HARDCORE?

Aug 14, 20157 min read

Deviation Actions

Published: Aug 14, 2015

11.3K Views

...or Art.

I remember the very first time I saw art that wowed me. I was very young. It was in a text book for Homer's Iliad and Odyssey.. simple drawn lines of beautiful, virile men. I was mesmerized, excited, aroused. All the intellectual and visceral things that art is supposed to do for us because it prompted me to read the amazing adventures of the things I saw in the illustrations.. Art is an expression, an extension of human emotion. It's supposed to be both simple and complex, thought-provoking, stimulating. Its born from reality but can transcend to fantasy. Music for the eyes, food for the soul. It should have no barriers or restrictions. I've often thought that an Art critic was a misnomer..because there should be no critique of someone's personal expression. To try to judge another persons vision only indicates another persons lack of it. So it doesn't appeal to you, that's fine... your judgment shouldn't be an influence on another individual...or the essence of freedom of expression is entirely mute.( just my own thoughts as an artist so you can take or leave those as well.)

My own attitude was slowly nurtured over time because I was raised in a fundamentalist Christian house where sex, even simple nakedness like taking off one's shirt was viewed as sinful and dirty. The repression I experienced was brutal, so everything I learned was in secret, and hidden. All the while, in my heart and especially in my mind, I felt this to be sick and wrong.(I could feel this in spite of what was being drummed into my head from a pulpit!) I like to say that my instincts rebelled against the real vulgarity which was sexual repression.

When I finally ran away from home, and the world opened up to me as it really was, and not the lie that religion had forced upon me, my own curiosity and creativity soared. That has never waned.

As I began exploring my own artistic ambitions I still felt there were barriers or restrictions on what was deemed as acceptable art.. and what was not. Not my restrictions or rules, mind you, but what society seemed to have laid down. You can show this, but you can't show that. This is art, but this is not. The line is drawn between what is called art, and what is called pornography. So to be acceptable, we as artists are supposed to "confine" our expression within these guidelines.

Does that make sense to you? Well, it sure didn't to me. Rules to art? The very nature of art is that it has no rules. But to pursue my wayfaring spirit I did my photography inside those guidelines. Until I made the decision to shoot male/male romance photos. I knew right from the starting gate that I was going in a direction that would have the critics snarling at me saying that what I was doing was obscene, unnatural, pornography and blah blah blah. But in my head..and in my heart..I knew that was bullshit. With time..of course, that viewpoint has modified. Now even Calvin Klein uses it to advertise his line of clothes. So what used to be obscene...is no longer. So you see, perspectives DO change.

Which made me think... why is pornography not considered acceptable art? You know sexually explicit art has been in every culture since the beginning of time.The Kama Sutra for example. In spite of how long graphic depictions of human sexuality have been with us, they've somehow been shelved in darkness, whispered about or disregarded as legitimate art. Why? Remember what Art is supposed to be? An expression, an extension of human emotion; complex, thought-provoking and yes... STIMULATING. Why then, if it qualifies for all the things that make Art what it is... is it not considered another form of Art?

The more I began shooting romance photos and keeping those restrictions enforced, the less passion I noticed in my shots. Oh, others might not have noticed it, but I did. The body language was stilted, the eye contact stony, the interaction forced...and the photo,( my art), was missing the passion that made it stimulating. The models I shot were reacting to my forced "cutting off" points. I wouldn't let them get carried away - be themselves. Something very unnatural was happening in my attempt to create art by adhering to these arcane and archaic rules. I discovered the difference by accident. I'd left two models during a shoot to download the photos I'd taken. When I returned, their own passion had carried them away and they were going at it... still in the same set and same props. I started snapping away. The scene was intensely sexual and very graphic, but they didn't mind my presence..if they noticed it at all... and when I downloaded the pictures and compared them to the ones I had taken previously... it was daylight and dark. I found the real art in their passion. The difference wasn't simply amazing.. it practically stood out three-d in the photos.

After that I changed my tactics. Before I even began a shoot I told the models what the scene was I wanted to do... then I left them alone for half an hour to "practice" it before I returned with my camera. My ability to express my art was enhanced the moment I allowed the models to express their true selves physically and emotionally. The people who see my work now tell me how it affects them.. and what I hear..is exactly what I felt when I first saw those illustrations many years ago that set me on my own path.

Now the truth is, because we still have those same idiotic restrictions of what qualifies as art and what's not, a lot of what I've shot cannot be seen.. yet. I've continued shooting through complete sex acts, and have cropped many of the pictures so you can only see what I saw when I allowed this: the intense expressions, the body language, that indefinable but tangible essence of real emotion that leaps out of a photo that says.. this is real.. And you can feel it. It simply does not exist with posed photos. And no, I don't consider this a secret to great photography. It's always been there and we've always been attracted to it..but would never admit it because we all have the same dirty little secret... we watch porn.

I will probably have other photographers get on their high horse to chastise me for this observation.. but I believe porn to be another form of art. A very civilized, very necessary form of it. Why? because, like Picasso or Rembrandt, it can appeal to all tastes and desires and intellects. It can be refined or crude, but as long as it serves to mentally or physically stimulate us... it qualifies within the context of the definition. It is our fantasy, an extension of our personality and can excite and enthrall. Why would a painting of an old Master in a museum portraying torture and bloodletting be considered less obscene than seeing someone have a glorious orgasm? I know which one I'd rather see and which one would fill me with more inspiration and fulfill me as a human being.

Thankfully with new social medias that allow more freedom of expression, artists like myself are now capable to give examples of where art can take us when we take off the freaking restraints. Sex is beautiful.. people relating to each other during sex is beautiful.. in all its forms. It's time we really throw open the doors and allow ourselves to be real humans.. and allow our art to reflect that! I have a feeling another label is going to change...