Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kimmykim
I don't think they have any such delusions about what they are. What they refer to themselves as, for legal reasons, is probably what their attorney advises them to do.
|
Whether or not they actually believe themselves to be an art site, the very fact that they call themselves an art site and can possibly legally defend that claim, makes it abundantly clear that the line between art and porn is not clear.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kimmykim
Of course they are valid arguments, you simply refuse to listen to them because they don't suit your way of looking at the situation. If their product is indeed art, then it should be marketed as art, through the traditional methods of marketing art. I don't see anyone from this board marketing Picassos, Koons, Courbets, or anything along those lines on tgps.
|
Why should art be marketed as art, through the traditional methods of marketing art? I know artists who work with B-movie producers, who design seemingly random street furniture, who sell what are in effect teaspoons through kitschy gimmick stores. Hell, the Real Doll started as what was mostly an artistic endeavor. On the other hand, as I just mentioned in my previous post, porn has made it into art books.
In this postmodernist age, the very act of breaking the traditional codes of the art world has become an important characteristic of art.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kimmykim
In that case, please find me an art gallery or dealer who has listings in a tgp or affiliates from the porn world as a major part of their marketing plan. Commercialism in art is not what this thread is about. You seem to be unable to grasp the concept that is being discussed here. Context. Not art versus non-art. Not the fact that art dealers are in business to make money.
|
First, just because something hasn't been done before or isn't common has nothing whatsoever to do with whether something is art or not. If Giger were to use his works for a science fiction/horror movie, would his works cease being art? Oh wait... he did, and they didn't.
Second, and more importantly, context depends on the distinction between art and non-art. After all, if the context is art, the situation is one entirely different from if the context is non-art. At least, that's what you are saying yourself.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kimmykim
Well, your considerations and aesthetic taste are not the context here. I'm sure that a certain percentage of pizza parlor owners around the world would not consider your taste to be anywhere but in your mouth. To say that putting pictures of underage girls into an "artistic" site containing adult materials and marketed to adults as containing adult materials by affiliates is neither politically correct or socially acceptable. If it were, then this thread would not exist.
|
Considerations and aesthetic taste are the context. After all, the term "art" is a subjective value judgement, rather than an objective observation.
The book I mentioned is a book putting pictures of underage girls into an artistic book containing adult materials and marketed to adults (I doubt the bookstores would sell it to children) as containing adult materials by resellers (bookstores).
Yet, it is entirely politically correct and socially acceptable, as exemplified by it being published by a large art book publisher and being sold in thousands of mainstream bookstores.
But, either way, should art be politically correct and socially acceptable?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kimmykim
The line is very clear, once again, evidenced by the existence of this thread. Your examples are weak and as I mentioned before, they don't do MA any favors.
|
The line is not very clear, evidenced by this thread containing several pages of debate and the lasting existence of MET. If the line were clear, they'd be gone by now.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kimmykim
The idea held by the US government -- which happens to be the country where this board, that sites employees and their processing/hosting is housed -- is changing rapidly to the most conservative its been in the last 50 years right before our eyes. And the chances of the US government bringing such a site before 12 jurors in a jurisdiction of its choice wouldn't bode well for the site.
|
The chances of a site getting prosecuted for linking to a very legal book and posting some images from it seem slim indeed, and I strongly doubt whether any legal case could be made against them for it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kimmykim
IF MA did have these images on their site recently, then they certainly deserve whatever public scorn and worse that they get.
|
They had the images on their site, but they were from an old page. Nevertheless, any public scorn they get will only get them more members.
I do agree with you that they deserve whatever backlash this may cause, but simply because it was a rather bad business decision.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kimmykim
If they did not have them on there, then I would be explaining exactly what was going on very soon to people on this board, since it's such a hot topic at the moment.
|
They already did explain what was going on. Didn't you read the thread?