I thought about it a bit, and hell why couldn't porn be considered an art? I know people are scared as hell of sex but you figure it's a joint effort by a slew of people, the ones involved are knowingly resigning a sprig of dignity for the benefit of people to view it, and the line between erotica and porn really almost doesn't exist and can be blurred. I once thought the line was important, but hell maybe it isn't. Hell what if you do a great job drawing people having graphic sex? Is it not art?
Maybe I'm just looking for trouble, but their IS a fine line. I have absolutely no prolem with artistic nudes, In the form of drawing ans sulpture, even 3-D art with the intention to study it or to present the beauty of humanity, but porn is porn and I find it offesnive and it isn't art.
Why would you want to draw people having graphic sex? It's a sacred act and if presented, should be done so in symbolic or non-graphic ways. Contrary to what everyone seems to think nowadays, their are lines that sholdn't be crossed....even in art.
Art is what the artist decides it is. Doesn't mean it can't be shitty of course, but the rule applies. People seem to think if there's an erection or sex or any of that hooooooooorrible naughty business going on it can't be anything but mindless brainless porn. I admit it can be, but it all depends on the intention. As I said though, it being art doesn't make it good art.