By Backseat Betty

The link between sex and psychology is one in which the roots grow deep. Many argue that you couldn’t possibly have sex or sexuality without some sort of psychological attachment to it in one form or another. Sex underlines many aspects of society; it serves to bring our actions and thoughts whole and to the foreground. Everyone we turn, we’re confronted with sexuality, especially as art, and as well as the various forms it takes on as we embody it as part of our own world.

When an artist renders sex or sexuality as an art form, there can be many interpretations. Good or bad, ugly or beautiful, divine or realistic. The important thing to remember is that sex is different for each individual and each person’s explanation of this joined union can differ widely from the next person. Who are we to determine which is the correct interpretation of a person’s own sexuality or, therefore, sex as a whole? I, myself, find that when someone tries to impose their views of sexuality onto me in order to get me to succumb and agree to their interpretation, I get wholly upset. Why is this? Maybe sex is sacred to some, while it’s ripe for explication for others. We can either accept sexuality as is, investigate its truths and its evils, analyze the twists, find the meaning of sex within us, or simply judge it. Whatever the case may be, understanding that sex is different for all of us is the key to comprehending the multitude of facets which make sex “sex”. Within that argument comes the crowning ultimatum: are artists then morally responsible for their art (in terms of the sexual nature)? Is the artist rendering their own interpretation of sexual art or are they merely exposing the truths behind it? If the latter is authentic, then the artist wouldn’t be held morally liable since he is nothing more than the messenger. The Marquis de Sade followed this course of logic in his renditions of criminal love and sex. In his book, The Crimes of Love, de Sade eloquently vocalizes,

“If the brush-strokes I have used to portray crime disturb and distress you, then your redemption is nigh and I shall have accomplished what I set out to achieve. But if you find the truth they depict offensive, if they provoke you to cure their author... then, wretched reader, you have recognized your own self and you will never change your ways.”

In composing these stories, de Sade may have been purging himself of his own evil thoughts which were a way of directing his impulses onto paper rather than into action. This, unfortunately, we don’t know for sure. What we do know is that de Sade continuously evades his readers and the moral questioning that we follow him with. To say that he is morally responsible simply for creating, for being a storyteller, an imaginative miscreant, an artist, is to quash all other imaginative art in this world. If we start to project our own ideas of sex onto others and their art/interpretations, we will find ourselves in a murky hole. What we have is choice, with the freedom to exercise that choice, and the power in which to choose the type of art we want to enjoy. Art, in itself, opens us up to receiving different points of view and more colorful renditions of life than we may have normally had. To censure art, or deem some of it immoral, would be the same as proclaiming that we, ourselves, are victims of our own immoral thoughts. It would be like censoring certain parts of our brains; being told that we weren’t allowed to think anymore, as thinking is creating in itself.

As far as the perception of sex goes, what is tactile or what is imagined is a combination of the elements in which we feel and think about sex. Can there be bodily sensation without thoughts and vice versa? Is the mind truly separate from the body, or are they joined together in an endless dance of the senses? In order to feel the full spectrum of pleasure, one must give in to both the joys of touch and the eroticism of imagination. The lover who succeeds in stimulation of the mind as well as the flesh is the ultimate master of lascivious union. Every one of de Sade’s masterful stories is pregnant with the juiciest riches of lewd sexual nature as well as the psychological passions of love and sex mixed with pain, tragedy, joy, and despair. By coupling these two forms of desire, de Sade cleverly weaves an intense and full-bodied sexual experience. Some may even argue that the mind is a more powerful ally of sensation than the body ever could be. While the body gives in to our primal impressions, our mind is stimulated by a higher process and, therefore, can be viewed as a more supreme receptor to both ardor and fornication.

In contemplating the mind-body connection, we see how this can be further justified by the rise of S&M culture. The participation in sadomasochism, the derivation of pleasure from the infliction of physical or mental pain either on others or on oneself, is highly sought after as a blend of both bodily and psychological elements of sexual gratification. By giving in to both sensational urges at the same time, to a more extreme degree, one can achieve a heightened sense of arousal and fulfillment. In an essay by Susan Sontag, “Fascinating Fascism”, the author examines the link between sadomasochism and the attachment to Nazi Germany. If we can understand fully the mind-body connection within the realms of sex and pleasure, then we can begin to understand the appeal of the Nazi stage in a purely animalistic and erotic sense. Sontag writes, “Sadomasochistic sexuality: to be involved in sadomasochism is to take part in a sexual theater, a staging of sexuality. Regulars of sadomasochistic sex are expert costumers and choreographers as well as performers, in a drama that is all the more exciting because it is forbidden to ordinary people.” There is something to be said about all the senses being engaged in order to reach a higher sexual potential. Isn’t dressing up in costumes and role-playing just another form of intellectual engagement? When one assumes a role in a sexual theatre, the bedroom being the stage, the arousal goes beyond the mere senses and rises up into insight, embedding itself in the brain and attaching itself there to blossom. The Nazi dress that has contributed to the costumes used in sadomasochism today are merely tools in the aesthetic sense. Where these costumes and theaters come from shouldn’t have much consequence. The reality is that the distortion of Nazi regalia integrated into sexual performance is jut another outlet of expression; an art in itself which is used for the purely intellectual sense of sex and satisfaction. Sontag continues, “Once sex becomes a taste, it is perhaps already on its way to becoming a self-conscious form of theater, which is what sadomasochism is about: a form of gratification that is both violent and indirect, very mental.” When you pair sadomasochism with penetration you are, therefore, arousing all senses, mind and body.

Sex and art are equally embedded within each other and trying to extract them into two separate entities would prove to be rather cumbersome. In order to accept sex wholly, you must also be willing to accept art without judgement. Also, to understand art, one must be open to all the exploration of all forms of sexuality that are entrenched in various mediums and art forms. The two are so closely intertwined that it becomes unavoidable to enhance one without the other. Is art merely sex for the imagination? Is sex a type of art form itself? When we allow people the freedom to make their own distinctions and encourage the union of art and sex, they can flourish. Whether it includes costumes, paintings hung on walls, role-playing, sculptures, toys, or even the written word as art, we are held in our own moral cells to discover our own sense of pleasure, pain, and what is right or wrong for sexuality in ourselves.