It occurs to me that, given my specialties, it might be fruitful to record my opinions of the erotic/sex-related films that I watch, which I have done only very sparingly up to now.
Well, this morning, I watched a delightful surprise of a little film titled Sexual Chronicles of a French Family (currently available on Netflix). It, well, chronicles, in a documentary-like format, the lives of each member of a French family, specifically as relates to their sexual fulfillment (or lack thereof).
The conflict begins when the teenage boy in the family gets caught at school filming himself masturbating in class (it was a dare). His mother is forced to acknowledge the fact that, as is so frequently the case, we teach kids about the dangers of sex, but leave them helplessly floundering when it comes to seeking sexual fulfillment.
So, the mother embarks on a quest to open a dialogue about sex within the family, and we, the viewers, are treated in voyeuristic fashion to each member's personal sex life, from the teenager dying to lose his virginity, to the elderly widower who regularly visits a prostitute, and everything in between.
I was pleasantly surprised at how much sex was actually in this movie, and although you don't see anything explicit*, it gets really close. Consistently. But the other thing is, although it's not unerotic, the sex feels very real, not like porn sex, and it seems to serve the purpose of fleshing out the characters and not simply existing for titillation's sake. The only thing that stood out to me was the fact that I didn't notice any of the characters ever experiencing orgasm.
Nevertheless, I feel that this film portrays a very healthy, sex-positive attitude toward human sexuality, even on topics such as prostitution and exhibitionism, which are frequently sensationalized for dramatic effect. The film does not ignore the importance of contraception, and there is a healthy balance between male and female nudity. One of the characters is even bisexual.
I feel I can recommend this film highly, although I doubt most people will be in a proper frame of mind to truly enjoy it. At least with regard to my experience of the American mindset, viewers either want mindless titillation (that goes out of its way to avoid incidental male eroticism), or they want a comedy where they can be free to giggle every time a character mentions a sex act. This film is neither. It is much more enriching, and much more fulfilling, than both.
* Yep, Netflix duped me into seeing the censored US release of this film. Fucking Americans. :-\
Thursday, September 5, 2013
Saturday, August 31, 2013
The Pros and Cons of Self-Portrait Photography
This is just a list I wrote up one day while bored.
The advantages of being a self-portrait photographer:
* You don't have to coordinate your schedule with other people.
* Your model is always on board with the kind of shots you want to take, as well as how you want to use them.
* You never have to bother with the confusing issue of model releases.
* You get experience modelling.
The disadvantages of being a self-portrait photographer:
* You can't really take any truly spontaneous shots.
* You get less experience behind the camera.
* Shoots encompass an awful lot of guess and check.
* You only ever have one body to work with, whether it's the one you want or not.
As a social recluse, I am greatly advantaged by the choice to be a self-portrait photographer. However, that last point is the crucial one. Luckily, in my case, I am at least moderately attractive, and that has brought me quite far. But in the end, it's not far enough. I know it's hard to believe, but I didn't pick up a camera to take pictures of feminized erotic male nudes. That means I am going to have to start working on my people skills.
The advantages of being a self-portrait photographer:
* You don't have to coordinate your schedule with other people.
* Your model is always on board with the kind of shots you want to take, as well as how you want to use them.
* You never have to bother with the confusing issue of model releases.
* You get experience modelling.
The disadvantages of being a self-portrait photographer:
* You can't really take any truly spontaneous shots.
* You get less experience behind the camera.
* Shoots encompass an awful lot of guess and check.
* You only ever have one body to work with, whether it's the one you want or not.
As a social recluse, I am greatly advantaged by the choice to be a self-portrait photographer. However, that last point is the crucial one. Luckily, in my case, I am at least moderately attractive, and that has brought me quite far. But in the end, it's not far enough. I know it's hard to believe, but I didn't pick up a camera to take pictures of feminized erotic male nudes. That means I am going to have to start working on my people skills.
Wednesday, August 28, 2013
The Stigma of Sex
If a person can become a photographer because he's inspired by the beauty of natural landscapes, and wants to capture and share that beauty with the world, then is it any less valid if a person becomes a photographer because he wants to capture the beauty of naked women and share it with the world?
I think that the biblical concept of lust as a mortal sin presupposes that one's disproportionate interest in sex outshines other important concerns in life; and I think that, from an artistic perspective, this is the problem with most pornography, where the goal is to produce a sexually appealing - rather than an artistically accomplished - image. But if your goal is to depict eroticism artistically, then what's wrong with that?
Sex is an uncomfortable topic for many, but it is a part of life, and I feel that it deserves the artistic treatment just like everything else. And it's not like sunsets or wildlife or flower macros or sports or newborns or any other popular genre of photography is any less cliché, or has any less potential for commercialism, than taking pictures of nude subjects (that may or may not be engaged in sexual activity). Yet, as an erotic photographer, I have a really hard time finding like minds among respected art communities.
I think that the biblical concept of lust as a mortal sin presupposes that one's disproportionate interest in sex outshines other important concerns in life; and I think that, from an artistic perspective, this is the problem with most pornography, where the goal is to produce a sexually appealing - rather than an artistically accomplished - image. But if your goal is to depict eroticism artistically, then what's wrong with that?
Sex is an uncomfortable topic for many, but it is a part of life, and I feel that it deserves the artistic treatment just like everything else. And it's not like sunsets or wildlife or flower macros or sports or newborns or any other popular genre of photography is any less cliché, or has any less potential for commercialism, than taking pictures of nude subjects (that may or may not be engaged in sexual activity). Yet, as an erotic photographer, I have a really hard time finding like minds among respected art communities.
Thursday, August 22, 2013
Why YOU Should Be Sex-Positive
I'm a pervert. I'm sexually liberated. I enjoy the sensual, erotic aspects of life, and I voluntarily spend a lot of my time indulging in them. Obviously, being sex-positive serves me, because I can be positive about who I am and what I do, and not wallow in shame. But why should you be sex-positive, if you're not like me?
The answer is, being sex-positive doesn't just help you to have better sex - although it does, and that's a worthwhile goal of its own. But I imagine that not everybody places "having better sex" as a high priority in their life. Maybe the sex you're having right now is fantastic. Maybe you don't really like sex - whether or not it's due to a sex-negative attitude - and having better sex is actually contrary to your goals.
But there's more to sex-positivity than just having better sex. And even if you, personally, are not in a position to reap the physical and psychological benefits of having a sex-positive attitude (although I doubt that's completely possible), I believe that embracing sex-positivity on a widespread scale will do much to alleviate the pain and suffering of many who currently live under a sex-negative framework, and increase their pleasure and enjoyment of life significantly.
The attitude of sex-negativity hinges on the belief that there is something immoral or sinful about sex. Obviously, if you have this opinion, then you're not going to think that embracing sex will improve the state of society. But sex is a natural part of human life, and as sexual organisms, we all experience sexual feelings and desires. Going against the grain, and saying that sex is the problem in the first place, is a very warped view of human nature and, if you're religious, God's creation.
Look at all the problems that sex-negativity fosters. How many people experience guilt and shame over their sexual feelings and desires? How many people grow up hating themselves, or being hated by others, because of the sexual feelings and desires they experience? Additionally, gymnophobia (the fear of nudity) contributes to the body image disorders that are becoming pandemic in modern society.
Sex obsession and sex addiction are often cited as sex-related problems that modern society faces. It is understandable that sex-negative social activists would caution us that embracing a more positive attitude toward sexuality would feed into these "illnesses", but this is actually backwards. Addiction and obsession are rampant, now, because we repress our sexual urges, and they are forced to manifest in unhealthy patterns of behavior.
Just because sex-positivity celebrates the positive role of sex in life, does NOT mean that it advocates turning a blind eye to people who engage in unhealthy patterns of behavior. Sex-positivity does NOT mean saying "sex is always awesome, let's all have sex all the time". It simply means having a more positive attitude toward sex, and treating it with the reverence and respect it deserves - which also means taking it seriously when it causes problems in people's lives.
The fact is, if we embrace sex, we will become less obsessed with it, and it will no longer be a marginalized aspect of our lifestyles, just dying to break out after dark and transgress all boundaries; it will instead be re-integrated into our daily lives, and recover it's own appropriate level of focus.
Another problem that sex-negativity causes - and this is a serious one - is a lack of communication. Negative attitudes support a stigma surrounding sex and our bodies. This makes it hard for people to develop healthy attitudes, and to seek help when problems occur. That not enough people practice safe sex often enough, which itself leads to the transmission of diseases and unplanned pregnancies, is a symptom of a lack of communication, often caused by embarrassment about the topic of sex, but also by prudish, overly modest attitudes - the kind that support abstinence as a "form" of contraception and the cultural institution of slut-shaming.
All of these problems could be alleviated by embracing a sex-positive attitude. Chances are you've been raised in a sex-negative culture, whether those influences have been blatant or more subtle. And if so, you feel uncomfortable about the topic of sex. Naturally, you're going to feel uncomfortable about adopting a more sex-positive stance, and probably healthily skeptical about the good it can do.
But think about all the social problems we have to deal with related to sex. Many of them are directly caused by the same embarrassment you feel, the stigma that causes people to feel less than happy, and be less than vocal, about the sexual aspect of their lives. And most if not all of the others are exacerbated by the culture of silence and shame that keeps these problems in the dark, where they fester without access to solutions.
Do you want to continue to contribute to that? Is your embarrassment, your allegiance to the social mandate that there is something unholy about the natural biological function of sexual desire and intimacy, more important to you than helping to heal society of its crippling sexual malaise? If not: if you're ready to stop struggling against your natural impulses, if you'd rather stand up and do something good for the world, then start to adopt a more sex-positive stance today. The more of you who do, the more popular it will become, and the better off we will all be in the long run.
The answer is, being sex-positive doesn't just help you to have better sex - although it does, and that's a worthwhile goal of its own. But I imagine that not everybody places "having better sex" as a high priority in their life. Maybe the sex you're having right now is fantastic. Maybe you don't really like sex - whether or not it's due to a sex-negative attitude - and having better sex is actually contrary to your goals.
But there's more to sex-positivity than just having better sex. And even if you, personally, are not in a position to reap the physical and psychological benefits of having a sex-positive attitude (although I doubt that's completely possible), I believe that embracing sex-positivity on a widespread scale will do much to alleviate the pain and suffering of many who currently live under a sex-negative framework, and increase their pleasure and enjoyment of life significantly.
The attitude of sex-negativity hinges on the belief that there is something immoral or sinful about sex. Obviously, if you have this opinion, then you're not going to think that embracing sex will improve the state of society. But sex is a natural part of human life, and as sexual organisms, we all experience sexual feelings and desires. Going against the grain, and saying that sex is the problem in the first place, is a very warped view of human nature and, if you're religious, God's creation.
Look at all the problems that sex-negativity fosters. How many people experience guilt and shame over their sexual feelings and desires? How many people grow up hating themselves, or being hated by others, because of the sexual feelings and desires they experience? Additionally, gymnophobia (the fear of nudity) contributes to the body image disorders that are becoming pandemic in modern society.
Sex obsession and sex addiction are often cited as sex-related problems that modern society faces. It is understandable that sex-negative social activists would caution us that embracing a more positive attitude toward sexuality would feed into these "illnesses", but this is actually backwards. Addiction and obsession are rampant, now, because we repress our sexual urges, and they are forced to manifest in unhealthy patterns of behavior.
Just because sex-positivity celebrates the positive role of sex in life, does NOT mean that it advocates turning a blind eye to people who engage in unhealthy patterns of behavior. Sex-positivity does NOT mean saying "sex is always awesome, let's all have sex all the time". It simply means having a more positive attitude toward sex, and treating it with the reverence and respect it deserves - which also means taking it seriously when it causes problems in people's lives.
The fact is, if we embrace sex, we will become less obsessed with it, and it will no longer be a marginalized aspect of our lifestyles, just dying to break out after dark and transgress all boundaries; it will instead be re-integrated into our daily lives, and recover it's own appropriate level of focus.
Another problem that sex-negativity causes - and this is a serious one - is a lack of communication. Negative attitudes support a stigma surrounding sex and our bodies. This makes it hard for people to develop healthy attitudes, and to seek help when problems occur. That not enough people practice safe sex often enough, which itself leads to the transmission of diseases and unplanned pregnancies, is a symptom of a lack of communication, often caused by embarrassment about the topic of sex, but also by prudish, overly modest attitudes - the kind that support abstinence as a "form" of contraception and the cultural institution of slut-shaming.
All of these problems could be alleviated by embracing a sex-positive attitude. Chances are you've been raised in a sex-negative culture, whether those influences have been blatant or more subtle. And if so, you feel uncomfortable about the topic of sex. Naturally, you're going to feel uncomfortable about adopting a more sex-positive stance, and probably healthily skeptical about the good it can do.
But think about all the social problems we have to deal with related to sex. Many of them are directly caused by the same embarrassment you feel, the stigma that causes people to feel less than happy, and be less than vocal, about the sexual aspect of their lives. And most if not all of the others are exacerbated by the culture of silence and shame that keeps these problems in the dark, where they fester without access to solutions.
Do you want to continue to contribute to that? Is your embarrassment, your allegiance to the social mandate that there is something unholy about the natural biological function of sexual desire and intimacy, more important to you than helping to heal society of its crippling sexual malaise? If not: if you're ready to stop struggling against your natural impulses, if you'd rather stand up and do something good for the world, then start to adopt a more sex-positive stance today. The more of you who do, the more popular it will become, and the better off we will all be in the long run.
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
Teacher's Pet
A message to students everywhere: have a great school year! And don't forget, your teachers put a lot of work into preparing those lesson plans, so be sure to show your appreciation by giving them something in return!
Monday, August 19, 2013
Porn Without Plot
I've come to you today to talk about a very frustrating issue: the current state of pornography in modern culture. It's pretty sad when a person as sex-positive and pro-porn as I am can't stay interested while watching porn. I mean, take any television series with a premise that intrigues me, and I could sit down and watch several hour-long episodes in a row - because the story keeps me interested. But after an hour of, say, Girls Gone Wild, I'm plain bored. And it's not that the porn isn't hot and exciting. But it's just sex. And how long can just sex keep an intellectual guy like me stimulated?
This is why I want more from my porn. But there's a problem, because a lot of people believe that porn should remain separated from the rest of our entertainment media. This is, incidentally, a great example of the compartmentalization of sex that I've written about before. The prevailing opinion (from the non-shamelessly perverted majority) on erotic scenes in non-pornographic movies is that they should be "tasteful" which is to say merely suggestive and never explicit. Why? Because, if a person wants porn, they'll seek out porn.
And that's precisely the purpose for porn. Not to tell stories that involve human sexuality, but specifically to turn people on and then get them off, as concisely as possible. And I have to admit, there is a place for media like that. Sometimes, you're just really horny, you've got noone to get it on with, and you need something to stimulate you. But is that all media depictions of human sexuality are good for? It sounds to me like a symptom of the mindset that sex is only good for one thing. It's not worth intellectual discussion. It's not worth artistic consideration. And it should stay well away from all non-"sex ghetto" parts of daily life.
Sometimes, you have people who try to make porn with a plot. In fairness, sometimes it works really well (please read Alan Moore's Lost Girls if you like good porn with plot). But a lot of it is just really bad. And it contributes to the stereotype that porn with plot is terrible, and reinforces many people's belief that porn has one function, and telling a story is not part of that. On the other side of the divide, you have professionals who are telling really fantastic stories, but they almost always avoid bringing sex into the story. And when they do, it's always "tasteful" and "suggestive", and never explicit. (George R.R. Martin, author of Game of Thrones, is one notable exception to this rule).
What, exactly, is wrong with including explicit depictions of sex in mainstream entertainment - not even gratuitously, but where it serves the story, like in romances, for example? And not just sex, either, but explicit nudity? Unfortunately, the barriers to doing so are formidable, and have much to credit our modern taboo on sex for. Many people are happy to keep sexuality marginalized, but I fear that it does us (as a species of sexual organisms) more harm than good. And one of the symptoms is really crappy porn that can't hold your interest.
Look, in my life, sex is not simply a disconnected act that occurs behind closed doors and is not talked about outside the bedroom. And I'm not just talking about sexual intercourse. I'm talking also about sexuality - sexual desire and sexual orientation - sensuality, and eroticism. Sex is a part of life - and an important one - and I believe in the importance of integrating sex into other aspects of one's life. Thus, when telling a story about people, it makes sense that sex may come up as a topic with real importance (and not just to titillate the audience). And, because I do not fear and shy away from sex, I don't see what's wrong with depicting that sexuality explicitly.
Even if this formula for fictional entertainment is not suitable for widespread audiences (and obviously it won't be, so long as taboo and negativity prevails), I do believe it has its place. We are plagued with a scarcity of really good erotic entertainment - and here, maybe an appropriate distinction between pornography and erotica can actually be made. It's not that porn is more explicit than erotica, but that porn is produced solely for the purpose of getting people off, whereas erotica is more like other kinds of entertainment, but it does not shy away from approaching the subject of sex, and does not try to refrain from titillating its audience, but is concerned first and foremost with telling a good story, or appealing to other aspects of a person's interest beyond the simple goal of arousal to orgasm.
And, really, that's the definition I've been using for my photography all along. Photos tell stories in a much different way than narratives do. But putting the story-telling aspect aside, I have never shied away from being "too explicit" in the service of my erotic photography, because I know it is not a coy attitude toward sexuality that sets my art apart from simple pornography, it is the sensitive approach I use to depict my subject - whether it is the sensual appeal of nudity, or the full-scale titillation of sexual intercourse - with consideration to all the artistic elements that come together to form a beautiful and artistic (and not just sexy) picture. And I think the very same approach could be applied to the production of pornographic videos.
Obviously, it would require a different mindset - the goal being to make a great product, not to bring the audience to orgasm - but the result would be far more interesting, and I think it would serve to promote a healthier attitude toward sex, that integrates it back into the great multitude of facets of everyday life, liberating it from marginalization and helping to shed its stigma. Sex is a beautiful thing, and a regular part of life - like the sunrise; it is not a tool brought out of the woodshed only for the purpose of making people cum.
This is why I want more from my porn. But there's a problem, because a lot of people believe that porn should remain separated from the rest of our entertainment media. This is, incidentally, a great example of the compartmentalization of sex that I've written about before. The prevailing opinion (from the non-shamelessly perverted majority) on erotic scenes in non-pornographic movies is that they should be "tasteful" which is to say merely suggestive and never explicit. Why? Because, if a person wants porn, they'll seek out porn.
And that's precisely the purpose for porn. Not to tell stories that involve human sexuality, but specifically to turn people on and then get them off, as concisely as possible. And I have to admit, there is a place for media like that. Sometimes, you're just really horny, you've got noone to get it on with, and you need something to stimulate you. But is that all media depictions of human sexuality are good for? It sounds to me like a symptom of the mindset that sex is only good for one thing. It's not worth intellectual discussion. It's not worth artistic consideration. And it should stay well away from all non-"sex ghetto" parts of daily life.
Sometimes, you have people who try to make porn with a plot. In fairness, sometimes it works really well (please read Alan Moore's Lost Girls if you like good porn with plot). But a lot of it is just really bad. And it contributes to the stereotype that porn with plot is terrible, and reinforces many people's belief that porn has one function, and telling a story is not part of that. On the other side of the divide, you have professionals who are telling really fantastic stories, but they almost always avoid bringing sex into the story. And when they do, it's always "tasteful" and "suggestive", and never explicit. (George R.R. Martin, author of Game of Thrones, is one notable exception to this rule).
What, exactly, is wrong with including explicit depictions of sex in mainstream entertainment - not even gratuitously, but where it serves the story, like in romances, for example? And not just sex, either, but explicit nudity? Unfortunately, the barriers to doing so are formidable, and have much to credit our modern taboo on sex for. Many people are happy to keep sexuality marginalized, but I fear that it does us (as a species of sexual organisms) more harm than good. And one of the symptoms is really crappy porn that can't hold your interest.
Look, in my life, sex is not simply a disconnected act that occurs behind closed doors and is not talked about outside the bedroom. And I'm not just talking about sexual intercourse. I'm talking also about sexuality - sexual desire and sexual orientation - sensuality, and eroticism. Sex is a part of life - and an important one - and I believe in the importance of integrating sex into other aspects of one's life. Thus, when telling a story about people, it makes sense that sex may come up as a topic with real importance (and not just to titillate the audience). And, because I do not fear and shy away from sex, I don't see what's wrong with depicting that sexuality explicitly.
Even if this formula for fictional entertainment is not suitable for widespread audiences (and obviously it won't be, so long as taboo and negativity prevails), I do believe it has its place. We are plagued with a scarcity of really good erotic entertainment - and here, maybe an appropriate distinction between pornography and erotica can actually be made. It's not that porn is more explicit than erotica, but that porn is produced solely for the purpose of getting people off, whereas erotica is more like other kinds of entertainment, but it does not shy away from approaching the subject of sex, and does not try to refrain from titillating its audience, but is concerned first and foremost with telling a good story, or appealing to other aspects of a person's interest beyond the simple goal of arousal to orgasm.
And, really, that's the definition I've been using for my photography all along. Photos tell stories in a much different way than narratives do. But putting the story-telling aspect aside, I have never shied away from being "too explicit" in the service of my erotic photography, because I know it is not a coy attitude toward sexuality that sets my art apart from simple pornography, it is the sensitive approach I use to depict my subject - whether it is the sensual appeal of nudity, or the full-scale titillation of sexual intercourse - with consideration to all the artistic elements that come together to form a beautiful and artistic (and not just sexy) picture. And I think the very same approach could be applied to the production of pornographic videos.
Obviously, it would require a different mindset - the goal being to make a great product, not to bring the audience to orgasm - but the result would be far more interesting, and I think it would serve to promote a healthier attitude toward sex, that integrates it back into the great multitude of facets of everyday life, liberating it from marginalization and helping to shed its stigma. Sex is a beautiful thing, and a regular part of life - like the sunrise; it is not a tool brought out of the woodshed only for the purpose of making people cum.
Sunday, August 18, 2013
Nude Fashion
There's one thing I don't understand about fashion photography - why do all these people think these models look better with their clothes on? This realization hit me when I saw a clothing ad in a magazine featuring a girl wearing one of those shirts with a wide collar that almost hangs off her shoulder, thereby exposing her beautiful clavicle to the world. And then I thought, I wonder how much more interesting the rest of her body would look without those boring, lifeless layers of manmade fabric covering up her natural beauty (or at least as natural as a photoshopped magazine ad can be).
I mean, I know I'm a pervert - I don't deny that fact - but it's not even about that. I'm not saying all these models should do porn (not that I would be against that, either). I'm just saying that I think the naked body is infinitely more interesting than the clothes we put on it. That's not to say that I have no interest in fashion - I do. Clothes can be a lot of fun, and they can look nice, too. But as an artist, the naked human body is so much richer an object for study and appreciation. (I think this is among the reasons why I will always be an art photographer, and not a commercial photographer).
I recently added a new quote to my sidebar on this topic. Well, actually, it's an old quote, and one that I'd passed over in the past. I've seen it used an awful lot among the nudist community, and that, I think, caused me to view it as a sort of cliche. But I'd always liked it, and recently I realized that, not only was it written by an artist (as opposed to a nudist) - I'm sure you've heard of Michelangelo - but it actually applies to art. Specifically, nude art, which Michelangelo had no qualms about dabbling in (see: endless controversies over whether or not David should be covered up). So, as a nude artist (in both senses of the term), I am reclaiming the quote for art.
"What spirit is so empty and blind, that it cannot recognize the fact that the foot is more noble than the shoe, and skin more beautiful than the garment with which it is clothed?"
- Michelangelo
And I don't give a damn whether you're an artist who thinks there is nothing sexual about nude art, or a pervert who thinks the great appeal of nudity is sexual in nature (I give weight to both of those arguments), either way, the truth and the importance of this quote is not diminished. A naked body is more beautiful than a clothed one, and that's true whether you're sexually attracted to it, or if it's rather your aesthetic inclinations that are aroused (my ideal would be both, simultaneously).
I regret that modern "civilized" society likes to throw a fit about anything that has to do with human sexuality, but I'm not going to let that get in the way of my appreciation for the beauty of life. As a matter of fact, whether you're for porn or against it, I think that in either case, if you were to be honest with yourself, you'd find that you agree with this statement: the world needs more nude art. (Whether for supplementation or diffusion, I leave up to you).
Of course, if all you can see in an image of the unclothed human body is ugliness and sin, then, as Oscar Wilde would say, you are the one who is corrupt.
I mean, I know I'm a pervert - I don't deny that fact - but it's not even about that. I'm not saying all these models should do porn (not that I would be against that, either). I'm just saying that I think the naked body is infinitely more interesting than the clothes we put on it. That's not to say that I have no interest in fashion - I do. Clothes can be a lot of fun, and they can look nice, too. But as an artist, the naked human body is so much richer an object for study and appreciation. (I think this is among the reasons why I will always be an art photographer, and not a commercial photographer).
I recently added a new quote to my sidebar on this topic. Well, actually, it's an old quote, and one that I'd passed over in the past. I've seen it used an awful lot among the nudist community, and that, I think, caused me to view it as a sort of cliche. But I'd always liked it, and recently I realized that, not only was it written by an artist (as opposed to a nudist) - I'm sure you've heard of Michelangelo - but it actually applies to art. Specifically, nude art, which Michelangelo had no qualms about dabbling in (see: endless controversies over whether or not David should be covered up). So, as a nude artist (in both senses of the term), I am reclaiming the quote for art.
"What spirit is so empty and blind, that it cannot recognize the fact that the foot is more noble than the shoe, and skin more beautiful than the garment with which it is clothed?"
- Michelangelo
And I don't give a damn whether you're an artist who thinks there is nothing sexual about nude art, or a pervert who thinks the great appeal of nudity is sexual in nature (I give weight to both of those arguments), either way, the truth and the importance of this quote is not diminished. A naked body is more beautiful than a clothed one, and that's true whether you're sexually attracted to it, or if it's rather your aesthetic inclinations that are aroused (my ideal would be both, simultaneously).
I regret that modern "civilized" society likes to throw a fit about anything that has to do with human sexuality, but I'm not going to let that get in the way of my appreciation for the beauty of life. As a matter of fact, whether you're for porn or against it, I think that in either case, if you were to be honest with yourself, you'd find that you agree with this statement: the world needs more nude art. (Whether for supplementation or diffusion, I leave up to you).
Of course, if all you can see in an image of the unclothed human body is ugliness and sin, then, as Oscar Wilde would say, you are the one who is corrupt.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)