Zaaz: I want to make a shout out to all of you who support the idea that drawn porn = art. The whole concept behind artwork is that it’s using a medium to express thoughts and emotions for others to enjoy. For you to say that because something has been drawn, that it makes it art is a cyclical argument. What does a donkey screwing a chicken that’s giving a dog a blowjob express artistically?

You, the porn artist, are the house painter of the art world. A house painter and an artistic painter both paint things. Hell, they might both pain houses. Both are skilled individuals in the craft of painting. The only difference between the house painter and the artistic painter is expression and meaning. The artistic painter has something to say that is apparent through their work. They’re able to convey an entire conversation through a single image. The house painter, although skilled, admired, and paid for their work, lack that artistic ability of concept conveyance.

The artist who draws solely for the sake of drawing pornography, although skilled, is not a master of expression. They are only masters of taking an easy and appeasing path to boost their own popularity, not particularly caring about the end result. So long as it’s graphic enough to grab attention or to sell.

Now, please do not interpret my words incorrectly. I have seen many works of nude subjects that I would consider to be art. Many even engaged in the act of sex. However a level of taste and tact must be maintained where the focus is not on the naughty bits, unless that’s an important part of the message. This goes back to even the great nude sculptures of the renaissance and before. To illustrate this point of the difference between nudity and pornography, take Michelangelo’s David. This is truly a magnificent piece of art that has stood the test of time. His pose is natural in stature and the fact that his penis can be seen is besides the point. Now imaging if David was sculpted as jacking off into Mona Lisa’s mouth for the money shot.

Did you crack a smile at that thought? That’s the sight of art turning into pornography. The focus has been drawn away from the message being conveyed in this piece, and put squarely on his engorged shaft.

The most dangerous guise that all these so called artist have created in this realm of internet ‘free expression’ is creating a shelter to harbor images that are completely morally wrong such as rape, pedophilia, and under age sex. Seriously? Cub Porn? If you can tell me what is artistically significant about two 5 year old kids, be it in human, animal, or furry form, having sex, I will retire from the internet forever. All that these images do is to glorify such heinous acts and introduce others to them.

In closing, it’s bloody late here, and I’m tired as all get out, so I apologize for the lack of organization in this post, but I needed to get this off my chest. If you disagree with any of this, email me to let me know your side of the story. But in the end, if it ain’t tasteful, it ain’t art.

Mail Zaaz