~ Get 'Em Out, For Art's Sake ~ |
Every few weeks or so I make an ill-advised comment on some blog or posting or other, sometimes my own, and live to regret it. I guess it happens to all of us from time to time, but it always comes as a bit of a shock as to how stupid we can be if we let our fingers do the talking before we've put our brains into gear.
This was the case yesterday, when I made what I thought was 'fun' of a photo posted on Facebook. The picture was a woman reclining and I foolishly suggested that the merit of the piece subsisted principally in the model having large breasts. Technically, I think it's fair to say the shot wasn't spectacular, including dodgy composition and posing, but I think it was an amateur shoot anyway.
Well, to cut a short story even shorter, my sly cynicism didn't go down too well, and although I published a follow-up reconciliatory comment that still didn't seem to calm things so in the end I apologised and deleted both.
In the end I think my comments were valid but very misplaced. Of course, by publishing on Facebook people open themselves up to comments of all sorts, but it even goes against my own principles to openly criticise or make fun of someone else's creative attempts, so for that I dis and do apologise; that was wrong I believe.
Having said all that, don't you sometimes get fed up of being nicey-nice all the time and simply long to say something is just pure, unadulterated crap, even if you are well-aware it's a (n almost) purely subjective comment which a generous person shouldn't be making?
And then there's the humour issue. Tricky with treacherous words, to be sure. Why on earth
would my insinuation that nude and glamour photography is just soft porn for geeky geezers go down well in that particular forum? It's not even my suggestion, but when I read that line of thought it struck a chord. Is a black and white image of a girl with her tits out art? You can dress it up (metaphorically speaking) all you like, but in the end it's still a chick with her top off and you might ask yourself the simple question: why?
Nudity isn't new in art of course. Boobs have been bouncing all over canvases and bursting out of marble blocks for centuries, even in civilisations where a similar lack of attire in real life would be completely unacceptable.
So what is this need to depict the naked human form and pretend, at least, to elevate it to to realms of high art? After all, it's just bodies in the end, isn't it? And we're slaves to our genes which makes us find this sort of thing reasonably pleasant to look at (anyone out there procreated recently, or ever?). But whether it all comes down to base purposes or we are, in fact, able to behold a naked female form, say, and appreciate it for purely aesthetic purposes, is debatable.
I don't know about you, but I feel we've moved, as a species, towards genuinely appreciating aestheticism, but in the primordial mix I'd say there's still a large percentage of carnal lust even in the loftiest of detached gazes. That's just the way we are, it's not a criticism. Tits out, anyone?
_________________________________________________________________________________
© 2011 Sab Will /
Paris Set Me Free - Contact me directly for photo tours, interviews, exhibitions, etc.
