Naked Dude (what they want), me, digital, 2023[deleted] t1_j9atq2o wrote
Reply to comment by Cu_fola in Naked Dude (what they want), me, digital, 2023 by TIH99
No I’m not doing that. I’ve no problem with people enjoying this. Who I am calling puritans are people that take offence with “sometimes multiple pieces of art with naked women” a week.
There’s nothing inherently bad about a naked woman and “multiple a week” is not much.
Are you gonna complain at the museum too if there’s multiple paintings of naked women?
If you are bothered by nudity, filter out NSFW posts. If you want more naked men, just say so. I’ve no problem with that whatsoever. I don’t particularly like to look at naked men, but nudity isn’t offensive to me. Female nor male.
Cu_fola t1_j9avx27 wrote
But the people you’re accusing of Puritanism are the same people who like this post.
You’re the one misreading the room.
They’re not against female nudity, they’re against the skew towards the same boring, overdone nudity that you see in abundance here and most places. A few, fairly overdone female body types in a few fairly overdone poses with little variation in expression or apparent purpose. Only thing that consistently changes are the props and medium.
Granted, it’s a sub with many amateurs and students who probably look up “female nude pose” which is a good way to find mostly 3 modes: langorous, demure and vaguely erotic
Until you start plugging in more specific search terms.
But my point stands. Multiple a day or week and virtually no other types of nudes for long stretches is a significant skew.
[deleted] t1_j9axxsk wrote
Look. I’m not misreading. I’m bothered by anything that is boring or overdone as much as anyone. What I find much more bothersome than “excessive” nudity is the abundance of sketchbook photos with obviously and purposefully low effort contributions. Yet there’s not much talk about that at all.
Yet however, underneath a just posted piece that obviously took a lot of skill to make, there are already people crying “again a woman with her tits out”. It’s so disrespectful rejecting a piece just because of the nudity. This was not a sketch done in two minutes. It wasn’t inappropriate or pornographic.
At least then make a distinction in responses. Don’t write: booo, nude women again. Rather mention the fact that it was low effort, distasteful or downright pornographic.
So no, it’s not just people that are only bothered by boring nudes (whatever that is. Who gets to decide what’s boring? And then it it’s boring to some, what does that even mean?). It’s for a large part people bothered by nudes in general.
Cu_fola t1_j9b2ci9 wrote
I don’t comment “ugh another woman with her tits out” because I don’t like discouraging people
but Unoriginal, heavily aestheticized vaguely erotic art with ostentatious titles doesn’t get privilege over “low effort pornographic sketches”
Comparatively superior technique is, at most, enough to convince me someone cares about technique for a limited style.
Most of the classically designated tasteful female nudity here doesn’t elevate the art above banal “tasteful” titillation or stylistically limited over-aestheticization of the female form.
People are free to post what they want, and the critics are free to call out what they want.
[deleted] t1_j9b822o wrote
Anyone is free to call out whatever anyone wants - and so I am free to call out a lot of the critics.
Point is that anything you mention above is subjective and the fact that it may get a lot of likes, doesn’t make it more true.
Some of the Great Masters were shooed away in their own era. By no means do I mean to say the (arguably cheap) nudity posters here are the new great artists of this century. I’m only saying that we shouldn’t be too eager to pretend that what we think is unoriginal, actually is unoriginal to all.
I don’t we even disagree that much. Some - if not a lot - of the nudity posts bother me (but same goes for a share of the non-nudity posts too). Maybe only in the respect that I try not to judge a piece by originality or good taste. (I mean: I do judge, but not out in the open). The only instance in which I do do that, is when I think someone is trolling.
But then one might object - and maybe quite reasonably so - that following my own reasoning, I shouldn’t judge the supposed troll either.
Anyway, thanks for the debate. You thought it well through. Also thanks for keeping it clean. I sometimes get carried away in a discussion, but since that didn’t really happen here, I think that’s at least partly due to you.
Cu_fola t1_j9bhrgi wrote
I think my problem with that is that people who got shooed away only to later become regarded as masters were people who did something less common and got picked on for it
But I do agree that reception is highly subjective and concede that something might feel novel to someone just starting out
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments