PORNOSOPHY - Pornography vs. Erotic Art

PORNOSOPHY PORNOGRAPHY VS. EROTIC ART EVIE POPE

SOREN KIERKEGAARD MARTIN FIRRELL SIMONE DE BEAUVOIR JOHN BERGER JERROLD LEVINSON CHRISTY MAG UIDHIR KENNETH CLARK

Note to the reader This book consists of 7 written essays, and a photo essay at the end which should be viewed as the visual conclusion to the theories discussed in the essays.

The theories discussed are based on the works of Soren Kierkegaard, Simone de Beauviour, Martin Firrell, John Berger, Jerrold Levinson, Christ Mag Uidhir and Kenneth Clark.

‘I’ve rushed into things just because of my dick’

Kierkegaard Loves Porn

Nestled in the streets of Soho, between vessels of various late-night activities of debauchery lies The Smallest Gallery in Soho. Ironically, in these sexy streets of London is being held an exhibition on the theologian and philosopher Soren Kierkegaard.

Parisian born artist Martin Firrell has created this exhibition based on Kierkegaard’s musings, in conjunction with reinterpretations through the eyes of porn star – aptly named Spurt Reynolds. As you may be thinking, it seems difficult to interpret the career of a philosopher as pious of Kierkegaard with something an uncouth as pornography. However, Mr Spurt Reynolds makes light work of it.

One of Kierkegaard’s most famous quotations is ‘Many of us pursue pleasure with such haste that we hurry past it’. Many people would interpret this to mean to enjoy the good things while they last – don’t rush past the most enjoyable stages of life. Spurt Reynolds interprets it as the following:

‘I’ve rushed into things just because of my dick’ He has a point, and I agree with him. I genuinely believe in my heart that the crux of what Kierkegaard meant was not too far removed from Reynold’s interpretation. People often rush into things for instant gratification and pleasure reception, however, not realising that rushing through the prior steps of pleasure makes them last much shorter than if you waited to receive pleasure. As Reynolds pointed out – mostly sexual pleasure.

This exhibition by Martin Firrell has achieved one major feat – making academic philosophy more accessible for the average man, using porn. While doing so, creating an artistic visual language which is an explicit reference to one of the sexiest places in the world – the redlight district of Amsterdam. Especially in an area of London which is laden with sex shops and gay bars, an exhibition about sex – a sexhibition if you will – is bound to be a success. Not only does it make philosophy more accessible, but it is much more stimulating and engaging. This exhibition truly brings to light the fact that sex sells, and it sells well. The impact on sex on society and the grip it has is shown explicitly through the fact that we must plaster a subject – usually pinned as prudish and boring – with sexual and erotic imagery for it to catch the attention of some people.

Viewing sex as a vehicle to sell and advertise subjects which are generally not of interest to a wider public scope may start to become more and more prevalent. It has already started being used for advertisements which have nothing

to do with sex – ads for ladies’ perfume, ads for men’s perfume, ads for clothes (ironically), ads for make-up, ads for food. It’s worth highlighting the fact that in the majority of cases, the naked body seen in these advertisements is that of a female. Therefore, leading to the conclusion that a woman’s body is mostly seen as that of a vehicle in which to attract men to buy a product. Not to use an extremely reductionist point of view, but it’s as if they see a female form and are immediately drawn in and feel like they MUST become a patron of said company or product.

This brings me onto the main topic of this publication, the way women are seen, the distinction between erotic art and pornography and the effect it has on the view of women in society.

‘It is impossible to regard woman simply as a productive force: she is for man a sexual partner, a reproducer, an erotic object – the Other through whom he seeks himself’.

The Second Sex

‘It is impossible to regard woman simply as a productive force: she is for man a sexual partner, a reproducer, an erotic object – the Other through whom he seeks himself’.

The third chapter of Simone de Beauvoir’s ‘The Second Sex’, she writes based on the idea of women being seen as ‘the Other’. As with Hegel’s account of the master-slave dialectic. Men – the Hegelian Master – have pinned themselves and the Subject in society – the absolute human type, and thus identifying women as inferior. Since men in society have identified women as inadequate, that is then used as justification for seeing them as ‘the Other’ and therefore treating them as such. Much like the Hegelian Other – women are unable to identify the origin of their otherness. The notion that women are viewed – by man, and in a sense, by society as a whole – as an erotic object, a mere reproducer and sexual partner. Not in her own sense as her own person, without autonomy or ability to be viewed holistically as a person. Eternally condemned by the reductionist view of her and her role in the world.

When discussing women and their sexuality – particularly how their sexuality is viewed – we can look at the work of John Berger in ‘Ways of Seeing’.

These two texts when viewed in conjunction with one another can depict a rich picture of how women are viewed in society and art.

Jerrold Levinson wrote about the separation of erotic are and pornography in terms of the response they call for. Below I have included the criteria that Levinson devised to be able to make this distinguishment.

Referring to the sexy, free-spirited streets of Soho, we find the setting in which actor, director and producer, Anna Span had a ‘moment of clarity’. In her teenage years she was anti-porn, believing it to be an area in which men were given complete free rein, and therefore not a place that she could indulge in as a woman.

A platform in which they could subjugate women entirely for their own needs.

However, as she was walking down ‘Old Compton Street’ in the red-light district of Soho, she realised that what she was feeling was not anger, yet envy. Jealousy at the fact that men had THEIR Soho. It considered men’s desired worthy enough to invest money to cater to them. Span realised that the equivalent for women was missing.

Span has made over 250 porn scenes to date. Her scenes focus on the enjoyment of sex for women AND men, as opposed to porn being used to sexually stimulate men, uses women as the stimulus. There is an emphasis on naturalism in her films, both in script and actors’ performances. She includes much more female POV shots in her films, a much higher percentage that male POV shots.

Anna is a member of Feminists Against Censorship; a campaign that understands that for women to be of equal rights of men, does not necessarily means that the way of achieving this is through restriction and censorship of the rights of the individual, male or female. Span has said that the open debate is better than hidden inequality. She believes that to sexually objectify and individual is to view a person’s sexual attractiveness separately from their personality. This is a natural human experience, not just a male experience, as traditionally depicted.

Erotic art consists of images centrally aimed at a certain sort of reception (R1).

Pornography consists of images centrally aimed at a certain sort of reception (R2).

R1 essentially involves attention to form/ vehicle/medium/manner, and so entails treating images as in part opaque.

R2 essentially excludes attention to form/ vehicle/medium/manner, and so entails treating images as wholly transparent.

R1 and R2 are incompatible.

Hence, nothing can be both erotic art and pornography; or at the least, nothing can be coherently projected as both erotic art and pornography; or at the very least, nothing can succeed as erotic art and pornography at the same time. (2005) R1 – aesthetic delight / aesthetic experience R2 – sexual arousal and release

‘Men dream of women; women dream of themselves being dreamt of’ ‘Men look at women; women watch themselves be looked at’

John Berger ‘Men dream of women; women dream of themselves being dreamt of’ ‘Men look at women; women watch themselves be looked at’ Ways of Seeing is synonymous with art students startting to explore the philosophical side of art. The study of social psyche and moral grit. Berger managed to strike a perfect balance between academic and playful, making the reader completely empathise with the way he views the world.

Chapter 3 of Ways of Seeing is based on women in art, how they are viewed, when they are viewed and whom they are viewed by. It is seen that in an average European oil painting, a woman is a sight to be looked at. Kenneth Clark in his book ‘The Nude’ defines being naked as being without clothes, whereas a nude is a form of art. To be naked is to be oneself, to be nude is to be seen naked by others yet not considered oneself. Often, a nude is a sight for those who are dressed.

If we look at the painting Susannah and the Elders, we can see that the main form in the painting – Susannah herself – is looking out of the painting, at the viewer. Susannah sees herself as a sight for a man. She is the one figure in the painting, which is unclothed, the rest of the figures – all men – are fully clothed.

It’s like the viewer – a clothed man – is a part of the painting her is looking at. He is one of the elders in the composition of the painting.

Berger points out that nudes in oil paintings are for the male viewer. In the television series Berger shows the programme to a group of 5 women and asks for their feelings. They say that the paintings are completely unrealistic and idealised. They state that when they look at a classical renaissance oil painting – such as Susannah and the Elders – they admire the painting, not the human being depicted in the nude. From this we can tell that woman, when viewing art, see the composition. Focusing on the entirety of the image as opposed to few singular figures. It can be derived from this that men do not have the same ability to view the composition fully. Instead, they focus on the figures – more specifically, the nude female figures.

Women point out that their image of herself is derived directly from other people, they are always being told and dictating as to how they are perceived and how they should perceive themselves. Men do not have this issue. The man’s image of himself is derived from the world around him. Men dress for the power they wish to hold – this is their vehicle for self-expression. Being seen as the Hegelian Subject. While women show their self-expression as how they want others to perceive her - in the hopes that one day she can make that perception a reality.

Therefore, if something is pornography, then it is not art.

Contemporary Aesthetics and the Problem of Pornographic Art Very few philosophers will deny the existence of aesthetic legitimacy of erotic art.

Pornographic representations are sexually explicit and rich in anatomical detail, whereas works of erotic art rely on suggestion and instead of focusing on certain body parts, will try to capture the individuality, personality, and subjectivity of the represented person. Roger Scruton and Kenneth Clark appeal to the distinction between ‘the nude’ and ‘the naked’ made famous by Clark. People in pornographic images are not nude, by naked. They are deprived of clothes in a way that is seen as exposing and embarrassing.

In 2009, Christy Mag Uidhir stated if something is pornography, then it is not art. This distinction has been set out within these guidelines.

Uidhir doesn’t claim that pornography has the singular purpose of sexual arousal, or even that the point of all pornography is to sexually arouse. He also does not claim that other purposes of pornography are manner unspecific. He furthermore does not claim that art has a purpose, he claims that only if art has a purpose, then that purpose is manner unspecific.

If something is pornography, then that something has the purpose ofsexual arousal (of some audience).

If something is pornography, then that something has the purpose of sexual arousal, and that purpose is manner unspecific.

If something is art, then if that something has a purpose, then that purpose is manner specific.

If something is art, then if that something has the purpose of sexual arousal, then that purpose is manner specific.

A purpose cannot be both manner specific and manner unspecific.

Therefore, if something is pornography, then it is not art.

Manner specificity in this context means for a purpose to be constituted by an action and a manner, the purpose is to perform that action in this specified manner.

A failure in doing this means a failure to satisfy and fulfil the purpose. A manner specific purpose is satisfied only if the situation is bought about in a certain manner.

Uidhir also states that he assumes that both pornography and art have intentional components. Both pornography and art are dependent on their specific intention.

Prima facie is a Latin expression meaning at first sight or based on a first impression. A necessary condition for somethings being pornography is the purpose of sexual arousal – the main point of pornography being to sexually arouse its audience. It seems then, the purpose of sexual arousal is a substantive necessary condition for somethings being porn.

To illustrate this Uidhir considers the following cases:

1. A security camera just so happens to capture a couple having sex.

2. To study behaviour during sex, a psychologist films a couple having sex.

Assume that the videos in 1 and 2 are visually indistinguishable from prototypical porn such that absent any information about their individual casual histories, we would think them in fact prototypical pornography. While these recordings may in fact sexually arouse the viewer, clearing this isn’t a purpose of 1 and 2, so 1 and 2 aren’t pornography.

Uidhir states the relationship between art and photography is similar to the relationship of art and pornography. The aim of advertising is to get the audience to purchase or use a featured product or service. This purpose of advertising looks to be a paradigmatic example of a manner unspecific purpose. Some advertisements employ the manner of featuring the product to demonstrate its value to the buyer.

Often, the manner employed is entirely removed from the product the consumer is working to sell. Advertisers know the power of scantily clad sexy models drawing sports cards – they merely prescribe a manner they think disposes the audience to buy the product, whatever it may be. Advertising and its main aim is to make the audience more likely to buy the product – whether the aim gets achieved in the prescribed wat is a moot point.

Uidhir points out that Marcel Duchamp’s In Advance of the Broken Arm looks well suited to be used as a snow shovel precisely because it physically is composed of an actual snow shovel, but this doesn’t mean that In Advance with a Broken Arm is both an artwork and a snow shovel. He also shows a similar example with Serrano’s The Interpretation of Dreams (Triumph of the Flesh). It may be well suited to be used at pornography because of its graphic sexual content, but this doesn’t make The Interpretation of Dreams (Triumph of the Flesh) both art and pornography.

This links back to the points made by John Berger in Ways of Seeing. The attitudes and interpretations of art can be decided on by the viewer. A viewer of The Interpretation of Dreams (Triumph of the Flesh)may become sexually aroused when looking at the work. However, this is different for each viewer. It may be used by some to sexually arouse and satisfy, whereas others may not be aroused at all. The ability to distinguish between erotic art and pornography is entirely down to the viewer and one’s interpretation of the view.

‘Erotic art is art that is made with the intention to stimulate its target audience sexually, and that succeeds to some extent in doing so’.

Erotic Art

The definition used to describe erotic art as told by Richard Posner in Sex and Reason goes as follows

‘Presentations and representations that are, or at least are taken by some viewers to be, in some sense ‘about’ sexual activity’ This definition needs to be narrowed down further if we are to arrive at a specific definition, one that includes the extension of what we ordinarily think of as erotic art. For one thing, a definition should exclude scientific-behavioural studies or medical illustrations of sexual activity – which in their nature tend to be neither artistic nor erotic). It may also be stated that simply because some viewers take a painting or sculpture to be about sexual activity that we are in fact dealing with erotic representation. As mentioned, a painting as pious as one such as Madonna and Child – to someone who is unfamiliar with the Bible – may take the painting to be erotic. However, this would be extremely insufficient grounds to call, for example, Tintoretto’s Crucifixion a work of erotic art.

A definition of erotic art as told by Peter Webb states

‘Art which aims to engage viewers sexually through explicit sexual content, and the succeeds to some extent, in doing so.’

This definition is already much closer to a true description of erotic art. Though, Webb emphasises emotions, which in understandable as from an etymological point of view. The term erotic derives from the Greek eros meaning love or passion.

He still fails in spelling out the necessary conditions of erotic art. Man Rays 1930 work The Prayer shows only the hands, feet, and buttocks of a woman. This does not make it a sexual depiction – however explicit – in the sense that there is no show of emotions.

As is told by Jerrold Levinson which he acknowledges in his definition of erotic art as

‘Art on a sexual theme related specifically to emotions rather than merely actions, and sexual depiction which are justifiable on aesthetic grounds’

However accurate this definition may be, it still poses the question. Does erotic art need to be explicit? An artwork may contain highly erotic content, which succeeds in arousing the viewer, while also containing no sexual content at all. Does this still count as erotic art if it doesn’t include sexually explicit content?

The most accurate description of erotic art is the following

‘Erotic art is art that is made with the intention to stimulate its target audience sexually, and that succeeds to some extent in doing so’.

However, this also raises further questions of what sexual stimulation is. Sexual stimulation is probably best understood as the inducing of sexual feelings, desires, and imaginings, that would generally be regarded and pleasant in themselves.

A further distinction I wish to explore is that again of Jerrold Levinson. He states that images intended to sexually stimulate but not to reward artistic interest, for example, provocative ladies’ lingerie ads. Erotic arts seem to fall within the vast category of sexually themes art. However, all works of erotic art have a sexual theme, it could be argued, but however it does not apply the other way round. Many works of art with sexual themes are not works of erotic art.

It is worth distinguishing between sexually themed art and sexually stimulating art. Like art that stimulates its target audience sexually, even though it may not have aimed to do so. Also, it is worth arguing censorship and moral policing have prevented artist from making art which is openly erotic. There is indeed an existence of covertly erotic art, meaning art made with the covert intention to stimulate its audience sexually and that may succeed in some extent to doing so.

An example of covertly erotic art is Sukashi Shunga – or hidden Shunga.

Popular woodblocks from Japan in the beginning of the 20th century, often depicting highly erotic scenes. As a result of censorship laws, at first the viewer would be beautifully drawn postcards of landscapes. However, when held up to the light turned out to be sexually explicit lovemaking scenes.

Erotic Art, Art History, and the Cultural History of Pornography

Erotic Art, Art History, and the Cultural History of Pornography Historians and philosophers are still anxious to make the distinction between the ‘highbrow’ erotic art and the ‘low brow’ pornography. As quoted by Kenneth Clark ‘the moment art becomes an incentive to action it loses its true character’. In this quote we can see Clarks main problem with pornography – that it was an incentive to sexual arousal. However, it could be argued that many religious pieces of art and alike are also calls to action. These inspired masterpieces which call on people to change their lives or perform certain actions. The view of separating art and pornography through their disparities in the actions in which they call the viewer to perform will not do.

This brings to light the argument of the rationale in which erotic art and pornography is separated – which is a popular subject among art historians.

Art is seen as having to be multi-layered, whereas pornography is purely onedimensional. The modus operandi of pornography is to sexually arouse – its singular job to perform and therefore is seen to be lacking in formality and structure. Art – as mentioned earlier like various religious pieces of art – may be seen as complex works, which indeed they are, yet there is reason to believe that the reason why pornography is viewed as singularly faceted due to oversimplification.

It is easy to think of porn as just having one purpose– sexual arousal of the audience. However, when looking at early pornography works – such as those produced in France and England between 1500 and 1800 – we can see what a misleading idea this is. Pornography from this era was deliberately created to criticise the current religious and political authorities. A vast majority of the books written about sex included terms related to philosophy in the title, such as Sade’s Le Philosophie dans le Boudoir. This subject matter was popular for many to write about due to the ability to share their ideas with a mass majority of the population without being seen as crude or overly sexual.

The modus operandi of pornography is to sexually arouse, using as many sexually explicit scenes as possible and therefore leaving little room for plot development or other details. Sontag stated the pornographer ‘concocts no better than a crude excuse for a beginning; and one having begun, it goes on and on and ends nowhere’. There is none of the classical literature form. Having stated this, it is still not strong enough to use as a distinguishing feature between erotic art and pornography. It is seen that pornography has no formality or structure, and this is obviously different from the more ‘highbrow’ form often used for erotic art – more particularly erotic literature. Perhaps investigating the structural complexity of pornographic novels may cast more light on how pornography can be a ‘highbrow’ form of entertainment. ‘Histoire de Dom Bougre Portier des Chartreux’ by anonymous author – later thought to be Jean-Charles Gervaise de Latouche – was one of the first erotic novels from the 18th century. The name Bougre refers to the French term

Boulgre meaning Bugger. The illustrations from this novel have turned out to be some of the most reprinted of French pornography. They contain explicit wood cuts and line drawings of many different sex positions, many of which including more than one couple, and as well as of that contain many gay and lesbian couples too. A highly pornographic book of this manner would have been highly criticised due to its discordance with the religious and political teachings at the time which would have been highly conservative.

Another disparity between pornography and erotic art is the difference between the one-dimensional effect on the audience. Sexual arousal is an extremely strong bodily state which blocks out many other functions, more importantly blocks out our cognitive abilities. It can be argued that this is what distinguished sexual arousal and sexual stimulation, which Jerrold Levinson has investigated and has found to not be compatible with the cognitive ability to appreciate aesthetics – which is needed to appreciate erotic art. If one does accept the animal like nature of sexual arousal does not mean that the stimulus does not have the ability to be rewarding and appropriate.

Questions of interpretation are frequently asked when in relation to erotic art. However, these questions are rarely asked where pornography is concerned.

A difference her lies in the fact that erotic art needs interpretation yet pornography in not in need of interpretation since its all too explicit anyway. There are two different kinds of interpretation projects to engage with. 1, What is the work about?

2, What does the work reveal about the author or the time, place, culture, society in which it was made? The former question is directed to the discipline of art criticism. While the latter question is the starting point of interpretations offered by cultural historians, sociologists, and psychoanalysts. These interpretations, especially where pornography is concerned, is the opposite of simple given the incredible amount of complexity of the pornographic landscape. The collection of taboos, body types, sex acts, and other pornographic stimuli. The question – What is the work about? – isn’t as important, especially in relation to the formula of the video clips one can see on pornography websites.

Erotic Art, Feminist Theory, and Objectification

Erotic Art, Feminist Theory, and Objectification Look at any photo or film of people making love, really making love. … there is usually sensuality and touch and warmth, an acceptance of bodies and nerve endings. …

Now look at any depiction of sex in which there is clear force, or an unequal power that spells coercion. … The first is erotic: a mutually pleasurable, sexual expression between people who have enough power to be there by positive choice. … The second is pornographic: its message is violence, dominance, and conquest.

In this quote by Gloria Steinem, we see the moral differences of erotic art and porn highlighter. Pornography focusing on sex that is aggressive. The focus of erotic art is on love, passion, and equality. For an artist to depict scenes of rape or other abusive forms are used in an attempt to warn against the degradation of women or men.

Pornography has been described as visual material which represents sexual behaviour that is degrading or abusive, to one or more of the participants in such a way as to endorse the degradation. This definition captures what is morally problematic about pornography.

However, the focus is on erotic art, not pornography. The harm that pornography causes begin in the early stages, forms of coercion, brutality, violence, and rape. Even if there is no coercion taking place during the making of pornography, with all actors treated fairly, there can still be harms that take place in post-production. Pornography may be used as a form of hate speech, or a way of silencing women.

It can also be stated that pornographic material may cause harm through exposure. The frequency of exposure, the nature of the material, the kind of harm inflicted and the whom it is inflicted on. By systematically sexualising aspects of gender inequality, inegalitarian pornography is mainly thought to cause the most harm to women in particular.

It must also be stated that harm can also be inflicted when erotic art is being produced. Erotic art may also constitute some harm. All the moral problems discussed above with pornography can be extrapolated and used in the same context of erotic art. Some erotic art can also cause harm in the same way as pornography, by eroticising aspects of gender inequality and therefore being able to shape people’s sexual preferences, therefore exacerbating gender inequality.

Neither exploitation nor objectification is unique to just pornography or erotic art – the presence if frequently unacknowledged in both fields, however, only pornography receives moral criticism.

In conclusion, there is no wat to make a distinction between erotic art and pornography based purely on moral grounds. Critiques of pornography are based on characteristics which can also possessed by erotic art. Feminists should embrace the conclusion that this implies that their critiquing are wider ranging than they first appear to be.

Another question which is necessary to discuss is what does it mean for a representation to be voyeuristic and what is the difference between voyeurism in artistic and non-artistic representations? This is a question which has already been raised in John Berger’s ‘Ways of Seeing. To suggest a work embodies the male gaze is to say that the audience perceived the women represented in the images as primarily a sex object. To describe this manner of seeing as purely a ‘male way of seeing and perceiving’ does not claim anything about how most men respond to these pictures. This manner of seeing to someone in the masculine social role, is avowedly heterosexual.

Furthermore, what is the role of transgression in erotic art? While we can see the highlighted moral dangers involved in the production and circulation of sexual imagery, other philosophers have argued that the norm breaking – more particularly the violation of social and moral norms about sexual behaviour – is indispensable for achieving sexual arousal in the viewer. As mentioned, the first erotic and pornographic stimuli in the 1500-1800’s in France and England were so popular because they destroyed religious and political zeitgeist of the time. The thought of a visual being shocking and ‘not suitable for work’ makes the viewer feel as if they are doing something wrong – something to keep quiet about since they could be penalised for being seen as a patron of such visuals.

Thirdly, how does the degree of eroticism of a work of erotic art relate to its ability to be ‘good art’? In reflection of this, the ability for a piece of art comes from the appreciation and perceived artistic status, when it has a non-artistic primary intended function, such as religion or politics. There appears to be different degrees of permissibility is one were to compare literature with visual arts. There seems to be very little erotic architecture, and it can be agreed that there is very little music which qualifies as absolutely erotic. There are erotic dances, yet these are rarely considered as art works or performed within a purely artistic context.

Fourthly, if erotic art and pornography are not mutually exclusive, why is there not more art that qualifies as both erotic art and pornography? We can recontextualise this question into cinematic terms. There are many resemblances between art films and pornographic films – the editing styles, long jump cuts, arousal of strong emotion, and an exploration of the human extremes. It could be compared to a Brechtian style of performance. It could be arguing that the market forces are the singular reasons for the overlap – the wants and needs of the consumer.

The role of censorship and obscenity will always play a strong part in erotic art. This can be seen in philosophical discussions of the nudes, and of art that may be seen to challenge the classical ideal of beauty. A normative definition of this kind will recall certain legal descriptions of obscenity. Miller v. California, a US Supreme Court Case which bought to light The Miller Test (1973). This test proposed 3 criteria for obscenity. A stimulus can be seen as obscene if it (1) is found appealing to the prurient interest by an average person applying contemporary community standards, (2) it depicts sexual conduct, specifically defined by the applicable state law, in a patently offensive way and (3) taken it lacks serious literary, artist, political or scientific value. The Miller Test has been proved to be

problematic in many ways – one of the most obvious is the conflation of two ideas – the pornographic and the obscene. However, more recent definitions of the obscene have avoided this mistake – therefore allowing for non-pornographic obscenities and obscene erotic art.

Photo Essay

Endnotes

The Garage Soho (2020) ‘The Smallest Gallery in Soho Explores ‘Pornosophy’ Through the Eyes of Porn Star Spurt Reynolds’. Little Black Book Online (Accessed on 3rd May 2022 at - https://www.lbbonline.com/news/the-smallest-gallery-in-soho-explorespornosophy-through-the-eyes-of-porn-star-spurt-reynolds ) O’Hagan, S (April 2018) Viv Albertine: ‘I just want to blow a hole in it all’. The Guardian online (Accessed on 3rd May 2022 at https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/ apr/01/viv-albertine-i-know-now-that-i-want-to-stay-an-outsider-memoir-tothrow-away-unopened-slits-ari-up ) McDonald, W (2017) ‘Soren Kierkegaard.’ Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (Accessed on 3rd May 2022 at https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kierkegaard/ ) Mikkola, M (2022) ‘Feminist Perspectives on Sex and Gender’ Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (Accessed on 3rd May 2022 at https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ feminism-gender/ ) Korsmeyer, C. Brand Weiser, P (2021) ‘Feminist Aesthetics’ Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (Accessed on 3rd May 2022 at https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-aesthetics/ ) Maes, H (2018) ‘Erotic Art’ Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (Accessed on 3rd May 2022 at https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/erotic-art/ ) Fanni Tutti, Cosey (2017) ‘art sex music’. Faber and Faber Ltd, London, England Ray, M (1930) ‘The Prayer’. Gelatine Silver Print. The Getty Museum, Los Angeles, California, United States of America © Man Ray Trust ARS-ADAGP. Posner, R (1992) ‘Sex and Reason.’ Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

Kant, I (1790) ‘Critique of Judgement’ Translated by James Creed Meredith, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007 (original publication date 1952), Oxford World’s Classics.

Griffiths, M. Whitford, M (1989) ‘Feminist Perspectives in Philosophy’. MacMillan Publishers.

Auden, W. H. Kiekegaard, S (September 1999) ‘The Living Thoughts of Soren Kierkegaard’ The New York Review of Books, Inc. New York City, New York, United States of America.

Beauvoir, S. D. (1989) ‘The Second Sex’ New York, New York City, United States of America. Vintage Books Hegel, G. W. F. (1802/3) ‘System of Ethical Life and First Philosophy of Spirit’. SUNY Press. State University of New York, Albany, New York, United States Levinson, J. (2006) ‘What is Erotic Art?’ Contemplating Art, Oxford: Oxford University Press. United Kingdom.

Berger, J. (1972) ‘Ways of Seeing. Episode 2 – Women and Art’. BBC Two. London, England

The Holy Bible. Book of Genesis 2:4 ‘Toledot of Adam’ Clark, K (1956) ‘The Nude: A Study of Ideal Art’. The Reprint Society. London, England Manet, E (1863) ‘Le Dejeuer sur l’herbe’. Oil on Canvas. Musee d’Orsay, Paris, France Sciamma, C (2019) ‘Portrait de la Jeune Fille en Feu / Portrait of the Young Lady on Fire’. Liles Filmes. Arte. Hold Up Films. Pyramide Films. France Garlikov, R (1998) ‘A Philosophy of Erotic Visual Art’. (Accessed on 19th May at http://www.garlikov.com/EroPhilo.html ) Joyce, J. (1920) ‘Ulysses’. Shakespeare and Company. Paris, France Keinholz, E & N (2009-2010) ‘The Hoerengracht’. The National Gallery. London, England.

Clark, K (1956), ‘The Nude: A Study in Ideal Beauty’, London: John Murray.

Levinson, J (2005) ‘Erotic Art and Pornographic Pictures’, Philosophy and Literature, 29: 228–240.

Levinson, J, (2006) ‘What is Erotic Art?’ in Jerrold Levinson, Contemplating Art, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Mag Uidhir, C (2009), ‘Why Pornography Can’t Be Art’, Philosophy and Literature, 33: 193–203.

Posner, R (1994) ‘Sex and Reason’ Cambridge: Harvard University Press Sontag, S (1994) ‘The Pornographic Imagination’ in Styles of Radical Will, London: Vintage.

Marcel, D (1915) ‘In Advance of the Broken Arm’ Tintoretto (1565) ‘Crocifissione’. Scuola Grande di San Rocco, Venice, Italy Serrano, A (2000) ‘The Interpretation of Dreams (Triumph of the Felsh) de Sade, M (1795) ‘Le Philosophie de la Boudoir’ Gervaise de Latouche, J-C (1741) ‘Histoire de Dom Bougre, Portier des Chateaux’ Fanni Tutti, C (1976) ‘Prostitution’. Institute of Contemporary Art, London, England Fanni Tutti, C (1975-1980) ‘Magazine Actions Vol. 1-3 Books’ Freak Animal Records, Special Interests Lucas Cranach the Elder (1510) ‘The Temptation of Adam and Eve’ Muzeum Narodowe w Warsawie Tintoretto (1555) ‘Susannah and the Elders’ Rubens. P, P (1636) ‘Susannah and the Elders’ Veneto, B (1505-1510) ‘A Woman as Flora’ Stadel Museum

Fouquet, J (1452-1455) ‘Virgin and Child’ Art in Flanders Emin, T (2017-18) ‘I was too young to be carrying your Ashes’ Emin T (2021) ‘WET’ Goldin, N (2016-17) ‘Ballad of Sexual Dependency’ Goldin, N (2001) ‘Valerie after love making, Bruno dressing Paris’ Titian (1520) ‘Flora’ Negretti, J (1520) ‘Portrait of a Woman’ Teenform (1960-1969) ‘Teenform, prettiest possible shapes to be in!’

JC Penney (1960s) ‘Penneys undethings look like nothing. Under certain kinds of clothes, that’s everything!’

Maidenform (1975) ‘I dreamed there was no end of me in my Maidenform Confections’ Sears (1970s) ‘Sears Cling-alone panty hose: it fits without stress at all the critical places’ Aertsen, P (1551) ‘A Meat Stall with the Holy Family Giving Alms’ Jaune, O (2015) ‘Candle’ Koss Stereophones (1970s) ‘Live and let live’ Myer (1970s) ‘Shirts for big boys who still like to go out to play’