga that is spoken of, as indecent child pornography, is called Lolicon and depicts under age characters that have sex with each other or with older characters. These stories are invented, so not based on real life. Normally manga is received as art, yet in this case the UN was able to shift the border from art to obscenity. What needs to be asked here is, if there are no actual children presented, is it possible to classify Manga stories as child pornography? This example shows that the border between art and porn is not easily drawn. Yet when the UN draws this line punishment could become a reality for some people. What they like to read, formerly legal, becomes illegal and their interest in this becomes stigmatized. This example is interesting because it shows how social phenomenon are interpreted not in a dynamic way, but at the same time the meanings they convey change.
With this thesis I will show that art and porn have shifting social meanings. Especially when art and porn come together boundaries are crossed and discussions arise. The purpose here is to gain a deeper understanding on the combination of art and porn. By applying the method of a case study, on producers and consumers of art porn/ porn art on Tumblr (a blog internet site), I hope to find answers to my questions. Some scholars have argued that art and porn are different social phenomena, which are not supposed/able to come together. Nead (1990) notes that through time art and porn was defined as opposing each other (324). If we take a closer look to the phenomenon of art porn/ porn art, this border is crossed and it helps us understand how the social meanings of art and porn are in fact constructed. People on Tumblr who produce/consume art porn/ porn art share sexual explicit content, which they cannot share on any other social medium. Outside of Tumblr there is also a lack of freedom to visit or consume porn art/ art porn2. Through interviewing these people I will try to
understand why there is a need on Tumblr for this type of space, i.e. where people can share art porn/ porn art visuals. Also I am interested in how they define content that is on the border of art and porn or of which we could say it is a combination of both. The question I would like
1
http://en.rocketnews24.com/2015/10/28/un-urges-japan-to-ban-sexual-images-of-children-in-manga-japanese-netizens-tell-un-to-shut-up/
2In the Netherlands there are some possibilities for this, but in other contexts like for example BDSM art in Great Britain is not possible.
5 to answer in this thesis is: How do consumers and creators of porn art on Tumblr, define porn art? To discover this I did semi-structured in-depth interviews and as a part of the interview I showed these people sexual content found on Tumblr and other sites that contain sexual content. The relevance for this type of study is the fact that for some reason there has been this obsession through time to define art and porn as something different. Art is seen as socially acceptable and porn as socially unacceptable. I do not agree with this. I think both art and porn have positive and negative sides. As I will argue, both terms are socially constructed through time. In chapter one this will be fully explained. I will look for the invisible line, which porn and art are crossing through time. This invisible line is the line between what is obscene and what is not. Where art has been on the positive side of this line, porn has been on the negative side of the line. When boundaries are crossed we can finally see how unstable these terms are and how we are in fact using terms of which we are not always that certain of what it means.
In the second chapter I will speak about what Tumblr is, how it works and what it does for the people that are using this medium. On other social media, for example Facebook and Instagram, it is not allowed to post “sexually explicit” content. Some of my interviewees complain about how their accounts were blocked or deleted. Tumblr did gave them the opportunity to express themselves only with more daring visuals.
Chapter three is about the producers and consumers on Tumblr, their own thoughts on what they see as art, porn and the two combined. Here the two most used ideas are intentions and context. Porn and art are seen as different in intentions, yet when the two came together also the intentions come together. Instead of only arousal in porn, suddenly also expression from art is an important intention. Which means that the porn art/art porn work is now nicely composed and arousing. With context some of my interviewees acknowledged that not everyone is looking through the same lens, and therefore it depends on one’s background or standpoint if one would have the same definition of a work as art porn/ porn art or as
something else.
Chapter four, also the last chapter, will be about the labeling of visuals by my
interviewees. I looked online for visuals that were labeled as porn art, art porn, sex art, horny art and I use those visuals during the interview. With this I aim to see what my interviewee think of the visuals. To see what they see in the visuals and if they would use different words to describe their definitions of art, porn and the two combined when they would look at these images.
6 porn and the two combined is. Instead I would like to show how in fact art and porn are vague concepts, which are being used by many people. Yet our ideas on these terms differ from each other and we are able to use these terms in different contexts. How is it possible that we can use these vague terms in society when we are not sure that we have a same shared
understanding of them? I am not trying to say that some definitions are wrong and that I have a better definition. What I do mean is that if people on Tumblr define certain sexual content as art porn/ porn art it does not mean they are wrong when they so. It means they have a
different perception on the fact if porn and art can overlap. I believe that in understanding the contradicting terms and the way people on Tumblr are dealing with this, can add to our
understanding of pornography. Is it possible to create more socially acceptable porn when you combine this porn with an artistic side to it? This thesis could add to a more nuanced
discussion on pornography and art.
The idea that there are no right definitions does come with some problems. Why do we use these terms in certain ways if the meanings are changing? Still there are also some
overlapping ideas, for example that porn is for arousal and art is for expression. This brings us to the first chapter and the history of art and porn. Who was in charge of discussing these social phenomena and defining them?
7 (Image 1: Tumblr, Herr von Wallenstein)3
Art and porn as an expression of time
On June second 2016 I went to “Artfest – de ophefeditie” (edition of scandals). This event was organized by de Correspondent (a Dutch news site) and different artists and art scholars were invited to this event to discuss scandals in the world of arts. One of the artists invited was a Dutchman, Ronald Ophuis, who came to explain a few of his art pieces. His work had been involved in different scandals and now he had the opportunity to explain what he meant with his work.
One of his works is called “Sweet Violence”, a piece that portrays a sexual scene where – as Ophuis states himself – two children are abused by three men4. The painting – as
3http://herrvonwallenstein.tumblr.com/image/129789489767
8 he explained to the audience– was inspired by viewing a child porn film at an intellectual night where the figure Pasolini was discussed. Ophuis argued that he was traumatized by this film. To cope with this film he painted it on an enormous tableau and painted the visual as painful as possible. In a way the painting functions as a “wake up call” and is not meant to be seen as a work of art to enjoy. What is remarkable about this painting is that initially it was not received as a scandal. According to him there were some critical comments, but not as many as you would expect with regard to the content shown. It could be displayed without objections and there were people making the effort to go and see it. But then, after a while, due to a shifting social context, it was regarded as a scandalous work. Ophuis claims there is a link between the news about Marc Dutroux (a case that had national attention in the
Netherlands) and the upheaval about his painting. Suddenly people were offended by looking at it. So much so, that eventually the church where it was displayed had to remove it or else they would be sued.
(Image 2: “Sweet violence” – Ronald Ophuis5)
Scandals have been part of the world of art for a long time. The interesting thing about them is that they give us an opportunity to explore what we define as art and what as obscene. Defining art and porn is very difficult and we need to go back in time to fully understand how meanings have changed. One of my interviewees pointed out how the fluidity of concepts like
9 art and porn makes it hard to define the terms. “(..) it reminds me of Derrida his.. in
deconstruction there is this concept of aporia and aporia is like a state of no meaning. I almost feel like art and porn exist in aporia, they are in a state of no meaning. Except what we
individually project to it” (Androscoped). Another quote from a different interviewee shows a different idea on porn and art. He states that art and porn is an “expression of time” (Ton of Holland, 59 years old, artist). Both quotes can explain how the painting of Ophuis
changed from painful art to obscene child pornography. As art and porn are in a state of no meaning and the terms are an expression of time, it is possible to have a totally different reality when certain events take place.
This is why I use the following question for this chapter: How are porn and art constructed through time and what is the significance for the construction of porn art/ art porn? This chapter is separated into three parts. In history of arts I will discuss art works that through time have been looked upon as being on the edge of art and obscenity. Looking at the boundaries can explain to us how fragile the idea of art and obscenity is and how easily ideas can change over time when considering works of art.
After this I will treat the history of porn and how porn has always been at the fringes of society. I will give multiple examples to point out why porn can be seen a very broad term and why it is hard to define.
I will conclude the chapter with the debate that is held around pornographic
art, circling around the question whether pornographic art or artistic porn is possible. Through history art and porn have been defined as opposite to one another. Philosophers nowadays are having a hard time trying to explain why porn and art is (not) possible.
History of Arts
‘Indeed, it is not actually possible to define art in abstract terms, because “what is art” – even broadly stated – is socially defined, and therefore subject to many inconsistencies (Alexander 2003:2). This quote of Alexander (sociologist specialized in arts) makes clear why it is difficult to define art. The inconsistencies Alexander is referring to, will become visible in this paragraph when we put light on the history of defining art itself. I will focus on art that is on the border of art and obscenity. Especially border-crossing-arts show us how difficult it is to draw a precise line between the two. When is it to be called art and when does it become obscene? And, who are our gatekeepers? Who is recognized to be an authority to tell us what is art and what is obscene?
10 dealing with. In the chapter “What is art?” I point out how Alexander explains that different trends in sociology use a different set of tools in researching arts. In this instance the concept of power-knowledge of Michel Foucault gives an adequate explanation of the influence postmodern sociology has had on the sociology of arts (ibid.:13). ‘This power-knowledge is so deeply embedded in the stories we tell that it is not readily evident to us’ (ibid.:13). Instead of knowledge creating power, power creates knowledge. This idea one can also apply to the phenomenon of art. Those who are in power, in recent history men, are able to define art. This is why women were so prominently the object of art. Although the way women have been portrayed over time has been changing, the female nude has been a big part of the history of art. At the same time there was always lurking the danger of crossing the border, the female nude no longer being considered as art because it was felt to be obscene.
Through history nudity in art has been gendered. Both Nead (1990) and Dennis (2009) describe how female nudes were supposed to be on the fringe of what was morally good and wrong. Dennis shows us how the first depiction of the female nude, the Knidian Aphrodite, was making classical Greek and Roman audiences feel uncomfortable (Dennis 2009:20). The sculpture was exposing her bottom and breasts, while the hand was hanging in front of the vulva. This particular pose (hand in front of the vulva) is called the pudica pose and was interpreted by many as hiding the female genitals in paintings and sculptures. The Knidian Aphrodite also provoked physical reactions in the group of spectators. Dennis writes of men masturbating near the sculpture (ibid.:20). Due to this physical reaction the distance between the sculpture and the beholder was destabilized, which also happens with other “erotic subjects” (ibid.:19). The uneasiness and physical responses to this sculpture showed that a border was crossed, that is of art and obscenity. As Dennis explains although some would see the pudica pose as proof of modesty, it still had this other effect of arousal, because attention was drawn to the part that she tried to conceal (ibid.:20). ‘Conclusion that Aphrodite’s gaze belied her modest gesture and that she invited the transgressions that took place thus justified what already had been determined: the nudity of the female body is always already obscene in contrast to the heroism of the male nude’ (ibid.:20).
Jeffrey Hurwit – who works at the department of the history of art and architecture, at the university of Oregon – points out that in classical Greek art there was attention for male nudity. This nudity, unlike the female variant, was however not supposed to be at the fringe of art and obscene. The masculine nude represents for example the heroic male, although
Hurwit, with the example of Dexileos, also shows that not all heroes were presented naked (Hurwit 2007: 44,49). Male nudity could be used for heroic reasons, but it could apply to a
11 submissive victim, to athletics, displaying youth, showing class difference, or could even be used on non-human beasts, like centaurs (ibid.:57). ‘(..) heroic nudity cannot be universally applied, and more often than we are used to thinking, nudity signifies the opposite of the heroic: helplessness, vulnerability, and defeat’ (ibid.:55). This means that depending on the context the male nude would be heroic, submissive, etcetera. At the same time one should not think Greek classical art was giving an image of everyday life. ‘But even though the Greek gaze regularly beheld naked youths and men engaged in exercise and competition, Greek males (it is generally agreed) did not walk around town naked, they did not ride horses naked, and they certainly did not go into battle naked’ (ibid.:45-46). Still it did not seem to be
causing the uncomfortable feelings the way the exposure of the female nude did. Needles to point out the female heroic nude was absent in Greek classical art.
(Image 3: Cristiano Ronaldo dos Santos Aveiro during the Champions League Finals after he scored the winning penalty6)
On May 28, a Saturday evening, I watched the champions league’s final match (football) between Real Madrid and Atletico Madrid. Because the match ended in a draw (1-1), the decision had to be made with a series of penalties. According to the Dutch TV reporter in these situations there is always one loser and one hero7. If we assume his theory is correct, this time Cristiano dos Santos Aveiro was the hero. And to show this, right after he scored the
6
http://www.gettyimages.nl/detail/nieuwsfoto's/cristiano-ronaldo-of-real-madrid-celebrates-after-scoring-nieuwsfotos/534985638
12 winning penalty, he removed his shirt and showed his muscles to the whole stadium. As Hurwit states that Athletics during Classical times could be portrayed as heroic via male nudity (Hurwit 2007:51), this example shows us the equivalent in male sports nowadays. Ronaldo taking of the shirt can be seen as the representation of a male hero. If he had been taking of his pants it would have been regarded as obscene. But, if a female would have copied Ronaldo, after being decisive, by taking of her shirt and showing her naked upper body, this would be regarded as equally obscene. This means that for a woman being heroic and naked at the same time is not possible (in the context of sports).
For Larissa Bonfante (1989) it is important to recognize the differences between nudity in Greek classical art when it comes to male and female representations. Bonfante points out Kenneth Clark uses two different words for the naked body, nakedness and nudity (ibid.:544). Nudity stands for the aesthetic body, while nakedness has a more negative meaning, and is linked to powerlessness and weakness (ibid.:544). In Classical Greece the concept of being naked changed over time and new meanings evolved. Where at first being naked was seen as something shameful (ibid.:546), it changed to showing ideal male youth bodies (Ibid.:549). For men being nude could be a costume during rituals of initiation
(ibid.:551), but also there was nudity among athletics, which showed that if a man had a dark skin color he could be judged on his ‘physical fitness’ (ibid.:555). Bonfante states that a darker skin color means that men had been training outside in the sun, while a white skin color would mean that the man is probably lazy (ibid.:555). Yet as I stated before the female nude was never seen as heroic. Most of the time nakedness was linked to prostitution
(ibid.:559). The only way female nudity (in classical art) could be presented in a respectable way, was by using Aphrodite as a model (ibid.:561-562). Dennis also shows only a goddess could be projected in a respectable way naked in art, while doing the pudica pose.
We take a big leap in time to see how the inconsistencies, Alexander writes about in relation to male and female nudity in art, evolved. In the 19th century Mark Twain (a novel writer) saw the pudica pose not as an expression of hiding the female genital parts. According to him it could be seen as masturbation (Dennis 2009:15). Later this interpretation of the
pudica pose was acknowledged by others (20th century). But now, as Dennis states, female nudity needed to be justified in order to be art (ibid.:21). The female nude masturbating was accepted, because in those days the idea was accepted that a man and a woman needed to climax at the same time for conception (ibid.:26). Another way of justifying nudity was done by using landscapes in the background of the art work. Now the nude was accepted as a metaphor for fertility (ibid.:27).
13 Lynda Nead (1992) describes how “the nude” changed into “the female nude” (43-44). Through history, as we already saw in Classical Greece, most nudes in art were of male bodies. In the 18th and the 19th century the female nude became more dominant (ibid.:47). Classes in arts were treating the autonomy of the human body in the same way medical students were learning. The body, male and female, were described in terms of health and beauty (ibid.:48). Nead describes how art critics like Kenneth Clark (art historian) saw the change from male nudity to female nudity as inevitable, the female body being much more attractive to the artist (ibid.:49). This creates the idea of a heterosexual relationship between the artist and the female object represented in the art piece. Yet during that time
heterosexuality became more important. In a short review Mary Kay DeGenova discusses the book of Jonathan Katz and the invention of heterosexuality (DeGenova 1995:1041). Here she describes how Katz argued that heterosexuality is an invention and it was created in the 19th century (ibid.:1041). This means that the artists during that time would probably have been influenced by the invention. Nead states that this idea of the female nude as more attractive says something about the definition of masculinity and the artistic identity (Nead 1992:49). What is even more remarkable here is how the idea of the female nude from Classical Greece totally changed through time to become the dominant depiction of nudity in the 19th century. During the history of art men were in the position of defining art. This changed with the introduction of feminist critique on the history of art. From the late 1960s in the US feminist interference became eminent (Gouma-Peterson & Mathews 1987:329) , while British, German and other North European feminists started redefining art history in the early 1970s (ibid.:331). Gouma-Peterson (art professor) and Mathews (professor in art history) describe the development of feminism starting to investigate art history and deconstructing the norms behind art. These feminists were able to expose art as a men defined practice. A practice also in which there was no recognition for female artists (ibid.:326,327). Through deconstruction feminist scholars were able to lay bare the dominant power-knowledge
structure that was responsible for the definition of art. We should be aware that the dominance that was exposed was not just male. It were white males who dominated the art journals (ibid.:331). What also should be acknowledged here is the fact that the feminists dealing with the subject of art history were not part of a homogenous group. As Gouma-Peterson and Mathews show there were a lot of discussions on how to introduce more female artists into art history. For example some books written emphasized the importance of placing female artists in the ‘traditional historical framework’ (ibid.:327). This raised the discussion about how this would contribute to female art, because it did not question the power structures that were
14 already in arts itself (ibid.:327). Also different protest groups were launched to liberate female art. For example one group that is mentioned in the article by Gouma-Peterson and Mathews is ‘Where We At’ (ibid.:329), which was a group to liberate female art for black women. Within feminism different groups and opinions were causing different topics to deal with and different ways of liberating female arts.
I will not be dealing all trends in art history. But, if we look at the examples so far being presented, it is clear as quoted form Alexander, art is socially defined, and therefore subject to many inconsistencies (Alexander 2003:2). My focus has been on the European and North American history of arts, being aware of the fact that art is being produced in other parts of the world. So far it has already become clear there is a grey area of what art and obscenity is. And also that during time the obscene can become respectable. Now I will be focusing on provocative arts from the last century and some that are from a few years ago. Dennis (2009), as mentioned before, claims that the distance a viewer has to an art work (like the example of Aphrodite and masturbating men) is important to see whether or not something is defined as art or not (21). Also if an art work is seen in public it can be accepted as art, while the same, if consumed in private surroundings, could be seen as porn (ibid.:21). ‘Such disparities in the public and private experience of images invoke a dialectic between distance and proximity, sight and touch, that informs the reception and definition of art but that also define the position of the viewer’ (ibid.:21). This shows in another way that the way we view representations of certain “sexual” depictions are bounded to the social context. The Dutch philosopher Maarten Doorman explains that during the 19th century a variety of artists were experimenting in their work to see how they could play with the borders of decency (2016:89). To Doorman these provocations should not be regarded as a way of getting attention. These were part and parcel of the avant-garde flourishing in those days (ibid.:). Doorman gives different examples of art provocation, partly religious, some sexual and others of a violent nature. A Dutch example he deals with is an art piece that was located in
Rotterdam. This piece of art was bought from Paul McCarthy, who made a huge Santa Claus with a giant dildo next to him (ibid.:92). People passing by started calling it names like
kabouter butt plug (butt plug gnome). By many it was seen as being obscene (ibid.:92). “The”
public of Rotterdam defined this piece as sexual and provocative, something they did not want to be bothered with. Eventually the piece (Image 4) was removed, but McCarthy eventually made another art piece (which he called abstract art) for Paris, which was also seen as sexually provocative (ibid.:92-3). Also that piece was eventually destroyed, because again that art piece seemed to look like a butt plug (Image 5).
15 (Image 4: Paul McCarthy’s “Butt Plug Gnome” in Rotterdam, 2012 - photo by Hrag Vartanian for
Hyperallergic8)
(Image 5: Paul McCarthy, Tree (2014). Via: @HauserWirth on Twitter9)
Sarah Thornton states that there are no objective standards for quality in art, but creators of art should formulate their own standards and needs to convince people like critics, collectors,
8http://hyperallergic.com/157371/how-to-talk-about-paul-mccarthy/
16 curators and co-worker artists that theirs should be regarded as genuine art (2015:11). We can see in the example of the Gnome the public of viewers – the people of Rotterdam – were not convinced and saw the object as morally deviant. They felt offended being confronted with the sight of it. That is why eventually it had to be removed.
There have been more incidents in which so called “art works” were questioned, this time by policy makers. ‘Recently two events have riveted the attention of arts watchers nationwide and embodied the tensions that exist between the art world and other segments of society’ (Lankford 1990:15). Lankford, a professor in art education, presents some examples that were seen as provocative and triggered a discussion whether or not public funds should subsidize art that had obscene content (ibid.:16). The title of the article is Artistic Freedom: An Art World Paradox, in which Lankford shows how the art world is defending its right for artistic freedom, while at the same time the US government is trying to prohibit federal support for obscene materials. The latter was the case with regard to the exhibition by Mapplethorpe. The article treats different depictions in arts that were defined as obscene (in 1989), which are: s/m, homoerotism, exploitation of children, individuals engaged in sex, etcetera (ibid.:16). Mapplethorpe was supposed to show his work in the Contemporary Arts Center (CAC) in Cincinnati, but the police cleared the gallery before the work was showed (ibid.:17,18). The CAC and its director were risking a fine and/or even imprisonment for showing work made by Mapplethorpe (ibid.:18). The exhibition – called “The perfect
moment” showed masochistic and homosexual behavior, and was also depicting two children nude/seminude (ibid.:18). These were seen as obscene. To label them as such was not without problem. One needed a clear definition of obscenity. Lankford quotes the American Law Institute (ALI) and their definition of obscenity: ‘(..) a thing is obscene if, considered as a whole, its predominant appeal is to prurient interest, i.e. a shameful or morbid interest in nudity, sex, or excretion, and if it goes substantially beyond customary limits of candor in description or representation of such matter’ (ibid.:20). What is interesting here is that one, as one should expect, obviously fails to give objective criteria by which it is possible to know when nudity is shameful or morbid. The Supreme Court (Miller v. California) added three tests in 1973 (ibid.:21). Lankford quotes The Supreme Court: ‘(..) insisting that materials, to be judged obscene, must meet three tests: the dominant theme appeals to prurient interest; the material is an affront to community standards, as judged by a reasonable person; and the material lacks serious artistic, literary, scientific, or political value (ibid.:21). This quote trying to define what obscenity is generating more questions than answers. For example what is the definition of a prurient interest? And how does one qualify to become acknowledged as
17 a reasonable person? Let us look at this closer by confronting the criteria of the Supreme Court with the concept of Aporia derived from Derrida (as suggested by my interviewee Androscoped). Derrida, a philosopher who focuses on language, was interested in language that crossed borders (Calarco 2002: 19). If language crosses borders it becomes problematic, because crossing these borders is “illegal” (ibid.:19). So when language becomes problematic, one can achieve a deeper understanding of the border itself and see why these are problematic in itself (ibid.:19). Calarco – a philosopher- tries to clarify the theory of Derrida. He uses a statement of Heidegger, who claims mortals (people) are able to experience death, animals are not. Because to experience death, language is needed to express it. Furthermore only people can speak of “my death”. But, for everyone this means something different (ibid.:19). So we speak the same language, use the same words, but we are never completely sure ‘what one is talking about when speaking about death’ (ibid.:19). Calarco states that being in a state of Aporia the problem of border crossing is no longer a problem (ibid.:19). Then what is solved? ‘(..) there is no longer any problem because no amount of projection or protection will
overcome the experience of the Aporia and render possible an impossible passage’ (ibid.:19). So the border has been crossed and shown to be problematic itself. Therefore there is not one projection that can explain the experience of death for example. Just as my interviewee stated, we individually project our own ideas on what art and porn is. The Supreme Court and ALI tried to define obscenity, but what they give us is just one way to look at obscenity. They cannot replace our own ideas of what is artistic valuable or he is supposed to be a reasonable person that is able to judge what is obscene or not.
Another approach to what can be seen as artistic value is proposed by Amy Adler (Professor of Law). ‘This new art – Post-Modern art – rebels against the demand that a work of art be serious, or that it have any traditional “value” at all’ (Adler 1990:1359). Adler problematizes the way Miller tried to introduce these tests to clarify the distinction between obscenity and art. She tries to give standards that are able to protect art from obscenity. But at the same time she acknowledges that these standards will fail to do so, because of ‘the nature of contemporary art’ (ibid.:1360). Adler discusses the intentions of artists and whether or not these intentions will convince when expressed court. Obviously when an artist makes a plea in which he or she states this is art because I say so, this will not convince the judge.
First, if a court were to accept that “this is a portrait if I say so”, then there would be nothing to prevent a hard-core pornographer from raising the defense that he intended his pornography to be art. Secondly, Post-Modern art would render a deeper inquiry into the purported artist’s
18 sincerity futile, because, as discussed earlier, Post-Modernism ridicules the notion of sincerity and rejects the possibility that a viewer can ever discover an artist’s true intentions
(ibid.:1376).
This quote then raises the question why is it a problem if a hard-core pornographer would depict his work as art? Adler gives a value judgment proclaiming hardcore porn cannot be artistic. She claims that it is hard to protect art from obscenity, because Post-Modern art itself is trying to cross boundaries. But do we need this protection?
In this paragraph we have seen how the meanings of art have changed through time. We saw a change in displaying nudity. From the male nude as the most dominant nude, to the female nude as the norm. Also we have seen how official authorities like the Supreme Court and ALI have tried to define obscenity and art as separate. Likewise we have seen how feminist critiques have been able to lay bare the power structure of men as artists and women as objects. Even nowadays artists have to protect the line between art and obscenity. Like in my first example of “Sweet Violence” where this piece at first was seen as artistic, yet when the context changed, the meaning of the painting went from art to obscene child pornography. Which also gave the artist the label of child pornographer. In other words, the meaning of art is historically dependent and fluid. What is apparent is the fact that there is a constant struggle to keep art away from obscenity, yet in the next paragraph I will discuss the subject of porn. Which is already on the side of the obscene.
History of Pornography
I’ve proposed that pornography is both a legitimate form of culture and a fictional, fantastical, even allegorical realm, it neither simply reflects the real world nor is it some hypnotizing call to action. The world of pornography is mythological and hyperbolic, peopled by characters. It doesn’t and never will exist, but it does – and this is part of its politics – insist on a sanctioned space for fantasy. This is its most serious demand and the basis of much of the controversy it engenders, because pornography has a talent for making its particular fantasies look like dangerous and socially destabilizing incendiary devices.
(Kipnis 1999:119)
What is interesting in this quote, is that Kipnis states that porn is something that does and does not exist at the same time. Just like with art, defining porn is incredibly difficult if not impossible. In the next chapter I will show I agree with Kipnis that porn is something that exists and also does not exists at the same time. If we move our attention back to the idea of
19 aporia, which Derrida uses, there are many possible projections on what can be described as porn. Giving different examples from the past and more recent times I will show how difficult it is to give a definition of porn, and why porn exists and at the same time does not exist. To illustrate how hard it is defining porn, but also how much porn is policed and associated with the immoral, let me introduce a minor discussion about food porn. Food Porn can be found on different social media. For example on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram when you search for #foodporn one can find different pages that show you delicious looking food. Also on Tumblr you can find blogs that use the label food porn. Most accounts or pages online depict food porn with photographs or video’s that give the end result of a certain dish that has being made (see for example image 6).
(Image 6: Twitter page: FoodPorn, shared on June 2 201610)
10 https://twitter.com/FoodPorn
20 Looking at this example in image 6 it might be hard to see what is pornographic here. There are no sexual actions between people or things shown. Then why would this visual be labeled as food porn? Another visual, on Tumblr, presents the viewer a naked woman with a
strawberry hanging out of her vagina (Image 7). This was one of the very few visuals I found on Tumblr that portrayed a naked body with food. The majority focused on food itself. So, to be called food porn, it is not necessary to include sexual representations in the visuals.
(Image 7: Found with the terms #foodsex11)
‘(..) food porn generally evokes the unattainable: cooks will never achieve the results shown in certain cookbooks, magazines, or television shows, nor will they ever master the
techniques’ (McBride 2010:38). In other words food porn is about desire, desire for something we cannot achieve. McBride introduces a forum that includes perspectives of academics and practitioners who have knowledge on cooking. Here she was interested in reexamining the meaning of food porn (ibid.:38). What is problematic is that McBride speaks of only one meaning. I have emphasized earlier that just like with art, porn is also subject to different projections of meaning. I think there is no reason why this should not be applicable to food porn. In the article the author extensively focuses on the question whether the term pornography is used properly in this context. McBride, and others of whom she claims they agree with her, do think it is wrong to use the word pornography for these kind of visuals (like image 5). ‘The use of food porn to describe professionally photographed food in magazines and on TV demonstrates a lack of understanding what pornography is, how it is produced, and for what purpose; it dilutes the meaning and seriousness of the word pornography’
21 (ibid.:40). So pornography is something we should take seriously, and by using it in the combination with food it moves away from seriousness. Now remember the definition of Kipnis, which says porn does not exist and exists at the same time. How are we to take something serious if it is not there, and at the same time it is?
According to McBride it is also important to remember the historical meaning of pornography while using the term. ‘Since food porn has become a cultural term taken for granted by bloggers and mainstream media alike, its origins have rarely been revisited’ (ibid.:41). Derivative from these quotes there is a certain history to porn that needs to be looked at before using it in combination with other words, because apparently there is something serious about porn that could be covered when used within another context, like the context of food.
‘The lines drawn between porn and other forms of sexual representation also seem much less clear than they did in the past; mainstream representation has become more explicit and ‘perverse’ and imagery and language, which would have been classed as pornographic not very long ago, have become part and parcel of popular culture. The landscape is clearly different now’ (Attwood 2002:94). According to Attwood pornography is a cultural
phenomenon that has changed meanings over time. And gradually it has become more
difficult to draw a line between porn and other sexual representations. What is clear is the fact that in art there is a constant discussion whether it is obscene or not, while with porn this discussion lacks being on the wrong and not respectable side anyway. Porn is seen as bad most of the time. Where art starts from the position of respectability which needs to be protected from the obscene, porn already starts as obscenity. But what if we start looking at porn in a different way?
Just like art, pornography has a long history with shifting trends. As Attwood states pornography is in some way representing sexuality. Earlier I wrote about the Knidian Aphrodite. Nowadays we would not perceive this statue as being shocking or sexually
provoking, as spectators in those days. In retrospect it seems unbelievable people actually got aroused by looking and the statue and would even masturbate because of it. Steve Garlick (2012), a sociologist, writes on the history of masturbation and its link to pornography. Masturbation was something to be frightened of at one point in history. ‘The panic over masturbation can be seen as an element in the formation of modern, secular societies’ (Garlick 2012:308). One fear for example was that masturbation would, because it was likely to come instead of sexual intercourse, disrupt marriage. In that way it would be disruptive for the social order in which heterosexuality was the norm (ibid.:309). That is why masturbation
22 eventually had to be regulated via medical regimes (ibid.:310), in the same way we saw in the writings of Nead female nudity was controlled by medical discourse. Like art, masturbation can be looked upon as being gendered. While female masturbation was stigmatized, for men this was different. Men who fell for the practice of masturbating were considered (in the 18th and 19th century) not in control of their sexual urges and therefore not masculine (ibid.:310). Garlick notes that one ideal of masculinity is self-control (ibid.:310), so who is not capable of this is seen as lacking masculinity. Texts problematizing Onanism started to be written from 1760 onwards (ibid.:311). Men were allowed to have pleasure in those days, but there were rules for what types of pleasure were allowed (ibid.:309). So what is the link with
pornography, one might ask? Garlick notes that concerns about masturbation were growing around the same time pornographic stories were produced and circulated (ibid.:318). Nowadays women’s masturbation is more or less part of heterosexual porn, but male masturbation still needs to be researched more extensively (ibid.:318). This seems strange, especially because, as Garlick states, contemporary porn is most of the time about
masturbation. There is hardly any porn film to be seen without the money shot at the end of it, in which the men ejaculates onto the woman’s body while jerking off his own penis (ibid.:307). Sadly Garlick does not explain why masturbation became a big part of heterosexual porn nowadays. Garlick also seems to have a limited look on contemporary pornography (ibid:307). Contemporary porn is obviously more than only heterosexual porn. And even the term heterosexual porn can be perceived as much wider than only films which are ending with a money shot.
Even though not much attention was given to the combination of masturbation and pornography, by feminists a lot has been written on gender relations and pornography. For example Andrea Dworkin sums up different anecdotes of women being raped. ‘That meaning is: pornography is the orchestrated destruction of women’s bodies and souls; rape, battery, incest, and prostitution animate it; dehumanization and sadism characterize it; it is war on women, serial assaults on dignity, identity, and human worth; it is tyranny’ (Dworkin 1989). So for Dworkin pornography is a moral crime against (the bodies of) women. Pornography is indirectly triggering men to do awful things to women. ‘Constitutional lawyer Catharine A. MacKinnon and I were hired by the City of Minneapolis to draft an amendment to the city's civil rights law: an amendment that would recognize pornography as a violation of the civil rights of women, as a form of sex discrimination, an abuse of human rights’ (ibid.). The projection of Dworkin on pornography, if we speak in Derrida terms, is purely negative. Porn is supposed to repress women, it is an expression that we should not want to see and we
23 should get rid of. ‘I was heartbroken as women I knew came forward to testify: though I listened with an outer detachment to the stories of rape, incest, prostitution, battery, and torture, each in the service of pornography, inside I wanted to die’ (ibid.). Trying to recognize porn as violating women’s rights, Dworkin notes that she started interviewing other women on their negative experiences with porn. What Dworkin tried to do was twofold. On the hand she was giving these women a voice. At the same she tried to push forward a law that would tell the truth about pornography (ibid.). Although I will not ignore the fact that it is possible to get wrong ideas from pornography, I think Dworkin is creating a rather biased picture of pornography. In her eyes all pornography is abusive. She does not give solid arguments for her claim that pornography automatically moves people into wrong behaviors. She just appears to be assuming it is even wrong to look at porn presenting sex or bondage. I will not ignore the fact some people might be affected by watching porn and could get wrong ideas, but I do not see why this should apply to all viewers. Needless to say the exploitation she describes should be fought against. Later feminist followed the same lines of arguments. They have been arguing against the idea of Dworkin that pornography should be seen as a moral danger, that pornography should only have negative effects. Wilkinson criticizes the idea that porn, especially extreme pornography, is seen as leading to an increase in sexual violence (2011:495). Special laws in Great Britain made this type of pornography illegal. ‘It is unclear how the government can be sure that its legislation will not affect political or artistic
expression, as it makes no attempts to differentiate between pornography that is produced for artistic reasons, or pornography that could be seen as a political tool for a minoritized sexual community’ (Wilkinson 2011:497). Wilkinson discusses throughout her article that some people could find these types of “extreme porn” liberating. She claims it can have this
therapeutic effect, to show people you are not the only one with having this fetish (ibid.:500). Extreme porn was being banned in Great Britain also because of the idea that children might be exposed to it and get the wrong impression from it (ibid.:502). Wilkinson criticizes the idea that women are always just the victim of extreme porn (ibid.:504) and that there is a
misconception that women could never consent to objectification (ibid.:505). Wilkinson is also critical on the idea that porn would lead to sexual violence. It does not mean that if someone would fantasize, this person will act on this fantasy (ibid.:495). In other words we should stop seeing every person as lacking self-control. It is interesting to see similarities on the issue of self-control in reference to porn and masturbation. In both cases, masturbation and pornography, some authors claim there is a lack of it. One who gives in to his or hers sexual urges and starts masturbating, in the 18th and 19th century, was a deviant. Someone
24 who is out of control and not very masculine. Porn on the other hand makes men objectify women. It forces people into motion of using violence against women (in the eyes of anti-pornography feminists). Dennis (2009) gives an interesting statement against these claims of anti-pornography feminists: ‘It is in fact difficult for anti-pornography feminists not to be complicit with these same institutions [hypocritical bourgeois institutions]: not, for example, to defend “norms” of female sexuality that pornography violates; not to join these institutions in maintaining bourgeois sexual mores against the “grossness” of the undisciplined body historically associated with the laboring classes’(112). ‘(..) the view that pornographic representations of women are inherently exploitative sometimes forces feminists into the position of condemning any pleasure derived from these acts or from their representation in pornography’ (ibid.:112). I agree with Dworkin that exploitation is not something we should promote and should try to get rid of. Unless one is consenting to exploitation (which is done with s/m), because that means there is consent. Still saying that all types of porn is
exploitation is indeed, as Dennis claims, wiping away the pleasure some might have from porn. Using the same vocabulary as the bourgeois did on female sexuality will not liberate women.
That porn also might have other functions apart from exploitation and pleasure is what Kakoudaki tries to argue. Kakoudaki investigates the history of pinup and how this
pornographic representation changed into propaganda for the US army during WOII (Kakoudaki 2004:336). ‘Compared to our contemporary visually explicit and hard-core genres, the illustrated mid-twentieth-century pinup is tame and, I would claim, not easily readable’ (ibid.:336). Pinup is less sexually explicit than recent depictions of hard-core porn, but it did have an important role in promoting patriotism in the army in those days. According to Kakoudaki pinup from the 1940s was posted in many different media, for example
men/women magazines, cartoons, movies, etc. ‘As a matter of fact, the pinup works as a patriotic image not because it is clean-cut and mainstream, but because it channels the
excitement of an explicitly sexual scenario into non-pornographic media’ (ibid.:339). Because of the context where pinup was showed, the meanings of pinup also changed. This is what Kakoudaki finds so interesting. ‘The multiple definitions of the pinup, from pornographic to non-pornographic, or from marginalized to mainstream, give us a special insight on how sexually explicit visual genres work and how they negotiate the boundaries between public and private pleasure, as well as public and private viewing’ (ibid.:337). When we look at these boundaries we are able to see how porn is a very dynamic term. This also becomes clear when looking at the development of porn from pinup and other drawn porn to porn films.
25 ‘And yet despite the new interest in the form, the classic art of the illustrated female pinup from the war years still poses important questions on how we understand the intersections of pornography, technology, politics, and culture’ (Kakoudaki 2004:336). Technology is important in the development of porn. Eric Schaefer shows what changes were possible by technological development. ‘(..) during the 1960s, feature-length soft-core sexploitation films gained a foothold in the marketplace’ (Schaefer 2004:370). Just like in the case of pinup visuals context was very important for changing meanings of the visuals. ‘What I want to suggest is that a set of historically specific material conditions of production and reception – notably the introduction of 16mm as a theatrical mode in the adult market – contributed to the rise of the pornographic feature’ (ibid.:372). This shows the importance of the social context in the present and in the past when looking at the meaning of it. While porn changed over time along with other cultural developments, it remained stigmatized. ‘By displaying sexual diversity – different positions, different partners, different gender combinations –
pornography depicts sexual activity and enjoyment outside the boundaries of institutionally sanctioned monogamous relations’ (Dennis 2009:112). Dennis uses Eleanor Heartney’s argument that porn in this way challenges the notion of the nuclear family, monogamy and heterosexuality, but also the idea of sex for reproduction (ibid.:112). Yet there is one example that does not contain different positons or partners. In his book Fat Don Kulick describes how there are magazines and sites online that depict obese white women eating. Your first reaction might be, what is the sexual link with overweight women eating pizza? Kulick mentions that there are some fat porn films include fisting or s/m practices, yet the main focus seems to be on big bellies and putting food in one’s mouth (Kulick & Meneley 2005:79,83). ‘Aside from the sheer size of these models, the single most striking thing about this genre of pornography is that the women who are pictured do not engage in sex’ (ibid.:79). The idea of fat porn crosses the boundary of what we see as sexuality. Kulick uses Foucault to explain how it is possible that people find obese women eating attractive. ‘He [Foucault] had shown that what we consider to be “sexuality” is not a natural or God-given phenomenon but is, instead, a culturally and historically specific way of linking together particular body parts, specific activities, sensations, and knowledges’ (ibid.:90). What is different in contrast with fat porn is that there is not a focus on stimulating the so-called erogenous zones, like the genitals, or nipples (ibid.:90). Here we can see a link between fat porn and S/M sex. Where S/M sex eroticizes dog collars for example, or other subject, that are normally not seen as sexual, in fat porn the pleasure is brought to other body parts (ibid.:90-91). ‘Sex should occur in private, away from public view, and for limited periods of time (twenty minutes, two hours, a whole
26 afternoon… but not all the time)’ (ibid.:91). If you eroticize eating, and one can eat all the time whenever and wherever they want, it does in fact deconstruct dominant ideas of what sexuality is and what porn should depict.
So when we consider the definition of Kipnis, in which porn does not and will never exist, while it exists at the same time, once again, while taking in account these examples of pornography, we might argue that it is very difficult to give a definition of pornography. The concept is fluid. What was seen as porn in the past, is not seen as porn today and vice versa. Also porn is not part of the material world, it cannot be touched. It is an idea constructed by human beings. Eventually as we have seen porn can also be used for acts that do not seem sexual at first. Fat porn is of interest to some people. For others looking at delicious food and having the desire of eating could be called food porn. Does it really need to contain sexual acts for something to be porn? Maybe because of the negative side of porn, it also makes it more attractive and therefore combining porn with other words makes those topics more appealing. So one person can argue that something needs to be called pornographic, while another person can claim it is not. Or, in the words of Derrida, that it is there, but also it is not. Which brings us to the discussion, when is something both porn and art?
Combining Art and Porn
‘One of the most significant ways in which pornography is historically defined is in relation to other forms of cultural production; we know the pornographic terms of its difference, in terms of what it is not’ (Nead 1990.:324). Nead notes that through time art and porn have been defined in opposition of one another (ibid.:324). In the case of the combination of the words art and porn the border of definitions is crossed. That is why art had many scandals through history when it came too close to the fringes of its definition. Art was supposed to be different from porn, opposed to the obscene. Yet cultures are dynamic, new meanings are created. That is also why we can now discuss the subject of porn and art combined in different works. This certainly does not mean that there are no discussions around this subject in the academic world.
Most debates on this subject focus on the intention with which the product is made. By knowing the intentions we are able to identify if something is pornographic or artistic. And when we have decided by knowing the intentions whether we are dealing with pornography, it cannot be art at the same time (Uidhir 2009: 193). Uidhir, an assistent professor in philosophy in Houston, is aiming in his article to present us a “value-neutral” option to discuss whether or not something is art or porn. He believes that it is impossible for art to be porn at the same
27 time, even though they share the same contents (ibid.:193). I think it is quite remarkable and open to debate a trained philosopher promises to give a value-neutral perspective to look at this issue. As I stated before extensively, definitions of art and porn changed over time and will do so in the future. Art and porn are no objects out there to be studied as “natural phenomena”, they need to be studied in the context of human beings who relate to them. Another philosopher who participated in the discussion of art porn/ porn art is Levinson. ‘What’s true of Vox is that it mimics pornography, and in particular, phone sex, appropriating its gestures, tropes, and outer appearance, but does so in order to produce a work of literature, and thus, art’ (Levinson 2005:233). Jerrold Levinson discusses here a literature piece that was looked at by Matthew Kieran, also a philosopher, and who claimed it to be pornographic art. Again like Uidhir Levinson argues that porn and art are two different phenomena and cannot be combined into one art/porn piece. Here again it is about the
intention of the work that makes it art or porn, and again it cannot be both. What is interesting is that Levinson uses the word mimicking. Art can be mimicking porn. How do we know an art piece is mimicking porn? And, can porn also be mimicking art?
Hans Maes, a philosopher from the Netherlands, takes another position on this matter. ‘Whether we consider works of art, works of pornography, or cases in the disputed middle ground, what Levinson seems to have overlooked is that most of the representations involved are intended for multiple occasions of reception’ (Maes 2011:52). That works of porn and art can be received and viewed upon in different ways is elaborately shown before. For example I showed the pinup visuals were not only pornographic, but were also used as propaganda. Still Levinson thinks it is problematic if art and porn would overlap. ‘(..) allowing that something can be pornography—and not just resemble pornography, or mimic pornography, or have a pornographic flavour, or be quasi-pornographic—and art at the same time, leaves no place for the category of erotic art as distinct from pornography’ (Levinson 2005:234). Which brings me to my final question. What is erotic art? ‘‘Erotic art’ is the term that defines the degree of sexuality that is permissible within the category of the aesthetic’ (Nead 1992:103). Where art needs to be defended from the category of porn, the erotic is important. ‘The erotic plays a critical role within this system; it is the borderline of respectability and non-respectability, between pure and impure desire’ (ibid.:104). If we would link this to the idea of Levinson that there needs to be a place for erotic art which is distinct from pornography, it seems that there only needs to be a place for the erotic so that it can justify certain types of sexual
representations. To me this makes no sense.
28 examples, in which art and porn were conflicting, were covered. While Greek men would masturbate because of the Knidian Aphrodite, a butt plug gnome in Rotterdam caused discomfort among its public. Answering the question I have posed in the beginning of this chapter: How are porn and art constructed through time and what does this say about the construction of porn art/ art porn? Through time art was supposed to be protected from the obscene. Even though nudity was part of art, it was defined as nude instead of naked, to keep it separate from the naked bodies in porn. It seems that there is a struggle going on between the worlds of porn and art and they must not overlap. If they do, the respectability of art will be questioned. That is why I believe porn art/ art porn is still believed to be non-existing. Yet, I find the idea of Kipnis relevant. Porn art/ art porn exists and does not exist at the same time. For some porn and art can be two sides of the same coin. For others the presence of the obscene is irreconcilable with art. My focus will be on the former. The attempts to reconcile porn and art has caused some heated debates. But we can see a lot of attempts have been made. As I will explain with the case study of producers and consumers of art porn or porn art on Tumblr, it is impossible to create a clear distinction between art and porn. Also I believe that art porn could shed a new light on pornography itself. Instead of focusing on the negative sides of porn, the discussion around art porn could give us new insights on what it could do for us.
Methods
With all this background knowledge in mind, we now turn to the actual subject of this study. To understand how different social meanings are constructed by people on Tumblr producing or consuming porn art/ art porn it was essential to use in-depth interviews. Through these interviews I was able to point out different views on the definition of these concepts. This was not the only benefit. Interviewing helped me to gain knowledge on why people share these images and what it does for them. The interviews were semi-structured. This was the case, because I wanted to ask my interviewees similar questions, but leave space for them to go into directions I did not thought of before. This turned out well, because I was pulled into different social worlds, for example the world of hentai manga, or the world of scat art. It was never about just one type of porn art/ art porn. It showed that art porn/ porn art is able to be visible in different fields, but at the same time it is not visible for others. Which reminds of the idea of Kipnis where porn never exists, but it exists at the same time.
Another method I used here, of which I assimilated examples during my interviews, was showing my interviewees visuals. The reason for this was because my interviewees
29 shared visuals themselves which they defined as porn art/ art porn. These visuals are
somehow on the border of art and porn. This made me interested to see if they would stick to their own ideas of art porn/ porn art if they would be confronted with visuals I collected (visuals that have sexual content, but could also be seen as artistic). Do their definitions change because of this or/and are extra criteria mentioned when they come in contact with these types of visuals? In other words what kinds of discourse do they use when discussing this topic? For the analysis of my research I used discourse analysis.
The visuals I collected were a mix of visuals I found on Tumblr, feminist porn sites, news articles and on the site Pornceptual.com. All photos that I used were labeled as porn art, art porn, porn, art, sex art, or horny arts on the pages that shared them. Also the porn sites, the Pornceptual site and the news articles were describing an artistic dimension in the visuals or were discussing porn art/art porn. I let my interviewees analyze and classify the images, but I also analyzed the visuals to see what my interviewees did not discuss, while it is visible in the images. So the actual visual analysis was done by my interviewees, and at the same time I analyzed their answers on the visuals.
To collect qualitative data on what people on Tumblr saw as art porn/ porn art I had to make my own Tumblr account through which I was able to communicate. At first finding interviewees was difficult, because I did not fully understand how Tumblr’s search function works. Also most people did not answer my messages. Eventually I tried to contact over 200 profiles and a few contacted me, because I made a blog where I asked people to discuss porn art/art porn with me for my thesis. In the end I was able to speak to forty people, of whom I interviewed 18 in-depth. Most of them preferred to be interviewed by email on the Tumblr chat function and only a few of them (3 in total) agreed with interviewing via Skype. Still most of them seemed to be enjoying the fact that they could talk about this subject. Some tried to keep in touch after I interviewed them and were interested in the outcomes of this
research.
The interviews were conducted between March and June of 2016. Sixteen in-depth interviews were done with people on Tumblr who produce or consume (normally when they consume, they also re-blog visuals) different sexual representations they identify as artistic porn or erotic art. Two other interviews were done with a Dutch artist from The Hague and a PHD student who writes about alternative pornography. The in-depth interviews were done with 14 males and 4 females. Other conversations I had were with 11 males and 11 females. The cultural backgrounds of the interviewees varies from the U.S. to France, to Brazil, etc. The Skype and in person interviews had an average of 1,5 hours. Some interviews done via
30 Tumblr chat were done over a time lapse of some weeks, others were finished within a few days with short intervals. One interview via Tumblr chat took me five hours in one day. The email interviews were send via Gmail to the interviewees, which took some a day to answer and others a couple of weeks or even months.
The people I questioned in-depth were between 17 and 59 years old. In one case (with the 17 year old) I could not send this girl the visuals, because it would be illegal to show an under aged woman sexual content. Also most of my interviewees described themselves as Christians (Protestants or Catholics), others regarded themselves as being not religious. Still most people who defined as having a religion claimed they did not consider themselves as being active as such.
When it comes to sexual orientation I found some sexual diversity. I talked to
heterosexuals (25), homosexuals (6), lesbians (4), bisexuals (4), pansexual (1) and people who added they also had different fetishes, for example Lolita types of images (1)12, exhibitionists (6), or people who were into BDSM(6).
I spoke to people from different educational backgrounds. For example there were quite a few people with a degree in arts, or who were studying art. It was interesting to see that people with an arts background were interested in art porn/ porn art. Others had a degree or were studying sociology, communication studies or engineering.
All interviews, except for one, were done individually. One couple accepted an
interview via skype. It was interesting to see how they each used different ways to define porn art.
During the visual part of the interview, I showed 10 of my interviewees 19 visuals. I did send all 18 of my interviewees whom I interviewed in-depth the visuals. Yet when they eventually had to define the visuals it seemed that they had no more time left, or they did not respond anymore. Probably it were too many visuals. Those who did respond did not all fully explain why they defined pictures in a certain way. Luckily there were also interviewees who put in a lot of effort in explaining how they would define the visuals and why.
For this part of the interview I tried to add visuals that showed different sexual representations like Transsexuality, homosexuality, group sex, lesbianism, heterosexuality, s/m like visuals, religious visuals, etc. With this I tried to find out if sexual preferences were important in classifying these visuals. As the whole discussion around porn art and art porn already showed that defining these terms is depending on social context, it could also be a
31 matter of different sexual preferences that causes people to have different associations. Just as gender, race, class and cultural differences. Yet what could be problematic here is that the visuals I selected for my interviewees to see are visuals I saw in a specific way and I tried to see if my interviewees would look the same at these images. These pictures do not represent every sexual fetish that is out there and it could be I missed some visuals that could also have been interesting to see people their reactions to. What could also be problematic is the fact I used 18 images and 1 film. On Tumblr there are images, videos and GIFs that are
shared/made. This means that not all forms that could be found on Tumblr are part of my interview.
In my final analysis I only used six pictures to analyze the definitions my interviewees gave. These six visuals were the visuals that had the most interesting responses, while the others did not really add a new perspective.
Next to interviewing my interviewees I also went to several museums, expositions and conferences where art porn/porn art was displayed and/or discussed. I did this to see what is out there (outside the world of Tumblr). I do have to add here that in the Netherlands it is easier to have these kind of discussions and to portray pornographic imagery. Of course not all sexual images were accepted, as we have seen in the case of McCarthy, but the
Netherlands is a lot more tolerant to sexual artworks. Compared to other countries, there is a lot more possible in the Netherlands when it comes to displaying certain art works. During my interviews it will be become clear why people from different countries have the need to share these images.
Interviewing also had the result that not everyone was only interested in just talking about this topic, but some would try to flirt with me. A few told me they wanted to have sex with me and even one interviewee proposed to fly to Amsterdam and wanted to “make love to me”. Another interviewee send a picture of his face and told me that he thought he was ugly, while another male send me full nudes of himself. It felt like these men were looking for positive feedback on their bodies or thought it was “hot” (as one called it) to send me these images. I did not felt threatened by these visuals, as most asked me if they could send the visuals to me. For example the male that wanted to send me some nudes, said he made porn art of himself and asked if I was okay with looking at those. Still I think it would be different if someone would strip on Skype. I might have felt awkward. Fortunately that did not happen and I felt pretty safe behind my computer.
The rest of the interviews I had did not contain these kinds of interactions. These were more about people their own experiences with pornography and art and how they discovered
