From: epona (acolyta@napc.com)
Date: 08/26/02-10:48:00 AM Z
I am enjoying this discussion.
Like some others on this list, I am having difficulty lumping all nudes into
the porno category. I am also having difficulty deciding where I stand on
the subject of nude photography as I see arguments on both sides. Like all
else in life, it seems subjective. I think it has more to do with intent.
On one hand, pornography is honest, like Judy says, truth in labeling, but
can be degrading and exploitive. And some fine art nude photography can be
more about worshipping the female figure as an embodiment of beauty, without
any attached eroticism on the photographer's part, but the same image may not
seem so for a viewer, who may eroticize. On the other hand, I have seen
plenty of hack photographers who got into it because it enabled them to take
pictures of naked ladies without being labeled perverts - they had the cloak
of Fine Art wrapped around them to buoy their validity. You can always see
the intent in their photographs, though. I cannot describe the quality that
gives it away, but it's something. I guess it can be gauged by my reaction -
oooh, that's beautiful or ugh, that makes me feel not so right inside. Like
I said, it's subjective.
And there are also those photos of women who are clothed but still set off
some sort of internal alarm. For Judy it was Charis straddling the chair.
You can't really *see* anything but her slip yet it disturbed Judy all the
same. There is a photograph by a photographer I know who usually does very
nice still lifes, but has a photograph of a woman in shorts and shirt
casually sitting with her leg crossed, ankle on her knee. The frame covers
only about her waist to said knee, lens pointed squarely at her crotch.
These pictures make you wonder about the photographers' intent.
I wonder if there are more female nudes than male because some find the
female figure more beautiful? Because there have historically been more male
image makers than female, or should I say, more male image makers
*published*, who naturally find the female form more beautiful? This can
also have little to do with desire - I would much rather look at/photograph a
woman's body than a man's any day because I find the female form more
appealing, and last I checked I was straight but not narrow. No offense
gentlemen, I just find the female figure with her smooth organic curves more
aesthetically pleasing. Though I have taken several nude photographs of my
male friend - a few of them pretty good - but none of his crotch.
For men can it have more to do with obsessing over something you can never
truly have/experience/be, because they are not women? I have a male friend
for whom this is true. He finds the female form mysterious and wonderful
because it is not his and never will be. And how do we feel about women
photographing women, even erotically, like Ellen Von Unwerth? Is is
different?
I am also curious as to hear Judy's opinion on Helmut Newton? I have some
male photographer friends who say he takes pictures of women in power, though
from what I have seen of his work I am not so sure I agree...
There, I *think* I've organized all my thoughts.....
Cheers,
Christine
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.
> It is the source of all true art and science. He to whom this
> emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and
> stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead; his eyes are closed."
> -Albert Einstein
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 09/19/02-11:02:50 AM Z CST