Ethics and Art: The Question of Pornography

The question of forgeries is undoubtedly a question of morals over merit. It does a disservice to the work to claim that a work is any less accomplished just because of its origins, or of the intent of the artist. But the question of morals is not unique to forgeries.

Many of the arguments pertaining to pornography do not even begin to consider any of the merits of the work. Pornography is written off as art not for any intrinsic value it has, but because of a moral judgment that pornography results in evil, i.e. lust, objectification of the person (particularly of women), or instigating sexual crimes. The arguments ignore any value that these works may have.

To show how ridiculous this is, allow me to take a couple of examples. James Joyce's novel, "Ulysses," was banned for a while in the United States because it was labeled pornography. It was banned despite its clear literary merit, and today it is considered a fine example of literature.

Another example of this is "The Story of O" (which was, incidentally, written by an upper class French woman). This, too, was banned for a time because of its fairly explicit descriptions of sadomasochism. It is now considered to have literary, and thus artistic, value, despite the heavy eroticism in the book.

The label itself of "pornography" becomes suspect, as it makes a judgment based on shifting moral values in society. One generations smut is the next generation's literature. It is therefore rather obvious that making such moral judgments about a work disregards any value the work may have. This is not to say that all such pieces are unjustly belittled, but that there are some for which the hasty denouncement causes we, the art-viewing public, to miss out on quality pieces of art.

For a closing question, I pose this: should any art be censored? Are there any qualities of a piece of art for which the piece can legitimately be censored?

Oh, Aesthetics Class... You Amuse Me.

I know not how many of you bloggers are blogging for credit, but I would like to point out something I find rather humorous: there appear to have been more responses to my questions than to any questions posed by anyone else, a tad absurd when you take into account the fact that I do this for my own intellectual exercise rather than for a grade.

Since, as previously stated, this blog is ungraded, I shall turn my attention to a less tasteful topic: the topic of pornography. Yes, pornography. Given that I have virtually no social life, I have begun to do research relating to the thesis of my research paper -- that thesis being that pornography is art.

This is doubtless going to be a contentious issue. I will readily admit that some pornography, particularly that which is so widely available on the internet, is distasteful, vulgar, unpleasant to look at. In my own travels across the internet, I have come across things that cannot be unseen, however much I desire to unsee these awful... things. Does this discount it as art? Perhaps, but perhaps not.

It would, of course, be quite difficult to have a discussion about pornography without at least touching upon the sensitive moral issues surrounding it. There are myriad arguments surrounding the ethical issues that pornography presents us with, but I will, to the best of my ability attempt to steer clear of these in order to focus in on the aesthetic value of pornography. We shall soon see if this is even possible.

I will, of course, refrain from posting links to pornography within my blog as I delve in to this question. It is far from my intention to offend anyone. I will, however, trace the course of my thesis here as I explore the topic, and quite possibly pose questions that I come across in an attempt to get a wide variety of perspectives on the issue and thus assist in the writing of my paper.

To end, I shall leave a discussion question related to class today: What is the practical value in distinguishing "major" art forms from "minor" art forms, if there is one?