The difference between pornography and erotica is aesthetics. The former lacks aesthetic, and merely reflects crude biological mating (hence porno-graphy, like reality-reproducing photo-graphy). The latter uses desire as a thematic point upon which various elements converge and conceive a greater meaning. In other words, erotica (which may or may not involve penetration or coitus) carries a subtext of meaning, characterization, emotion, symbolism, narrative, etc.
This is why we speak of pornographic video on the one hand (literally: recording two people fucking in the most mechanistic and biological manner), and erotic art on the other. Erotic elements may feature in music, theater, painting, prose, poetry, cinema—whereas porn is never artistic.
One is explicit and the other implicit. The pleasure derived from erotic novels or films is in the greater context of the narrative, one that does not require explicit sexual depictions. Meanwhile, porn is all about explicit sex, and anyone who enjoys pornography usually despises erotica for not ‘showing enough’ (i.e. nudity, penetration, ejaculation, etc.).
Due to its emphasis on explicit physicality, pornography is a radical form of materialism or “empirical” knowledge. The pornification of the mind is a process whereby the individual cannot appreciate subtlety or suggestion, or implied meaning, or subtext—he only acknowledges as ‘real’ what he can see. The porn-obsessed man is only aroused by what is shown him, not what he may be capable of thinking and feeling. Erotica appeals to the imagination, the image-making faculty recognized by traditional cultures as one of many ways to Knowledge (it is often a crucial part in the spiritual training of seers, sorcerers, and magicians—magic being an art dealing with i/mages).
Without a sense of imagination, one relies solely upon data offered by external phenomena. One becomes a slave to one’s surroundings, extroverted and dependent upon the images that the world thrusts upon the passive consciousness. This is anathema to any sort of active willpower—thus pornification is antithetical to any notion of heroic masculinity. That said, to enjoy intentional, conscious erotic fantasies is neither weak nor degenerate, because it may be used strategically in the exercise of psychic faculties. The reader ought to consider various occult authors such as Austin Osman Spare and Kenneth Grant for detailed instruction in the art of ‘sex magic’.
It is important here to note that imagination is not unrestrained fancy or delusional escapism. There is still an external world we encounter. However, this will not be a passive perception thereof. Imagination allows us to use the data-input in various ways. We will not be dependent upon a meaning ‘thrust’ upon our senses, we can choose how to react, how to feel, or even transmute the as-is to our advantage.
As a study in erotic cinema, one ought to watch the 1973 thriller Don’t Look Now, starring Julie Christie and Donald Sutherland. Pay close attention to color, scene cuts/splicing, and music. Empathize with the couple grieving, and you’ll acquire an insight into subtext.
This brings us to the example portion of our essay: pornification manifesting through the proliferation of film “ending explained” videos on Youtube, even when the ending of the film in question is obvious and requires no explanation.
Be forewarned: the following paragraphs include plot spoilers of the 2024 film Immaculate.
Briefly, the film casts Sydney Sweeney in the role of Sister Cecilia, a young nun who travels to a convent in rural Italy. Basically, she is drugged and inseminated with DNA gathered from the convent’s religious relic: one of the nails driven into Jesus during his crucifixion. Of course, this is done secretly by the priest and isn’t revealed until later. The whole point was to convince everyone that another immaculate conception of the Savior had occurred (in other words, the Second Coming of Jesus was imminent).
At the end of the film, Sister Cecilia escapes the convent and gives birth, in the countryside, to what is clearly a deformed monstrosity. We are offered no glimpse of the infant, although we hear a sort of wheezy snorting sound supposed to be breathing. This offers the viewer a clue as to the failure of the experiment. Sister Cecilia slowly walks towards a large rock, raises it above her head, and brings it smashing down on upon the newborn entity, as the screen goes black.
She killed a genetic failure. Why does this straightforward ending require a 15-minute commentary?
It seems people have difficulty processing information that is relayed in a subtle or implied manner. Many films that receive negative views are those whose plot is labeled as “slow-burn” or “understated”. Although there are films that are complex (such as David Lynch’s Mulholland Drive), Immaculate is not one of them. I find it seriously troubling that people are doubting themselves because they didn’t actually see the child get killed, or wish to know more about its appearance despite the film giving us chilling, disturbing indicators through the strange, laborious breathing.
It may be that these commentary videos simply exist as content-for-content-sake (which has become a malady on Youtube in the past 5 years). Such statements do not negate the point of this article. What is, and may be, and not so much do not matter. If one looks long enough, one begins to see the rot at the core of the fruit.
This is an excellent and timely distinction to point out, and I will go a little further to add something concerning the etymology of the word "pornography" itself. The word, rather than explicitly meaning anything sexual, refers to the "writing" (-graphy) of prostitutes, or rather, "those who sell themselves." In this context it's not only depictions of sexuality that constitute pornography; you have these non-works as you've described, like "ending explained," and other vapid sluices of "content" that comprise a whole pornographic ecology from the "journalists" to the "reviewers" and even the "lifestyle influencers," all sponsored by some contemptuous venture-capitalist startup company or other. So, pornography is everywhere and has gotten completely out of control. You could say we're living in a fully pornographic society, sexually explicit media being only a portion of it.