Thinking about nudity  

wiloma 47M
3 posts
1/2/2006 11:22 pm

Last Read:
3/5/2006 9:27 pm

Thinking about nudity

Porn bores me.

Nudity is nudity; it can be artistically and sexually pleasant to behold. There's a tacky old saying: "if it's in focus, it's porn; if it's out of focus, it's art." But there's some bit of truth to that. Porn concentrates on revealing EVERYTHING to details. Art means selection, choosing what NOT to see. Annie Ample used to say she didn't like "medical photography," and that's sadly as good a comment about porn as there is. There's no mystery to it at all.

Russ Meyer's approach (like David Friedman) is to leave some mystery, at least a little. While it's true that one can see people fucking in Meyer's later films (the influence of hardcore, undoubtedly), one never sees direct penetration or "kumquats." In porn, it's ALL about the penetration. How dull, for me. For the life of me I don't see how it works on people. But then, I don't masturbate, either.

Something has to lead up to the nudity, too. Otherwise, the nudity has less effect. Cutting straight into people screwing would be ultimately boring. There has to be some tease. Time to put the tease back into film. The nudity replaces the penetration as the apex/catharsis. Create the tension in the work by not allowing the catharsis?


imBambi 58M/50F

1/3/2006 1:59 am

I remember the days when the video stores were stocked with genuine amature porn. Because of their "inexperience" the people who made these films actually made them more interesting to the viewers because the movies were not always as explicit. I think you raised a valid point.

"Mr. Bambi"


Become a member to create a blog