Be honest, she's just angry there aren't more properly exposed butts floating around out there in webcomic land.
Well she has a point
Have you ever considered just going fuck it and doing a serious NSFW comic
Because there are some great ones out there like Oglaf or Chester 5000 XYV and I bet you could pull one off
I like jerkcity and hate oglaf
No fault of mine
Oglaf is...certainly different.
The nudity/sex doesnt bother me, and nor do i read it just to see naked women. (In oglafs case your more likely to see naked men anyway which isnt my thing). I just dont get the nudity taboo. Its not like im a nudist or have no modesty, I dont think people should walk around naked all the time, however I don't see how its something to be ashamed of putting into a story via tv or movie or comic. Nor do i get why that suddenly makes the story pornagraphic no matter how tasteful it is done.
There's no real line in my opinion. There are comics out there which are obviously drawn for the author's fantasies. There are others drawn as stories. There are also some fantastic webcomics that have a great story, but you know what the author enjoys drawing ladies so they're "titillating". So? Does it even matter which sense we titillate? Does poking the base instincts of revenge or fear differ from desire or sexuality?
Your webcomic better boil down to one thing: Keep. Me. Interested.
That's incredibly stupid, not to mention lacking in imagination. I'll agree that it's easy for porn to be vapid and meaningless since a lot of its audience doesn't care about story or characters or any kind of artistic merit, so a lot of porn doesn't even bother with that stuff, but to say that all pornography is inherently boring and vapid and meaningless, no matter what? That's total bullshit.
Just because the main aim of porn is to titillate doesn't mean that every other aspect of a work of pornography loses its merit. Rolo mentioned Chester 5000 XYV by Jess Fink. That's definitely pornographic, but it is not lacking in artistic merit. The art itself is quite good, so there's merit there, and the story is engaging and clear despite lacking dialogue of any kind. The pornographic aspects of it are also well done and actually help further the story. Dismissing it just because it's porn (it is porn and not just a story with sex in it) is ridiculous and definitely just you being a prude. Not necessarily an american prude, because there's prudes all over, but still just a silly goose of a prude, I'm sorry.
It's hard to do serious pornographic stories, I'll give you that. Probably not impossible, but pretty difficult. Most of my favourite porn is also hilarious as a result. Slipshine is a good site for that. Probably the majority of their stuff is also really, really funny. It's easier to make jokes during sex than it is to talk about serious, life-changing shit and philosophy, and comedy has artistic merit, so a pornographic comedy or a comedic porn can have artistic merit, too.
Art is, for a large part, about the artist trying to get something across or to elicit a response in the observer, emotional or physical or whatever. It's not a super exact definition, but it's art, so an exact definition is impossible. But to arbitrarily dictate what kinds of intended responses have merit and which don't is prudish snobbery and a clear sign that you haven't really thought this through very well.
It's perfectly all right if you dislike pornography, or if you find pornography too distracting for whatever reason to be able to focus any other possible aspects of a thing (this isn't intended to be a joke or anything, I don't mean to imply tat you're too busy tugging it to pay attention). All of that's fine. But to say that it's impossible for pornography of any kind to have any greater artistic merit simply by virtue of it being pornography? That's a really stupid thing to say because it's imposing arbitrary limits on what art is, which is impossible, because it's subjective.
b-b-but
Sex is gross!!!
this has absolutely nothing to do with anything that I said, but please, continue being an ass.
To be fair you haven't actually given us anything to work with beyond "porn can't be art because I arbitrarily decided this"
Be honest, she's just angry there aren't more properly exposed butts floating around out there in webcomic land.
Well she has a point
Have you ever considered just going fuck it and doing a serious NSFW comic
Because there are some great ones out there like Oglaf or Chester 5000 XYV and I bet you could pull one off
I like jerkcity and hate oglaf
No fault of mine
Oglaf is...certainly different.
The nudity/sex doesnt bother me, and nor do i read it just to see naked women. (In oglafs case your more likely to see naked men anyway which isnt my thing). I just dont get the nudity taboo. Its not like im a nudist or have no modesty, I dont think people should walk around naked all the time, however I don't see how its something to be ashamed of putting into a story via tv or movie or comic. Nor do i get why that suddenly makes the story pornagraphic no matter how tasteful it is done.
Oglaf's teenage bent on sex is not what appalls me or I wouldn't be reading Jerkcity.
That's incredibly stupid, not to mention lacking in imagination. I'll agree that it's easy for porn to be vapid and meaningless since a lot of its audience doesn't care about story or characters or any kind of artistic merit, so a lot of porn doesn't even bother with that stuff, but to say that all pornography is inherently boring and vapid and meaningless, no matter what? That's total bullshit.
Just because the main aim of porn is to titillate doesn't mean that every other aspect of a work of pornography loses its merit. Rolo mentioned Chester 5000 XYV by Jess Fink. That's definitely pornographic, but it is not lacking in artistic merit. The art itself is quite good, so there's merit there, and the story is engaging and clear despite lacking dialogue of any kind. The pornographic aspects of it are also well done and actually help further the story. Dismissing it just because it's porn (it is porn and not just a story with sex in it) is ridiculous and definitely just you being a prude. Not necessarily an american prude, because there's prudes all over, but still just a silly goose of a prude, I'm sorry.
It's hard to do serious pornographic stories, I'll give you that. Probably not impossible, but pretty difficult. Most of my favourite porn is also hilarious as a result. Slipshine is a good site for that. Probably the majority of their stuff is also really, really funny. It's easier to make jokes during sex than it is to talk about serious, life-changing shit and philosophy, and comedy has artistic merit, so a pornographic comedy or a comedic porn can have artistic merit, too.
Art is, for a large part, about the artist trying to get something across or to elicit a response in the observer, emotional or physical or whatever. It's not a super exact definition, but it's art, so an exact definition is impossible. But to arbitrarily dictate what kinds of intended responses have merit and which don't is prudish snobbery and a clear sign that you haven't really thought this through very well.
It's perfectly all right if you dislike pornography, or if you find pornography too distracting for whatever reason to be able to focus any other possible aspects of a thing (this isn't intended to be a joke or anything, I don't mean to imply tat you're too busy tugging it to pay attention). All of that's fine. But to say that it's impossible for pornography of any kind to have any greater artistic merit simply by virtue of it being pornography? That's a really stupid thing to say because it's imposing arbitrary limits on what art is, which is impossible, because it's subjective.
b-b-but
Sex is gross!!!
this has absolutely nothing to do with anything that I said, but please, continue being an ass.
To be fair you haven't actually given us anything to work with beyond "porn can't be art because I arbitrarily decided this"
Pretty much.
I mean, if you define pornography/obscenity as that which is without artistic merit, then axiomatically porn is without merit.
But there are plenty of works which focus explicitly on sex, which a casual observer would probably identify as pornography, and which do have merit in the eyes of many people.
That's incredibly stupid, not to mention lacking in imagination. I'll agree that it's easy for porn to be vapid and meaningless since a lot of its audience doesn't care about story or characters or any kind of artistic merit, so a lot of porn doesn't even bother with that stuff, but to say that all pornography is inherently boring and vapid and meaningless, no matter what? That's total bullshit.
Just because the main aim of porn is to titillate doesn't mean that every other aspect of a work of pornography loses its merit. Rolo mentioned Chester 5000 XYV by Jess Fink. That's definitely pornographic, but it is not lacking in artistic merit. The art itself is quite good, so there's merit there, and the story is engaging and clear despite lacking dialogue of any kind. The pornographic aspects of it are also well done and actually help further the story. Dismissing it just because it's porn (it is porn and not just a story with sex in it) is ridiculous and definitely just you being a prude. Not necessarily an american prude, because there's prudes all over, but still just a silly goose of a prude, I'm sorry.
It's hard to do serious pornographic stories, I'll give you that. Probably not impossible, but pretty difficult. Most of my favourite porn is also hilarious as a result. Slipshine is a good site for that. Probably the majority of their stuff is also really, really funny. It's easier to make jokes during sex than it is to talk about serious, life-changing shit and philosophy, and comedy has artistic merit, so a pornographic comedy or a comedic porn can have artistic merit, too.
Art is, for a large part, about the artist trying to get something across or to elicit a response in the observer, emotional or physical or whatever. It's not a super exact definition, but it's art, so an exact definition is impossible. But to arbitrarily dictate what kinds of intended responses have merit and which don't is prudish snobbery and a clear sign that you haven't really thought this through very well.
It's perfectly all right if you dislike pornography, or if you find pornography too distracting for whatever reason to be able to focus any other possible aspects of a thing (this isn't intended to be a joke or anything, I don't mean to imply tat you're too busy tugging it to pay attention). All of that's fine. But to say that it's impossible for pornography of any kind to have any greater artistic merit simply by virtue of it being pornography? That's a really stupid thing to say because it's imposing arbitrary limits on what art is, which is impossible, because it's subjective.
b-b-but
Sex is gross!!!
this has absolutely nothing to do with anything that I said, but please, continue being an ass.
To be fair you haven't actually given us anything to work with beyond "porn can't be art because I arbitrarily decided this"
I didn't go further because I'm not going to get into a huge long winded argument, and listen to you rail for pages against my obvious stupidity and lack of artistic knowledge. Someone mentioned porn comics and whether they could do something more beneficial. I opined that I, specifically me, believe that things that are either completely gratuitously violent or pornographic don't have much artistic or literary merit.
0
Clint EastwoodMy baby's in there someplaceShe crawled right inRegistered Userregular
Posts
Oglaf is...certainly different.
The nudity/sex doesnt bother me, and nor do i read it just to see naked women. (In oglafs case your more likely to see naked men anyway which isnt my thing). I just dont get the nudity taboo. Its not like im a nudist or have no modesty, I dont think people should walk around naked all the time, however I don't see how its something to be ashamed of putting into a story via tv or movie or comic. Nor do i get why that suddenly makes the story pornagraphic no matter how tasteful it is done.
Your webcomic better boil down to one thing: Keep. Me. Interested.
To be fair you haven't actually given us anything to work with beyond "porn can't be art because I arbitrarily decided this"
Oglaf's teenage bent on sex is not what appalls me or I wouldn't be reading Jerkcity.
I just think Oglaf is unfunny.
in b4 STOP NOT LIKING WHAT I LIKE
Pretty much.
I mean, if you define pornography/obscenity as that which is without artistic merit, then axiomatically porn is without merit.
But there are plenty of works which focus explicitly on sex, which a casual observer would probably identify as pornography, and which do have merit in the eyes of many people.
GoFund The Portland Trans Pride March, or Show It To People, or Else!
Short Bus
based god liked oglaf
what if Skrillex liked oglaf
I laughed I straight do not give a fuck
godwin's law, that's what
why don't you call it The Professor's Law
you can draw my webcomic based god
if only 8->
I didn't go further because I'm not going to get into a huge long winded argument, and listen to you rail for pages against my obvious stupidity and lack of artistic knowledge. Someone mentioned porn comics and whether they could do something more beneficial. I opined that I, specifically me, believe that things that are either completely gratuitously violent or pornographic don't have much artistic or literary merit.
i love you bahamutZERO
That's the one!
Also, you can keep your Oglaf and your Chester. The pinnacle of art, erotica, and humor was reached long, long ago.
And to this, we give praise to Sexy Losers.