on the explicit

I’ve been working on a few things lately which are primarily or casually explicit.  I suppose this comes as a sensible statement for one who makes a living as a pornographer.  But, depending on who you ask, pornography is not ever and always explicit, and the explicit is not ever and always pornography.  I’ve been excavating some layers of thought about explicitness and how we talk about it and how it affects us.

For some people, explicitness is the problem with pornography – I hear regular complaints from the folks who don’t want to ‘see everything’, who want some things left to the imagination, who are confronted in one way or another by the genital close-ups which grace your average RedTube video.  And that’s rightly grounded.  If our understanding of the explicit is shaped by our exposure to the gynecological approach taken by most mainstream sexual imagery, which is unsatisfying to a seemingly growing percentage of the porno-watching populace, it’s going to be difficult to create terms upon which the explicit can be freely enjoyed.

In some ways the explicit posits itself as truth.  You can see everything with you very own eyes, so it must be the most true way of seeing it.  There is no room for doubt.  But explicitness as it’s commonly presented to us seems to me to be a bit of a half-truth, and the empty space can be filled by other ways of creating and seeing the explicit.  Shining a light on something and moving closer to it are the methods by which we are taught to consider the explicit.  In my very recent experience trying to experiment with explicitness (mmm hmm), I’ve just sort of tripped over some new ways of doing and seeing it.

Sometimes you don’t actually see something until you turn off the goddamned light.  This is a basic principle of looking anyway – if you are accustomed to noticing looking you know this.  But that’s generally abandoned when we’re creating something explicit.  Maybe it’s one of those ‘forbidden’ things – because we’re generally not allowed to look at each other’s genitals we really clamor for those images when we have access to them, and we eat up as much of what we like about that image as possible.  Gobble gobble, as fast as we can.

We all have our own things we like about the explicit and what I’ve noticed with my own work of late is that I can dissect all of the elements of the explicit that are pleasing to me and play with ways to present them in ‘explicit’ detail.  Colour, size, shape – all of the things that compose the corporeal aesthetic – can be dealt with in ways that create emphasis but not obsession, that show you exactly what’s there without getting out the magnifying glass and the anatomical diagram.  There is more lust over large, plump labia presented in silhouette than on any ‘this is a tour of my pussy’ micro-study.

I will re-visit explicitness here, and work on collecting some images that show you what I mean, and if/when the things I’ve discussed above are released into the wild I’ll tell you where to go looking.  My own eye and head is ridden with contradictions about how I personally approach the explicit, and what I enjoy is not always consistent with they way I theorise about it – if it was I think my sexual consciousness would be much less interesting.


8 responses to “on the explicit

  1. You’re such a good writer! I love how well you can articulate your ideas on stuff. I’m jealous!

  2. Interesting perspective. Photo.net had an old maxim about shooting nudes: show a person’s face, or genitals, but not both simultaneously.

    For me, personally, context is more important than anatomical detail.

  3. The suggestion of something and a glimpse of another, is such a turn on. To be able to peek around a corner and not quite be able to see fully, but be able to hear.
    Forbidden things are what attracts the curiousity.
    Interesting post.
    Thank you for sharing.

  4. The Bearded Traveler

    I’ve seen some SEXXY G-rated, clothed glam photos.
    And some tacky, horrid porn (who hasn’t?). . .

    so, to your treatise above, I say-


  5. hi art. could you do me a favour and, if you’re going to comment repeatedly, say something substantive? this isn’t really the sort of blog where i post explicit things just for the sake of doing so, and comments like the above make me want to do it less. if you want some explicit images of me that you can simply consume/eat, please follow the links i’ve listed for ishotmyself and/or ifeelmyself. cheers.

  6. Pingback: Wise and Wild Ladies I know « Sequoia Redd

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s