Related Information to Nude Sculpture?

Nude Sculpture? - Page 3

I only wanted to add something that may be interesting, although I don't know much about history of Art. 18th (or 17th?) century representations of nudes, nymphs or just women on a picnic etc used to exist on the walls of rooms where rich (and famous) people used to gather with their friends and feast (tell me if I'm wrong about this one). If that's true, then doesn't this mean that the nude representations gave 'pleasure' for these men to look at them, and that they were thus pornographic in nature? Otherwise they wouldn't situate them selves in the rooms of pleasure, wine etc?

Sculpture Nude

Nude sculptures and paintings could be art, if they answer the definition of art. In my opinion, the definition of art is something done to express your thoughts or emotions. That is, if someone drew a nude painting to express some thought or emotion of his, it would be art. If it is made just for money and to invoke lust, it is pornographic.

The nature of the piece is not dependent of how the viewer reacts to it, or what emotion it invokes in him, but oof the purpose of the artist. If what he wanted viewers to feel when seeing the picture was sexual pleasure, it would be pornography. If he just wanted to express his own emotions, it would not.

Edited: Smudge on 31st Aug, 2005 - 1:54am

Nude Sculpture? UFO & Writing Art Education Sciences

I believe that this is to be determined by the purpose of the creator.
However I do get the impression that allot of "art" nowadays, and that is not just nude art, is meant to shock people and I do not think that is what art should be about.

Page 3 Sculpture Nude

I think that the intent of a piece is what the artist desires for their work, or the reason for its creation. however, once the artist puts the piece in the public eye, it doesn't matter what his/her intent was, because not everyone who sees the piece will know the intent. Thousands or millions of people may see the work of art and interpret and react to it in whatever way they wish. I think that there are some people who can look at a piece of art that was never intended as pornography, but to them it has the same effect. For some people, it may seem as though all nude art is pornography, and if that is the case then they simply need to stay away from nude art, despite the intent of the artist.

However, as the majority of the population becomes increasingly desensitized, the line between art and pornography becomes increasingly blurred to much of the world. And it doesn't help that there really isn't one all-encompassing, clear-cut definition of art that is accepted by the art world. It seems forbidden to tell someone that their work isn't art if they insist that it is. Who really makes these rules anyway?

Sculpture Nude

Dimavo, this is exactly what I have been saying or at least trying to say, but most people look at who is the artist to make the determination. If I took a nude pic as a graph artist then they may say that it was for a project, but if it was photographer from the Sun newspaper they would say it was for porn. Yet, it does not matter the purpose or who it was, in the end it is the same - a naked body to be interpreted by whomever is looking at it.

Nude Sculpture?

In my opinion as an artist, I believe that the treatment of the model and their pose is that which draws the line between pornography and art. If the model (for the purpose of photography say) attempts in any way to draw the veiwers attention to the genital region then this becomes pornographic.
The genitals may well be on display in an artistic piece, but only because the artist is trying to capture a complete image.

Now after reading through the posts here, I am starting to feel as though I am either of low moral fibre or very progressive. I have absolutely NO problems with the naked form, either male or female. Obviously there are some images that I do not wish to display in front of my children, but I have busts on display in my lounge room as well as nudes in my bedroom. These are paintings that I have done myself, and sculptures that I have traded my work for. I have produced and given pictures of nude females to my parents, and they are on display for all to see. My mother enjoys the pictures for their artistic merits.

I guess we are all different, and that is what makes art what it is, an excuse to start a conversation...In my humble opinion


MI

Nude Sculpture - Page 3

In my opinion if they wanted them to be that way they would teach them to be like that but it seems to me that they were just trying to show art or at least admire their own art. As for it being at a child party it's their parents choice and I think you over reacted a little about it but it was your choice. All in all the only problem I would see is if an artist was to show off their art to a bunch of little kids or to a group of porn freaks.

Nude Sculpture Sciences Education Art Writing & UFO - Page 3

As stated by others.. It is art if the artist has the right intentions with the piece... It is a sad thing in my opinion to see so many people in our generation confuse art when it is done tastefully with pornography. Yes, some people may look at the sculpture of David and be completely offended by how graphic it is.. But in my own opinion, this is a definition of fine art done tastefully.
Nude studies are the best way to understand the anatomy of the human form. Human cadavers are also great ways to learn, but without the movement, it is hard to understand how it all pulls together.. (Sorry if I put a visual that isn't pleasant.) So, a lot of the sculpture or paintings you see could be a study of that person in his wanting to develope his skills in anatomy..

Rather off topic, but... I think everyone would be quite surprised to see how many famous LDS artist have nude work.. You won't find a single sculpture on Temple square where the artist hasn't studied nudes.

Message Edited... JB: Please see your Intro, LDS comments are to be kept in the LDS Boards. Thanks.