Wassup!

Today's rant will consist of Fetish Art. A form of art that's so popular that DA has givin' it its own sub-category.

Now let's look at the two words. Fetish and Art. Can these two really co-exist? Is it REALLY a form of art? Some may agree while others will not. So, let's take a closer look.

Before I do, keep in mind that I'm not knockin' any of the fetishes that will be put on trial here. This journal is just used for discussion on the topic, not for flamin' one fetish/artist over the other…and don’t worry. I’ll make this short as possible.

Here’s my belief. I do think that fetish art IS a form of art, as how the nude body can be perceive in an artistic sort of way. However, for obvious reasons, I don’t think that it is viewed as such by most people. Some look at it as smut that disgraces the definition of art, while others just ogle over it as one would a porn flick.

In most cases, the “Art” in Fetish art loses all meaning. For instance, there are several artists on DA that have themes of bondage and vore. Most of the pics are mediocre at best, displaying off anatomy, terrible use of colors, no line weight and lack of composition. Yet, they still get hellified favs and comments. Does this mean that the bondage/vore that is within’ the piece outweighs the artistic value??? And if it does, can you REALLY call that art? I truly don’t think so.

What’s that? Didn’t I say that fetish art CAN be art? Yes, I did…and to back that up. Let’s look at these pics.

[link]
[link]

As you know, underwater glamour shots like these are getting more popular these days. You probably had seen them in action like on “America’s Top Model” and such. But did you know that this is also a growing fetish?

Pics like these can also be listed under the fetish “Hydrophilia” or “Aquaphilia”. Though the the two pic maybe thrown into the glamour/artistic nude category, there’s fetish art of this caliber as well.

So, let me get to the point. I think that fetish art can be deemed art if the “Artistic” side outweighs the “Fetish” side of a picture. The two examples are great proofs of that (even though that they’re not seen as such). The lighting and cool colors are very nice with the model’s fiery red hair, which makes it a vocal point for the eye to be drawn to. The artistic nude pic can be praised for not only for the beauty of the pic, but also provides great reference on how light refracts on the body and skin textures for 3-D artist.

We all know that fetish art exist more for guilty pleasure than artistic praise, but that doesn't mean that it isn't art. If the artistic side is more prominent over the fetish side, then it should be able to stand as deemable art.

Alright! I’m tryin’ to make this short. I’m gonna shut up now and let you guys say what’s on your minds.


Peace.