I've come to you today to talk about a very frustrating issue: the current state of pornography in modern culture. It's pretty sad when a person as sex-positive and pro-porn as I am can't stay interested while watching porn. I mean, take any television series with a premise that intrigues me, and I could sit down and watch several hour-long episodes in a row - because the story keeps me interested. But after an hour of, say, Girls Gone Wild, I'm plain bored. And it's not that the porn isn't hot and exciting. But it's just sex. And how long can just sex keep an intellectual guy like me stimulated?
This is why I want more from my porn. But there's a problem, because a lot of people believe that porn should remain separated from the rest of our entertainment media. This is, incidentally, a great example of the compartmentalization of sex that I've written about before. The prevailing opinion (from the non-shamelessly perverted majority) on erotic scenes in non-pornographic movies is that they should be "tasteful" which is to say merely suggestive and never explicit. Why? Because, if a person wants porn, they'll seek out porn.
And that's precisely the purpose for porn. Not to tell stories that involve human sexuality, but specifically to turn people on and then get them off, as concisely as possible. And I have to admit, there is a place for media like that. Sometimes, you're just really horny, you've got noone to get it on with, and you need something to stimulate you. But is that all media depictions of human sexuality are good for? It sounds to me like a symptom of the mindset that sex is only good for one thing. It's not worth intellectual discussion. It's not worth artistic consideration. And it should stay well away from all non-"sex ghetto" parts of daily life.
Sometimes, you have people who try to make porn with a plot. In fairness, sometimes it works really well (please read Alan Moore's Lost Girls if you like good porn with plot). But a lot of it is just really bad. And it contributes to the stereotype that porn with plot is terrible, and reinforces many people's belief that porn has one function, and telling a story is not part of that. On the other side of the divide, you have professionals who are telling really fantastic stories, but they almost always avoid bringing sex into the story. And when they do, it's always "tasteful" and "suggestive", and never explicit. (George R.R. Martin, author of Game of Thrones, is one notable exception to this rule).
What, exactly, is wrong with including explicit depictions of sex in mainstream entertainment - not even gratuitously, but where it serves the story, like in romances, for example? And not just sex, either, but explicit nudity? Unfortunately, the barriers to doing so are formidable, and have much to credit our modern taboo on sex for. Many people are happy to keep sexuality marginalized, but I fear that it does us (as a species of sexual organisms) more harm than good. And one of the symptoms is really crappy porn that can't hold your interest.
Look, in my life, sex is not simply a disconnected act that occurs behind closed doors and is not talked about outside the bedroom. And I'm not just talking about sexual intercourse. I'm talking also about sexuality - sexual desire and sexual orientation - sensuality, and eroticism. Sex is a part of life - and an important one - and I believe in the importance of integrating sex into other aspects of one's life. Thus, when telling a story about people, it makes sense that sex may come up as a topic with real importance (and not just to titillate the audience). And, because I do not fear and shy away from sex, I don't see what's wrong with depicting that sexuality explicitly.
Even if this formula for fictional entertainment is not suitable for widespread audiences (and obviously it won't be, so long as taboo and negativity prevails), I do believe it has its place. We are plagued with a scarcity of really good erotic entertainment - and here, maybe an appropriate distinction between pornography and erotica can actually be made. It's not that porn is more explicit than erotica, but that porn is produced solely for the purpose of getting people off, whereas erotica is more like other kinds of entertainment, but it does not shy away from approaching the subject of sex, and does not try to refrain from titillating its audience, but is concerned first and foremost with telling a good story, or appealing to other aspects of a person's interest beyond the simple goal of arousal to orgasm.
And, really, that's the definition I've been using for my photography all along. Photos tell stories in a much different way than narratives do. But putting the story-telling aspect aside, I have never shied away from being "too explicit" in the service of my erotic photography, because I know it is not a coy attitude toward sexuality that sets my art apart from simple pornography, it is the sensitive approach I use to depict my subject - whether it is the sensual appeal of nudity, or the full-scale titillation of sexual intercourse - with consideration to all the artistic elements that come together to form a beautiful and artistic (and not just sexy) picture. And I think the very same approach could be applied to the production of pornographic videos.
Obviously, it would require a different mindset - the goal being to make a great product, not to bring the audience to orgasm - but the result would be far more interesting, and I think it would serve to promote a healthier attitude toward sex, that integrates it back into the great multitude of facets of everyday life, liberating it from marginalization and helping to shed its stigma. Sex is a beautiful thing, and a regular part of life - like the sunrise; it is not a tool brought out of the woodshed only for the purpose of making people cum.
