I recently saw a series of photos showing erotic, sensual romantic love, passionate erotic sex, aggressive controlling sex, and violent domestic abuse with possible rape. Many agreed the content in the last photo illustrated the horrors of domestic violence.
In another venue, I saw someone joking about Michael Jackson's death. That person was chastised by the audience members shouting, "Too soon!"
At what point does culture decide that something is appropriate or has stepped over the line? In the same way, how does culture decide that enough time has passed that we can look at an event more objectively and maybe even with humor?
In a recent photography class, we had an assignment to photograph veterans. During the critique, we all gushed over how stoic, anguished, powerful, heroic, and great each photo was. Some of the subjects were in current service, others older and retired. There were men and women of different races and ages. We all gushed.
At one point the instructor, a Vietnam War veteran, asked, "Is it because of the subject matter that we can not criticize the photos?" He had a point. Were we afraid to criticize the quality of the image, the subject, the composition, and other aspects because we may fear it would reflect our inner beliefs about veterans? Are veterans so revered that we must soften our attitudes out of deference to their sacrifice and service?
Their was an episode of Seinfeld where Jerry and his girlfriend could never find time alone. The only time they could was while at a movie. They made out during Schindler's List. The girlfriend's family found out and were disgusted by the lack of respect for the movie. For a show about nothing, they brought up an interesting point about freedom of thought and speech. Can the holocaust, September 11th, or any other tragedy be joked about? If yes, when, how, why, and by whom?
Now, let us talk about sex. What is too far? We know the old statement about porn, "I know it when I see it." Some see erotica and art, others see porn. I may be a freak, but I've seen erotica that was not art and porn that was.
In a relationship, what is defined as right for the couple may be defined as "too much" or "too far" by culture. Which is right? At what point is bondage abusive? What if I put a blindfold on my lover and then kissed, massaged, tickled, and pleasured her with my mouth? What if I did that same thing but she was blind folded and softly tied up with silk bows? What if I pinned her arms under my hands? What if they were leather straps? What if I was pinching? What if she wanted and desired this? At what point does the transfer of power in a relationship, sexual or not, constitute abuse? Let us ask the same questions if the roles were reversed and I was the submissive one? Is it OK if the submissive is male?
This then brings up the question, why does the submissive partner want to be treated like this? What is his/her history? If their was prior abuse, does that make it absolutely wrong to act on it? If there was no abuse, just curiosity and desire, does that make it right?
Let us look at the roles of the stripper and the client. Men going to a strip club are seen as "dogs" at the worst and "shallow" at the least. Bachelor parties with strippers are looked down upon, but are understood as a "traditional objectification of women" right of passage. Married guys going once, or continually to strip clubs are leches and unfaithful.
How about the reverse? What are the perceptions of women seeing male strippers? How about the bachelorette party? Married women going to see the Chippendale dancers? Some say it is wrong and disgusting. Others celebrate that women can finally celebrate their sexuality and desires. It brings equality to the misogynistic history of the men going to see strippers. At that point though, isn't it misanthropic?
I am a libertarian on most of these issues. What floats your equally accepted and desired boats is your business. That is true for most things, but I have to take issue when we delve into the reasons we desire such things. At that point, when is it OK to go too far or when is it too soon or soon enough to go into taboo areas?
I've posted a gamut of photos here, one mine, most not. Some may seem tame and some may be defined as violent or abusive. At which point did they cross the line? I know I have my own definitions for that line, but how do we as a society decide where to put that line?
I need to wake up a bit before I tackle this one. I will be back after I have some more tea...
ReplyDeleteAlright, I'm partially awake.
ReplyDeleteYour question: "What is too far, or too soon?" is as vague a question as, What is art and what is porn?, or What is art and what is crap?
Each of us has a set idea in our heads.
One must go back to the basics. If it is created by someone to spark an interest, be that a good or bad interest, it becomes art. I don't seperate art from porn. I have my own ideas about what I consider porn, but is also art. So I take things, whether I like them or not as being art. But there is poor art as well. Art does not cease to be because it was done poorly, it just makes it bad art. And as an artist I feel that other artists have the right to create anything they want. There should be no limits set on what is too far as long as others are not hurt in the process. If you want to create an image of a woman being raped (and she is not actually being raped) go for it. It is not hurting anyone. If some person thinks it is terrible, they don't have to look at it.
Too soon?
Well, you can't hurt Michael Jackson's reputation so I say there can't be too soon with that one. That may have been a poor example, but once again the creator of a joke is somewhat of an artist also and why should that person be put under restrictions. There were more jokes around my hometown about Michael Jackson years before he was dead than there is now, so why should we have a moment of silence just because he died?
If you are going to say it is too soon, or too far, you are putting a restriction on something based on what someone else thinks is too soon or too far and that makes no sense to me. If you want to put a self restriction on your work as the artist based on your own feelings, then pick what is comfortable for you.
And to hell with what others think.
Maybe I didn't have enough tea...
Dave S said: If you want to put a self restriction on your work as the artist based on your own feelings, then pick what is comfortable for you.
ReplyDeleteAnd to hell with what others think.
I say: Amen to that!
We all have to go with what feels right to us. If doing something makes me feel sick, I know it's wrong.
Morality is mandated by "society"; ethics are individually shaped. What you're really demarcating is morality vs. ethics. I believe in ethics as my final decider.
An example of one person's gone rampant opinion imposed upon others is the dialogue going on in the comments at Figures of Grace, the Beard post. Take a look and see what I mean! And this is artist vs. artist, photographer vs. photographer.