What is the Difference Between Art and Pornography? - Some Personal Thoughts

Stephen Alexander Beach 

(930 Words) 

A question that I have thought about for awhile is about the difference between nude sacred art and pornography. Thinking about it in a philosophical sense I think I have identified the essential difference between the two, and therefore how we should react in encountering them. Let me explain … 

Traditional Visual Art Versus Modern Photography 

In order to answer this question, a key distinction needs to be identified between traditional visual art, such as paintings and sculptures, and new technologically produced media, such as photography and videography. The distinction is that new technology-produced media captures reality with such precision it captures all of the unique details of particular places, times, and people. (I’m not saying that photography and video cannot be artistic, of course it can, but I do think there is a fundamental difference which needs to be pointed out). Traditional visual art, of the other hand cannot capture such detail, and so is rather characterized by using a mode of universals, or particulars with no individual identity. For example, Michelangelo’s David reflects more the universality of the male form rather than the unique details of what David actually looked like. And so traditional visual art dehumanizes (or maybe de-individualizes might be more accurate a term) its subject to emphasize an aspect of the human person or existence as such. For example, a painting of an old hand shows the wear of old age and hard work, that’s the whole point. 

A picture, on the other hand, is so detailed that it is always clearly a capturing of a real individual at a particular time and place. If the mode of traditional art is universality, photography and videography’s mode is that of individuality and particularity. A painting dehumanizes to bring out one aspect of the human experience, while a photograph humanizes the particular subject who is captured. And so if a photograph was taken of King David, it would be not as much represent the universality of the male form as much as the identity of this individual, King David. 

Nude Art Versus Pornography

What’s the important insight in this distinction? Well, nude art does not depict any one particular person that is discernible to the viewer. Rather, nude art carries an anonymity of the individual so as to emphasize the universal human form. It is de-individualized so that the viewer can appreciate the beauty, for example, of the female form as such. This being the case, such art can actually be an inspiring experience of the beauty of God’s creation in general. 

On the the other hand, pornography is done with photograph and video. It captures individual people in such detail that they are clearly discernible as these particular people who exist in that time and place. It is a meeting with a real person in as much as one encounters one’s loved ones when they look at pictures of them on the wall in one’s house. The problem, of course, being that the person who consumes pornography is not encountering the other person in a loving way. 

Rather, they are there to use the other as a means to an end of one sided sexual gratification. And so the individuals in pornography become dehumanized into objects of lust. It is not art, which emphasizes the beauty of the human form in general, but is rather a base depiction of these individuals being consumed by the viewer for selfish gratification. The viewer doesn’t see their humanity at all, but rather strips their particular humanity away and sees only their sexual value as certain body parts or actions. And so to view a picture as an essence of some quality is to dehumanize the individual in the picture because to look at someone as a thing, or body part, and not in their highest aspect as a whole person, is to do violence to them. Again, to reduce this individual to their body parts is to dehumanize them because one misses the greater part of their existence, their mind and soul. 

How to React 
And so now that we have distinguished the difference between art (that uplifts the mind to beauty) and pornography (which degrades human beings), how should we react when we encounter these depictions in daily life. If we are faced with pornographic pictures of whatever degree, we must always seek to humanize pictures as glimpses of real individual people. We must see the people in the pictures as their parents would see them, or as God would see them. In doing so, we restore their dignity as a whole person back to them. Art, on the other hand, is meant to be focused on as a part of the human person or experience at large.

Now there are pornographic pictures which I do not believe will one is able to humanize the person in the picture. This would be any picture that only shows a body part or that depicts a sexual act, or that involves multiple people. If one is suddenly confronted with a photo of this type, the proper response is to simply flee. 

The Desire to be Lusted After 
Another effect that this confusion between art and pornography has had on society is that women seek to hide their individuality and to put on a mask of universal sexual attractiveness which dehumanizes them. You can see this by the homogenous way in which we consider what is sexually attractive today. They all try to have the same flawless hair, skin, eye brows, lips, nails, etc. It can be hard to see their uniqueness shine through. An individual person has imperfections, but universal forms do not. This is not to say that women trying to look beautiful is wrong, but just that we often default to a pornographic view of others in which we deny their individuality and see them only as universal features and body parts, even in real life.