It's a funny thing really. On one hand we have magazines like Allure, and Maxim showing women completely nude (with fabulous lighting and airbrushing of course). And on the other hand we have people who complain when they go to an art festival or art gallery and see a painting of a half-draped (partially clothed) woman hanging on the wall. Really? What is this about?
Since when did the female body - or any body for that matter - become OK to flaunt in public, on TV in commercials for lingerie, on the beach, or in a main stream women or men's magazine; and yet NOT be ok to see in an Art Gallery or at an Art Festival?
When I put paintings in restaurants, I always make sure that there is no nudity. But the fact that I sometimes feel the need to censor my own art when hanging it in an art setting is a little ridiculous. I generally hang paintings of half draped models, or paintings where the nudity is implied. But this still isn't enough, someone will always complain. And still others will look at a painting of a partial nude, or even of a draped model, and because she's not wearing a turtleneck call it "disgusting."
Nudes have been part of art for a very long time. My work isn't porn, it's art. Is there a sexy side to some of it? Sure. But that doesn't make it bad, wrong or inappropriate in an art setting? Absolutely not.
Oh yes, and just to clarify - this is an actual nude! ;-)
| For another female inspired post, see Honoring Ourselve as Women |
This is an odd sort of reversal, which I think has happened within my lifetime.
ReplyDeleteBecause, I can remember as a child that nudity was "bad" in magazines or on TV, but I was given the impression that the nude was perfectly legitimate in Fine Art.
I still marvel that folks cannot distinguish art from porn, nudity from eroticism.
Agreed :-)
ReplyDelete