From: Rod Fleming (rodfleming@sol.co.uk)
Date: 09/14/00-06:05:55 AM Z
Hi s'me again
----- Original Message -----
From: "Judy Seigel" <jseigel@panix.com>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2000 12:32 AM
Subject: Re: Tutti Nudi
> > What is a "neutral art convention"? Is neutral art somehow of a
> > higher order than non-neutral art?
> >
>
>Meaning a *neutral* not sexually charged art convention,
> in the way I suppose that a bowl of fruit would be a still-life
> convention.
Why on earth would an artistic statement be "neutral"? Don't you mean
neutered?
I quote a certain E Weston in a letter to the Newhalls
"P.H. (pubic hair) has definitely been part of my development as an
artist..........I like it brown, black, red or golden..."
And Picasso- go, on, tell me his drive was asexual- "Les Demoiselles
d'Avignon", for example, or again his etchings. Pure lust expressed on
paper.
The fact is that the sexualisation of the female nude is a part of the
depiction of that nude by a straight man. It is not just about line and
form, and to suggest that it is is a laughable travesty. Artists respond to
that which moves them, and one of the things we are moved by is sex. This is
a part of the human condition. Look at Mapplethorpe's men- the clear
sexualisation of the male figure! Minor White! Michelangelo!
A straight male artist will respond to the female nude in a sexual way, or
denies himself. According to the example of Mapplethorpe and others, a gay
male artist responds to the male nude in an equally sexual way. I don't feel
demeaned as a man because Mapplethorpe sexualised his male models. Indeed I
can look on these pictures and take pleasure in them- and part of that
pleasure is the understanding, the tiny glimpse of the person Mapplethorpe
was. "Oh yes, so that's what turns him on!" I can even be excited, feel my
blood quickening, by this communication of the artist's lust. I am not
sexually attracted to men- but then to see men as he saw them....is still
exciting. I am not threatened by this- but then I am not threatened by
homosexuals, or by my own sexuality.
Do you really imagine that after spending 2-3 days a week for years gazing
on, studying nude persons of both sexes, in the ticking dryness of the Art
School studio, I found my response to the female body the same as to the
male? Oh, a mere conglomeration of line and mass, me dear, nothing to get
excited about! Get real! And do you think that the gay Art students sitting
next to me felt any differently, other than that they were turned on by the
male figure instead? Nuts.
I have always enjoyed drawing the male nude- drawing is an exercise, a
study, precisely. I can get on with the business of analysis without dealing
with the sex. But with a camera, no- the time is for expression, for the
direct involvement of the artistic spirit- and I assure you, there is no
time I would rather photograph a naked man than a naked woman! When I
photograph my wife- who is 38 this month, the mother of 4 and beautiful- in
the nude, part of my expression of her is my sexual response to her! How on
earth could it be any different and not be a lie?
People should realise that which so many would rather we did not- art and
sex are intrinsically, essentially linked, sex is part of our creative urge.
It's like Hemingway's "juice". Again consider Mapplethorpe- look at his
female nudes- stylized, refined, reposed- but then look at his men- charged
to overflowing with sexual tension and excitement! Mapplethorpe identifies
with the women- but he wants to be taken by the men! What do you suggest-
that only gay men should photograph the nude female, or that only gay women
should photograph the nude male? Or that all nudes should resemble
Muybridge? Or Friedler? Nonsense!
A sexual response to the naked person, on the part of the artist, and if the
artist is any good at all, the viewer, is legitimate, indeed essential. The
attempt to deny this is daft. Art is not cool, cerebral, refined, the stuff
of parlour parties where no one sweats and God forbid anyone should fart-
art is life, and that is sex, blood, pain, toil, love, birth, death, joy.
Attempt to deny part and you miss the point of the whole.
Rod
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 10/01/00-12:08:59 PM Z CDT