Today on Blogcritics
Home » Porn as Fine Art

Porn as Fine Art

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

How to Achieve Instant World Fame

Warning: If porn offends you, even “fine art porn,” do not visit any of the links below.

Terry Richardson is one lucky stiff (pun intended) who becomes famous in the rarified upper crust of the art world while getting his fine art porn exhibited in New York, London, and Paris.

I’d love to see what would happen if one of our Washington, DC area museums or galleries had a Terry Richardson exhibition around here.

In fact, it would make Richardson world famous on a level achieved by the Mapplethorpes and Serranos and Ofilis of the past. I am sure that the exhibition would be most likely shut down by the DC cops, which would bring the ACLU into action and thus Congress would have a collective heart attack and start trying to pass all kind of laws, etc. You can’t buy publicity like that.

Hey, at least we’d get some bi-partisan work!

A Terry Richardson exhibition in Washington, DC would make the Mapplethorpe controversy pale in comparison, of that I am sure.

In fact, this is such a good idea for a local up-and-coming struggling art space: instant fame through fine art porn!

In fact redux, I’ve got a couple of tentative places (cough, cough) in mind that could use the bright angry light of the public’s ire and salacious mentions in the Congressional record.

Washington, DC making an artist world-famous!

Terry baby… call me; I’ll tell you how to get a show in DC.

Powered by

About Lenny Campello

  • http://mike.shelikesit.net mrbenning

    The thing that strikes me odd is his expressions. In one picture he’s giving the rock horns with his hands while being serviced. In another there’s a cameraman standing in the background. If there is art in porn, he’s certainly not going to great lengths to find it.

  • http://www.tantmieux.squarespace.com/ sadi

    in a somewhat similar thing, the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston did a show of the work of Helmut Newton, who may not classify as “hard” as Terry, but nonetheless, was quite controversial,esp. around here where things tend to be rather provincial.

    I happen to really like HElmut Newton, so saw this as a reallly great way for the new director at the time to really make his mark. Unfortunately,though, most of the local media did not agree and thought the show crass and out of line etc erc and yes, even categorized it as “pornography.”

    The thing about that word is that it’s so slippery, no pun intended there. I can’t define porn, but as Judge Black said, “I know it when i see it.” The problem with any definition of porn is that one inevitably winds up having to include such artists as Michelangelo and the like or anyone who has nudes in painting or sculpture that could be considered at all “provocative.” So definining “art” v. “porn” or “porn as art” is a tough thing to begin with because logically you have to first define porn, then you have to define art, and both to me seem difficult tasks to say the least and it would be tough to get a consensus on either one.

    Having worked for the Museum as well as the media, i see the situation from both sides and have to say that in all honesty, i don’t agree with either, though i work for both. I don’t see Helmut Newton as “porn” and i’m not sure what i would all “art” since even Jeffrey Koons classifies as “art” as does Sarah Sze, who is interesting, but again, not really what i personally…

    Tough questions.

    Thanks for posting this. It lead me to other thoughts and was interesting and reminded me of just how slippery and intangible our definitions of such important concepts really can be. That we can hardly define art or pornography seems to me a bit of a problem in some ways, even just legally speaking because we need to be able to define “child porn” for example or “voyeur porn” for prosecutable cases.

    but i agree with Judge Black: I know it when i see it, and i would guess that we all do.

    Cheers, and thanks again for this,

    Sadi (r-p)

    http://www.tantmieux.squarespace.com

  • http://www.johnsampson.hi5.com John Sampson

    Terry’s works is certainly not art, but it is in bad taste whatever it is. Post-modernism is no excuse for parading pornography as art, however liberal the artist might imagine viewers to be.
    The work is not even controversial in a fine art sense.
    Terry merely comes across as trailer trash with a camera looking for a moment in time