
I'm confused.... do you think it only counts as art if it's in a museum or if it tells a morally good message...? An artist had to draw and paint this in order for it to exist. Film, video games, comics, architecture, sculpture, music, textile, poetry, painting, drawing, etc is all art even if you personally don't value a particular genre. A sculpture of a dildo and Michelangelo's David are both art. A kid's crayon drawing is art. Erotic media is art.

Just because something is created with intention or in a specific medium doesn’t mean it's art..... yes art isn’t only about being displayed in museums or having a “good” message,, but It’s about expression creativity & impact.. those elements *can* make something qualify as art but that doesn’t mean everything that fits those criteria automatically is... Erotic media is definitely art, but that doesn’t mean ALL erotic media is equally meaningful or valuable as art. The value of art depends more on things like the context, the creator’s intent (which is clear in here LOL) , and the audience like YOU who consider it as art. But its still ridiculous how you can consider torture porn which is mainly meant for arousal & exploitation as art....

I think we just have a fundamental difference on what we believe the word art means. To me, art is a neutral label, the perceivable product of someone's imagination and expression and that has nothing to do with quality or value. Whether or not a piece of art has "value" is a completely different question from whether or not something IS "art". I personally find value in this particular story, in this ART, because I enjoy its themes and style. I do think it's interesting to ask if something in particular is art, like is painting a room a different color art? But uuh drawing a comic and telling a story through it, even a violent, erotic one, to me, is obviously art.

ok but I don’t think everything that involves imagination should be called art. I know the term is pretty broad,, but I believe it’s important to tell the difference between works that have real artistic intents or emotional depth and those that are just practical or shallow... for ex, a comic with violence or erotic themes can be provocative or entertaining... but that doesn’t necessarily make it art. I think for something to be considered art it needs some level of creativity, meaning, or depth. Without that I think it’s more accurate to see those works as expressions rather than art...

Who gets to decide what level of creativity, meaning or depth something has in order to qualify as art? It's so subjective and impossible to measure. Why is entertainment/fun a shallow emotion? This comic has made me feel sad, angry, righteous, excited, entertained etc and the artist has worked hard bc it isn't easy to create even a 6-page comic. Idk why we need to create definitions of art that exclude forms of artistic expression just because they aren't high brow enough for someone's opinion

This is only MY view of art obviously and clearly everyone has different ways to define art. I do not care what this comic made YOU feel especially since u believe everything can be considered art.. but you can't deny the main purpose of this comic is trauma porn & power play as I already said once,, which if not done right (like in here) it's just someone's fetish and not to be taken seriously... Again, IN MY OPINION, I argue that is NOT even remotely close to art... Also these specific definitions of art exist because *some* people's way to identify or label things as art.... maybe not yours but def others'. Anyways I'm done, if trauma porn's your thing u should've just said so from the start instead of all this bs
Yesss give me love and hate in impossible circumstances, give me torment and horror!!! This is what art is all about!