Nude or rude?

[opticalparadox]

Life drawing is a common practice in art colleges to improve drawing ability. The human form is considered by some artists as the most difficult subject to accurately portray. When the naked form is portrayed in art, it is described as 'nude'. It is not rude, it is art. Why is the naked form accepted as natural in the world of art yet in other areas, it is deemed offensive or unacceptable? Why are naturist activists arrested for indecent exposure? They are just trying to dissolve the notion of our bodies being shameful as depicted in certain religions. Yet paintings of the human form are sometimes displayed in places of worship and of culture such as museums or galleries. Any thoughts?
_________________
Optical Paradox: design solutions - web design leeds, web design harrogate, web design barnsley | Artistic Directory & Forum - uk art directory, online portfolios, artists resources | Epiphany: Open your mind, Evolve as a human being

[Thermidor]

I guess it all comes down to the context that the nude is displayed in, or recived in. for example, a picture of a nude in the national gallery in the ordinary sections would be seen as nude, not rude, all though, i would think, if you put the same picture in an erotic gallery next to other nudes it might be seen as rude, even though its the same picture. maybe....

http://www.zombiedesign.com/polycountbits/big1.jpg

anyway , this is my 3D work in progress. hope you all like.

[marbles]

I think nude or rude is governed by the viewer's attitude to sex and the human body. I personally don't even find pornography rude. It evokes sexual arousal which therefore, in my estimations, is in itself an artform. Surely anything that moves or affects your feelings in a positive way is an artform? So then what do I find rude?
Rude to me would be images of rape and child abuse that i would find socially offensive and distressing. Also, images of starving under-nourished people in Africa are RUDE. They are a shame on a civilised world.
If you find sex offensive, then you oppose perhaprs the greatest natural pleasure given to human-kind and you oppose the process of your creation! If you don't like it, don't look at it but accept that other people may want to.
I think my above comments render the simple naked body as not even remotely in the 'rude' ball park.

[iris]

To my mind nudes in art are conceived as abstractions. A nude does not portray someone unclothed, it portrays nudity as such. There was an uproar in Paris in the Salon in the mid 1800s when the audience realized that the painting (by Manet I think) had clearly showed a woman well-known to many viewers.

[scultore]

It's a false opposition, driven by a crass rhyme. Nothing in itself can be rude (except in the special sense of, for example, a rude shelter, that is something simple and unrefined). Rudeness is a function of behaviour. So, to appear nude at Camilla's wedding could be considered rude (though it could be an artistic happening as well), while appearing nude on the beach might not if it was an area where such behaviour is expected (i.e. not the main beach at Blackpool). Pornography isn't rude; it's just pornography.

[Wendy W]

You migh find this interesting. A comic store owner was giving out freebies. A copy of Alternative comics #22 ended up being given to a minor we assume by mistake.


http://www.boltcity.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5606

Kind of deals with what can be considered obscene or not, then ends up as an arguement over politics.

[steve]

Hi
I am experienced life model working in South and West Yorkshire areas, and no one even raises an eyebrow at the nude figure. I think it is healthy for people to be able to look at the nude body without associating it with sex all the time. Just to be able to appreciate the beauty of the human structure of both genders is very good for the eye training.
I think people who have hang ups about nudity and impose these on others have a lot to answer for. For instance children don; t have a problem with nudity until someone tells them in their childhood that they should keep their 'naughty bits' covered up - encouraging shame and unhealthy interest in whats covered up in others. Paedophilia for example is unheard of in societies in the world that live naked.

[opticalparadox]

Hello Steve, thanks for adding your thoughts. You might be interested in reading the blog I posted under miscellaneous about 'The Naked Rambler' - Which is more offensive violence or nudity? I was shocked at the behaviour shown towards the naturists featured in the programme. We British eh?

Out of curiousity, how much do you get paid for being a life model? I hear it's quite fruitful...
_________________
Optical Paradox: design solutions - web design leeds, web design harrogate, web design barnsley | Artistic Directory & Forum - uk art directory, online portfolios, artists resources | Epiphany: Open your mind, Evolve as a human being

[steve]

hi again
well pay varies from £5-10 per hour.
I don't get a vasts amount of work as people prefer a variety of models rather than the same one each week, also there seems to be a preference for female models, as think apart from Frink, the male form goes largely under appreciated.
its very worthwhile though when people thank you for your efforts - I do try and make sessions as interesting as I can as I;ve had a lot of experience by now.
No, I didn;t see the Naked rambler programme.
regards
steve