Pleasure ennobles man. Art, eroticism, society

Long gone are the times of Savonarola who burned the 15th-century erotic prints or Braghettone who in the 16th century covered Michelangelo's nudes in the Sistine Chapel with pants.

Since ancient times, artistic expression has had to deal with the morality of the time, with the sphere of the licit and the forbidden and as society got rid of certain taboos, this was reflected on art, and vice versa.

Today we live in times of freedom (one might say) and yet it is not so, or at least it depends on what is meant by freedom, especially in reference to the erotic theme, which most of all must continually fight with the collective perception and conditioning "in vogue" in such a period and in such a place.

It so happens that in 2017, a handful of years ago, the posters of the London exhibition dedicated to the artist Egon Schiele on his death are defined as "excessive" and censored. In the same year, in the United States, a petition asks the MET to remove a work by Balthus, "Thérèse Dreaming" (portrait of a dreaming girl) because it is guilty of romanticizing the voyeurism of a child.

The times of the Inquisition are long gone, therefore, and those of Hitler's campaign against "degenerate" art, yet every era has its scissors that cuts where something disturbs, screeches, accuses, entices.

Yet, the so-called cultural revolution of the '60es/'70es, had given so much hope: thousands of young people fighting against laces, engaged in an unprecedented campaign of sexual liberation.

These are the years of works of art such as "Sex parts and torsos" (1977) by Andy Warhol, a collection of explicit polaroids of sexual parts and acts, or Made in Heaven (1980) by Jeff Koons, a sculpture in which the artist mates with his porn star partner, Cicciolina.

Of course, art has always somehow dealt with the erotic theme, censored or not. In previous decades, we can not forget the works of Picasso ("Entretien", the '20es), Schiele and Matisse (in the early '900) and many others who through art gave expression to the erotic tension of human bodies.

Therefore, we have two forces that travel together intertwining, fighting each other, transforming each other: the drive towards a free expression of eroticism and the parallel tension to restrain it, hide it, accuse it, fear it.

And as the events of 2017 recounted above demonstrate, the game continues.

One thing Herbert Marcuse had not considered when he acutely and optimistically wrote "Eros and Civilization" in 1955: time. Perhaps, along with him, many thought that humanity would free itself forever from censorship and fear, but it was not so. Anything that stimulates or evokes pleasure terrifies most of the mankind, in every age, no matter what form it takes. In reference to "eros" Marcuse explained: "Although the term recalls the Greek concept of love desire, it does not refer only to the sexual act, but to everything that stimulates human pleasure, that is, fantasy, creativity, enthusiasm and desire for life”.

What else is eroticism if not a vital manifestation? What else is censorship and persecution if not a necrophilous tendency? They are the ancient Eros and Thanatos, life drive and death drive.

As long as there is a struggle between these aspects, the utopia at the base of Marcuse's thought (and not only) resists, that is, of a society based more on pleasure than on duty.

Pleasure ennobles man.

Miriam Fusconi