I stumble upon this page:
http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/fashion-beaut...By ddging "legal artistic pornography", note the comment section has this:
"""
Nope. There is no difference between art & pornography in art: The distinction is an imaginary one .
I shall now debunk our authors premises, with historical context.
“1.Nudity in art has been an accepted subject since ancient times while pornography is an unacceptable expression which has been developed in later years.”
Nope. This is a common misconception, but images & texts pertaining to the act of sex & sexuality, what our author would argue is porn, has existed in art since mankind first found a way to scrawl rudimentary images having sex.
Later societies constantly pretend that earlier societies didn’t do it, from the erotic frescoes of Rome, to the carvings of India’s Khajuraho Temples, to the 35,000 years old carving from ancient Germany (about 10,000 older that the “Venus of Willendorf”).
“2.Nudity in art is natural and is meant to let the audience appreciate the human body while pornography is intentionally done to arouse sexual feelings in the audience.”
Then you’ve just declared any amount of ancient classical art pieces to be pornography, since many of them were designed to arouse.
” 3.Models of nude artworks pose naturally and do not convey any eroticism while pornographic models have expressions and poses that are erotic and sexually arousing.”
What does one mean pose naturally, any pose one can do with the human body is by definition natural. Such a distinction as you are trying to construct is a distinction without a distinction, because the poses one would use to arouse are as possible by humans as the pose of eating.
” 4.Nudity in art is accepted in society while nudity in pornography is seen as inappropriate and is banned in most societies.”
Which just goes to show the double standard. The subject matter is the subject matter, which is why this tactic has been used for centuries to try to get artwork banned. You can’t show kids this image because it’s porn…. Oh you mean Michelangelo’s David is porn? How is it porn? It has nudity in it.
“5.In some cases, what one person may view as art might be viewed as pornography by another depending upon how the presentation affects the audience.”
Which again shows that the difference between what makes up pornography & what makes up art is an artificial distinction, that only exists in the minds of people who imagine it exists.
Read more: Difference Between Nudity in Art and Pornography | Difference Between http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/fashion-beaut...
"""
My reading is that there is no such thing as artistic pornography.