How to define pornography has always been elusive. In the 1950s, this issue came to the forefront as the authorities sought to restrict freedom of speech through the written word. Works such as Alan Ginsburg's poem Howl and William Brurroughs Junky were labeled obscene, removed from shelves, and bookstore workers were arrested for selling them. Ultimately, however, these authors won their cases and their works were reestablished on the shelves selling more copies than they might have sold had the conflict not existed. Since then, there have been numerous cases both involving literature and art in which congress and state legislative bodies have attempted to codify a single definition of obscenity, with the end result being a vague allusion to those works whose express value is not art but gratuitous sexual titillation.
So, then, what is obscenity? Is it pornography? Then what about artistic works that are sexually suggestive? How do we define when something is art and when it is porn? It all depends on the subjective perspective and desire of the viewer. A teenage boy might be aroused when looking at a Greek or Roman statue of a naked person. Does that make the statue obscene and render its artistic value useless? A pedophile might become aroused when looking at Anne Geddes naked babies in flowers photography. Does this make her work pornographic?
Essentially, as there is no way to define pornography, there is really no way to illegalize it. Instead, it is better, in my opinion, to allow the individual to choose whether or not he or she wants to become involved in pornographic material and to what degree (reader, viewer, participant). As long as no one is being physically harmed in the process, pornography should be allowed as it is a form of free speech.