A social experiment, of sorts
The Sunday Times just published a very interesting piece on semi-decent female flickr photographers showing nipples to get attention. The piece documents a recent trend that has been aptly named Nipplegate to refer to the explosion of female nudity on amateur photography websites such as flickr.
When do you think it's ok to show your boobs and butt in public? If ever, I guess. Why do you think there isn't nearly as much male nudity on websites such as flickr? Should we even care?
***
Food for thought via Prof. Grady
When do you think it's ok to show your boobs and butt in public? If ever, I guess. Why do you think there isn't nearly as much male nudity on websites such as flickr? Should we even care?
***
Food for thought via Prof. Grady
posted by petya at 1/23/2007 04:07:00 PM
10 Comments:
It is just the media. My opinion is that the motivation is the same in the online and the offline world. Why should we treat it any different from the other types of female exposure, kako?
Perhps they're trying to attract all of those people who really just want to look at porn, in which case, it's a little worrying because the women are doing it not because it's an essential part of the photo, but to get some attention...Who knows. In terms of nudity; it's all good, clothes are very overrated. The caveat to this is when it's socially appropriate, and I'd say that generally, if it's about artsy stuff, it's appropriate (all those nudies in the art museum attest to this), but then, when is it art? Also, if you'r sunbathing on the beach and it's the sort of beach where it's allowed, nudity is appropriate.
To my mind, the problem is not with nudity (totally acceptable in the right circumstances) or even pornography (more complicated, perhaps, but harmless if done right), but with the blurring of the boundaries between promoting one's artistic talents and promoting oneself as a hot piece of ass.
The difference between this and other forms of exposure is that people permit themselves a kind of self-display in their self-portraits that they would never dream of out on the streets, but then excuse it by appealing to the distinction between "tasteful, artisitic, nude portraiture" and pornography, as if any such distinction exists or has any real clarity.
It is the bad faith of the whole thing that bothers me. If you want to show your ass to the world in the hopes of looking attractive to potential partners, do what the rest of the world does and get a myspace account. Or post nudes of yourself on flickr, so long as you can explain to you kids why you think that's ok.
Peio, anonymous, and Prof. Grady: I will respond to all of you together as you've already started the conversation among yourselves and there's no point in splitting it up.
I agree that you see A LOT more female than male nudity off the internets as well. There are historical and social reasons about that and a long list of arguments that have attempted to explain why that seems to be the case. I do not wish to get into that right now, although I do believe the question is quite interesting and important. However, I don't think this undermines the point that the type of nudity we're talking about has proliferated on websites such as flickr.
Perhaps my questions were not quite ON and I pushed you in a direction I never wanted to go. I think that prof. Grady's comment helps sum up the issue very nicely. It's not that (female) nudity is bad per se. It's the whole "art-vision-self-expression" bull that goes along with it that's questionable. It's one thing to show your hot-bod on flickr. Calling that ART, however, is quite a stretch most of the time. Like Kyle said, "If you want to show your ass to the world in the hopes of looking attractive to potential partners, do what the rest of the world does and get a myspace account."
Now, all that being said, I think that the "photographers" doing this are just as responsible as their fanbase who continue to encourage the whole enterprise (това беше за теб, бате). Something that Kyle has mentioned to me in the past and I think is helpful to bring up at this point in the conversation, is the fact that a lot of people have a very hard time differentiating between "a photograph of a beautiful thing" and "a good photograph". Just think about your own photos! How often do people tell you that you take great pictures? OK, good. Now, just think about how many of those conversations were prompted by the fact that you had been showing them pictures from a vacation at an obviously interesting location...
Some celebrities (whose names don't need to be mentioned, giving them further publicity) have encouraged this phenomenon, by releasing "private" videos and flashing the papparazzi, which could all likely be considered porn of one type or another. But, it does come back to the fact that enough people must get caught up in wanting to see or hear about it, so it's profitable for the celebrities, even if it's at the expense of not being taken seriously as artists. Given that art may not seem so meaningful to the creator if nobody sees it, some more serious photographers may be tempted to join the bandwagon and add gratuitous material to their portfolios. Same applies to movie-makers or anyone doing art that involves the human body.
I have seen nude photos and paintings where I didn't feel the whole point was to say "aren't girls pretty", which I already knew (similar case can be made for art with nude males, though there may be less examples). But, it must take a lot more effort to make "real" art happen with nudes. Most any female could disrobe in the Louvre and immediately gain more attention than some of the greatest artists in the history of humanity - it has been said, by men of course, that "women are the only true works of art", so what chance does Rembrandt have against them?
Some women have put plenty of effort into looking good, and it's true they may get a certain presentation of beauty combined with simplicity, that many artists may strive for, just by striking a naked pose. Yet, generally I believe more thought goes into "real" art, so that a viewer gets a message from it, sees the underlying complexity (behind the simplicity) or whatever, rather than just saying "wow, breasts". If not-so-bright celebs can take the lazy route by flashing and get rewarded with huge audiences for it, such that it influences previously credible artists to resort to pseudo-art-porn, then maybe there's just too much porn and too little education. But, that's a simplistic take on a complex situation, so a true artistic rendering of it may be needed. Where's Dante when you need him?
http://www.1390425736.com
[url=http://www.997509940.com]997509940[/url]
505871125
871901399
wow gold cheap wow gold buy wow gold world of warcraft gold wow world of warcraft wow gold WoW Warrior WoW Hunter WoW Rogue WoW Paladin WoW Shaman WoW Priest WoW Mage WoW Druid WoW Warlock power leveling powerleveling wow power leveling wow powerleveling wow guides wow tips food flower google排名 google左侧排名 google排名服务 百度推广 百度排名 网站推广 商业吧 机床 LED灯 电池 塑料 摄像机 移民 甲醇 染料 福州热线 体育博客 股票博客 游戏博客 魔兽博客 考试博客 汽车博客 房产博客 电脑博客 powerlin518 logo design website design web design 商标设计
Post a Comment
<< Home