You must understand that there is a difference from art that displays the sensuality of the subject, whether it be an adult woman or a child, and art that is pornographic in the sense that it debases the subject by relegating its nature to a mere existence as a sex object in which any human character is stripped of dignity. I for one find no danger or disgust in the former, but much in the latter. Simply the fact that a nude child with overtones of sensuality would be attractive to a pedophile doesn't make such a painting pedophilic or pornographic. You seem to pooh pooh the intent of the artist, while ignoring that divining the artists' intent isn't merely an esoteric endeavor separated from the actual artwork, but something which forms the particular piece of art and gives its character. If a creator of an image intended an image to be pornogrpahic, it would be apparent that this was true merely by looking at a picture of an image. There will always of course be people who pose a disagreement with you on an artist's intent, but usually the true intent can be found by the individuals disecting and deconstructing their own perceptions and observations of the image -- in order to deterime if their opinion of it being it debasing has merit or is merely rooted in a knee-jerk reaction to the subject matter due to a particular cultural attitude.
Perhaps this discussion of sensuality versus pornography in art provides me the perfect opportunity for detouring into a general discussion about what I find to be an absurd treatment of sexuality and nudity in today's culture. Parents and creators of entertainment or art are consciously working to prevent children from seeing a person that is declothed, for fear that a child's knowledge that how a person looks before he is dressed is somehow "corrupting" and harmful. The depiction of a nude person on a television network would be considered unthinkable, because our perceptions that nudity somehow taints a child's innocence. Yet at the same time, there is a regular portrayal on network television of rampant and carefree sexuality -- you will often see a couple having sexual intercourse underneath the protective covers of a bed blanket or a young attractive woman in skimpy underwear or a bathing suit in which her apparel is designed for the sole purpose of people being aroused and feeling a sexual impulse towards her. Isn't it a fair question to ask which is closer to pornography and which is more harmful to the upbringing of children: showing how a person looks without clothes, or displaying people in a wanton (and sometimes debasing) glorification of sexuality? The fact that nudity is immediately considered a better target for censoring demonstrates the absurd and backwards the notion of sexuality is to postmodern culture. The same kind of absurdity can also be found with regards to the treatment of foul language and violence. For example, while we work to obscure the mention of words that have found a place in our culture's official catalogue of inappropriate words (ie, "the f-word", "the a-word", etc), any derisive, insulting, or indignant language that doesn't include a word from this list of 'bad words' is never considered inappropriate in any manner.
I might add that the Victorians -- who supposedly were prudes who repressed all sexuality in their era -- had a more healthy and rational attitude towards these matters. Depictions of nudity or even sexuality were never questioned as being inappropriate in art and were never attacked as being indecent or obscene in themselves. It was only depictions of nudity that were considered "unwholesome" in that they displayed the figure as a sexual object that was considered in this manner. Art that displayed eroticism was enjoyed by Victorians, but not art that displayed sexuality in a manner that would be considered "filthy" or debasing -- such as portrayals of prostitution, deflowering, or orgasmic expressions.
I have absolutely no problem with children viewing the naked body; it is the messages in the treatment of sexuality that I am concerned about. I find myself routinely snickering at discussions of nudity or portrayals of sexuality that do not have such a rational understanding about the subject matter.
-- Brian Shapiro
