University Art Student to Lose His ‘Anal Virginity’ in Public

[Novaheart]

Aside from the various arguments for and against gay sex, does it strike anyone else as wrong that this student appears to be doing this as a project for his art school, that it's a "performance art" piece that he may get college credit for?

Compared to what? Art is a funny thing, it's hard to define it or rank it. Andy Warhol wasn't a great technician, but many would argue he was a great artist. Dali was a master of an artform which would eventually be taken over by computers, but his vision has probably inspired a lot of Sci-fi landscapes and the creation of the computer programs which can generate our surrealist images of imaginary outer space.

There was a time when Art School in college meant learning to reproduce the "greatness" of past artists, composers, writers, designers. Do I think that getting fucked on stage is a challenge or a step up from that? No. However, at the same time I realize that while we all know the name of the man who painted Mona Lisa, somebody painted the art we see on the walls of motels, restaurants, doctor offices, etc...

[Odysseus]

I am not getting into the absurdity of this stunt but your reasoning in the last sentence doesn't really hold up. It's like saying because Bouguereau's Nymphs and Satyr is considered art, it legitimizes furrie porn.

Uh, no.



Bouguereau's Nymphs and Satyr is a great painting, independent of the subject matter. Art can be erotic, and erotica can be artistic. The art is in the execution, the technical skill and the sheer beauty of the image. A great drawing or painting of the act that is going to be carried out by the student in the OP might qualify as art, but simply having sex onstage is no more art than it is when it's done at a peep show; this project is simply graphic sex, without any meaning beyond alleged shock value.

Compared to what? Art is a funny thing, it's hard to define it or rank it. Andy Warhol wasn't a great technician, but many would argue he was a great artist. Dali was a master of an artform which would eventually be taken over by computers, but his vision has probably inspired a lot of Sci-fi landscapes and the creation of the computer programs which can generate our surrealist images of imaginary outer space.

There was a time when Art School in college meant learning to reproduce the "greatness" of past artists, composers, writers, designers. Do I think that getting fucked on stage is a challenge or a step up from that? No. However, at the same time I realize that while we all know the name of the man who painted Mona Lisa, somebody painted the art we see on the walls of motels, restaurants, doctor offices, etc...

Art instruction meant learning the techniques of the past in order to advance the art of the present. Today, the techniques of the past are abandoned as too difficult by those who lack the discipline to learn them. Those who mastered those techniques produced great images while improving on what they had learned. Those who rebelled against them produced the various modern art movements whose sole criteria was often the absence of anything resembling talent.

Art is hard to define, but that doesn't mean that anything is art. Arroyo attempts to make the case that the subject matter of Bouguereau's Nymphs and Satyr could be construed as pornographic, and while some might argue that, there is no denying that it is also a work of great technical skill, and that it communicates more than just a desire to get down with a furry. In this case, there is no technique to master, it's simply a sex act, something that literally anyone can do, provided they are willing to abase themselves. It's not art, it's posturing, and the idea that this "student" should be given credit for something that takes no intellectual effort is sad and repellent.

[Novaheart]

"The future of art is photography" Andy Warhol

[Arroyo_Doble]

"The future of art is photography" Andy Warhol

He was wrong.

[Novaheart]

He was wrong.

Show me some recent painting that isn't derivative or boring.

[Odysseus]

Show me some recent painting that isn't derivative or boring.

Boredom is in the eye of the beholder, and usually denotes a lack of imagination. However, here are some examples from one of my former teachers.

[NJCardFan]

He was wrong.

Warhol is a nut but he isn't wrong. He isn't right either. Comparing art forms like painting or photography is like comparing baseball to football. It's a matter of taste as well as there's nothing wrong with liking both. I, personally, like paintings slightly better than photography only because it takes far more talent to paint than to point a camera at something and shoot it.

[Novaheart]

Boredom is in the eye of the beholder, and usually denotes a lack of imagination. However, here are some examples from one of my former teachers.

I admire the skill, but the subject matter leaves me flat.

[Odysseus]

I admire the skill, but the subject matter leaves me flat.

That's a purely subjective reaction. The ability to breathe life into canvas and paint is nothing short of miraculous. If that leaves you flat, it's because your soul was flat to begin with.

Sic hacer pace, para bellum.
Sent from my android.

[Arroyo_Doble]

Okay. The last Bouguereau, I promise.