Art and Porn

So the other day in my 19^th Century Philosophy class, two of my classmates had a presentation they'd done together that included stripping nuns. Ok, so they weren't real nuns, just women dressed up like nuns doing a VERY erotic belly dance (and as much as I'd love to link the video, I haven't for the life of me been able to find it on YouTube).

This sparked off a debate about what is art and what is porn. I won't get into that argument here (for the record, I think it all depends on intent and personal taste), but it got me thinking, can something be both porn and art at the same time?

Consider Titian. A great (if not the greatest) Venetian painter of the 1500's, Titian is one of my heroes mainly because he painted right up until (literally I believe) the day he died. When he started to go blind from old age, he threw out his paint brushes and painted with his fingers. And his work didn't suffer! How bad ass is that?

Now a short and simplified art history lecture for those not in the know, before I stop drooling and come to my point: The Renaissance painters had a big kick about returning to classical references for inspiration and they loved them a naked woman. Higher-up clergy were still big patrons, which is why you see a lot of Madonnas (with and without child), but in reverence to the Greeks and Romans, almost any woman painted that wasn't the Virgin Mary of a specific portrait was a Venus.

Back to Titian. Most painters' Venuses were, as a reflection of the times, modest. See Botticelli's The Birth of Venus. Note how eager she is to cover up all her girly bits, even with the nymph right there with a robe.

Now let's look at Titian's most famous Venus, Venus of Urbino.

Well would you look at that? She's not hiding anything, is she? And she doesn't exactly look displeased either...

I understand this probably isn't getting anyone's rocks off (well, other than mine...but I really like art), but in its day it was considered pornographic.

And this isn't just a one-shot “dirty” picture. Titian had a thing for erotica. Venus of Adonis:

“Look honey, I'd love to fornicate some more, but I have to go off to war now!”

For the mindset of society when it was painted, it's porn. But is it art too? Obviously Titian thought so (but pornographers are always claiming it's art, aren't they?). We think so now, and surely it must have been considered art in its time because it was known and shown.

So what does Titian show us? That something can be intended to be beautiful and graceful and to stimulate a physical, sexual response at the same time? Or does he show us that the Ren folk were prudes? Or both?

In the case of the stripping nuns, I think the goal was to be both. And I think they achieved that goal. It was stimulating, but it also was a beautiful commentary on female sexuality and religion.

But I'd really like to start a discussion on this, so what do you think: Is there art and there's porn, and never shall the two meet? Or can they come together?