Id like to share a quote a book called

 Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man

 , that i found today really interesting. I have recently come into the argument more more often of the difference between porn and art, and until now i never really looked into it myself. Anyway, the before mentioned quote.

Proper art has the quality of 'stasis' - it stills the heart of the viewer into a state of aesthetic arrest. As Stephen say in the Portrait, "This supreme quality is felt by the artist when the esthetic image is first conceived in his imagination. The mind in that mysterious instant Shelley likened beautifully to a fading coal. The instant wherein that supreme quality of beauty, the clear radiance of the esthetic image, is apprehended luminously by the mind which has been arrested by its wholeness and fascinated by its harmony in the luminous silent stasis of esthetic pleasure, a spiritual state..."
     Meanwhile, improper art has a 'kinetic' quality - it excites rather than stills the mind: "The feelings excited by improper art," Stepen says, "are kinetic - desire or loathing. Desire urges us to possess, to go to something; loathing urges us to abandon, to go from something. The arts which excite them, pornographical or didactic, are therefore improper arts."

(No idea how to control text color)

Ill start by talking about the first paragraph.
To start with, when describing the artist's side the terms, "Supreme Quality," and ," esthetic," show up. When the artist comes up with the idea to start with they sense quality, and esthetic in their vision. When the art is formulated in a person's mind, it should be of art and not of arousal. The majority of the difference between the two relies on the conception of the thought. The person who came up with it is fascinated by it's harmony and can see its worth. They do not necessarily know how it will be perceived once put on their medium or what changes will be made once put to action. So this single moment of conception means the world in the end. As for the viewer, it is another story. The viewer is a singular person with a unique mind and ways. So when it comes to the viewers ability to feel, " a still in their heart and aesthetic arrest," there is nothing certain. Meaning that because of how a persons views are random to art, their opinions don't mean much. So for the rest of this ill focus on the producer and not the consumer. The author is the sole line between porn and art. If the person is of questionable sanity then it's understandable to question their judgement on the mater. But their is still a big line between a opinion of someone's sanity and a fact of someone's sanity. But EVEN THEN look at some of the world's most influential artists. Vincent Van Gogh , one of the most well known names in art, once cut off his own ear in a bout of insanity and depression. So when we come to this intersection, we realize that not even sanity matters. Now lets go to the difference between the artist, start to finish. When the artist starts they still know the feeling of esthetic they originally felt. But as they under go the process of creating the work they are subjected to the outside. Their opinions change as time passes and their view of the project changes. Think of it as a game you loved to play as a child. You may have loved the game back then, but now looking back you think it is childish. The childlike state you had has come, gone, and can't be returned to you. As you grow, you become a different person. So you could say, that the person you are starting the work and the person you are finishing the work, are two different people. So what if as a person is working on a innocent picture and it slowly turns to adult? Good intentions? The thought behind the piece means more than the art itself. So now, we ask the artist, "What were the thoughts that inspired this piece?" 

And that answer my friends, 
Is the only way to know if a piece is 
Art
     or
          Porn