Nigel Allan
Member
In this post, copied from the thread on Favorite Photographers, here, Nigel makes a point that all art might be considered porn! That, seemingly simplistic quip to a fellow in a barbershop, has some value for our consideration. ADK
It is so long since I looked at others' work I honestly can't recall a lot of them. Most of my photography books have been boxed and left in the attic for years since we currently don't have the room to display them (heresy I know), but if I had to list a few off the top of my head they would be, in no particular order:
1) David Bailey
2) Robert Mapplethorpe
3) Henri Cartier-Bresson
4) Helmut Newton
5) Richard Avedon
6) Don McCullin or almost anyone from Magnum
7) Almost anyone who has ever been published in National Geographic
I was chatting about this the other while getting my hair cut. My hairdresser is very artistically and visually literate and has many of the same books in his waiting area for people to read. He saw me refreshing my memory of some of the iconic images of Helmut Newton and asked me this question about Newton's work,
"Is it art or is it pornography?"
Without blinking I replied that in my view all art is pornography since it invites (nay, demands) you to become a voyeur and derive some stimulation from it (sexual or otherwise is not the issue here).
Others might disagree due to their definitions or even socially derived prejudices around the words pornography and art.
One man's meat is another man's porno.
This could serve as the theme for a new discussion or even themed photo thread
It is so long since I looked at others' work I honestly can't recall a lot of them. Most of my photography books have been boxed and left in the attic for years since we currently don't have the room to display them (heresy I know), but if I had to list a few off the top of my head they would be, in no particular order:
1) David Bailey
2) Robert Mapplethorpe
3) Henri Cartier-Bresson
4) Helmut Newton
5) Richard Avedon
6) Don McCullin or almost anyone from Magnum
7) Almost anyone who has ever been published in National Geographic
I was chatting about this the other while getting my hair cut. My hairdresser is very artistically and visually literate and has many of the same books in his waiting area for people to read. He saw me refreshing my memory of some of the iconic images of Helmut Newton and asked me this question about Newton's work,
"Is it art or is it pornography?"
Without blinking I replied that in my view all art is pornography since it invites (nay, demands) you to become a voyeur and derive some stimulation from it (sexual or otherwise is not the issue here).
Others might disagree due to their definitions or even socially derived prejudices around the words pornography and art.
One man's meat is another man's porno.
This could serve as the theme for a new discussion or even themed photo thread
Last edited by a moderator: