Sculpture Community - Sculpture.net  

Go Back  Sculpture Community - Sculpture.net > Sculpture Roundtable Discussions > Sculpture Community and ISC topics
User Name
Password
Home Sculpture Community Photo Gallery ISC Sculpture.org Register FAQ Members List Search New posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #76  
Old 05-12-2006, 12:57 AM
anatomist1 anatomist1 is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 604
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

I studied about Koons briefly in an art class. What he is about is very abstract conceptual art, or complete crap, depending on your point of view. We didn't go into these porn images, but I am not surprised. You have to understand that this guy is a rhetoritician, and someone who hangs out with big money people in the fashion industry. He does not 'make' anything. He gives general instructions to others to actual make the work. What he does is think up sensationalistic concepts, make deals, and talk to the media.

I found the man and his projects extremely offensive on a level much deeper than having to do with sexual taboos. His sculptures deliberately contain exact copies of commercial images, stuff like the pink panther, precious moments-like figurines, etc... For those of you who haven't seen much porn, those pictures are basically standard poses and shots, and the woman's head wreath is virtually the trademark of an Italian porn star named something like Cicciolina - aside from some of the syrupy backgrounds they are EXACT copies.

That's his schtick. He presents you with exact copies of the most banal, commercial, or in this case pornographic images, then tries to convince you that this crap is somehow transcendent or different because he says so, and because he has the connections to get it presented in major galleries and art/fashion mags. Like someone else said, he's like Duchamp, except squared, and bumping up against contemporary norms and taboos. Koons is well respected by people who don't care about beauty or craftsmanship in art and instead see art as primarily a kind of contemporary dialogue of extravagant philosophies. To these people, Duchamp is a god who practically invented art as they know it.

Anyway, the whole array of arguments here is exactly what he was trying to provoke. Given the serious repressive and anti-intellectual streaks in american culture, it almost seems too easy. Just be aware that, in this whole debate, he sees himself as above and beyond it all: a puppet master, laughing at you whichever side you are on. If you don't like him for peddling smut, you've totally underestimated the problem.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 05-12-2006, 02:13 AM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

Quote:
Originally Posted by anatomist1
I studied about Koons briefly in an art class. What he is about is very abstract conceptual art, or complete crap, depending on your point of view. We didn't go into these porn images, but I am not surprised.
Briefly but not brief enough
I guess I don't have the definition of what "conceptual; art" IS, isn't all art "conceptual"?

Quote:
He gives general instructions to others to actual make the work.
I am reading the book about Saint Gaudens, it seems that in the 19th century artists hiring assistants to do or finish their work, enlarge etc too was the way it was. Saint Gaudens did this frequently, but it does seem like "cheating" if you are selling a work done by yourself and then hire someone else to do it FOR you.


Quote:
I found the man and his projects extremely offensive on a level much deeper than having to do with sexual taboos. His sculptures deliberately contain exact copies of commercial images, stuff like the pink panther, precious moments-like figurines, etc... For those of you who haven't seen much porn, those pictures are basically standard poses and shots,
The porn/sex doesn't bother me, seen plenty and variety, I just can't consider it ART in any form but you are right, pretty standard and pretty commercial.

Quote:
That's his schtick. He presents you with exact copies of the most banal, commercial, or in this case pornographic images, then tries to convince you that this crap is somehow transcendent or different because he says so,

he's like Duchamp, except squared,
You mean "R. Mutt" with the urinal "masterpiece "submitted admittedly as a joke or revenge? I've already submitted my comments on the urinal in another thread- it's plumbing, it's lazy man's art to go to the plumbing store, buy a fixture off the shelf, put your name on it and call it "art"...

Only thing great about it is it's now an antique, never used plumbing fixture which must be a rarity. How many of those urinals from way back them 1930 or whatever year it was- never got used or are sitting in the landfill right now after the building they were installed in was demolished or the bathrooms updated and all the old fixtures tossed?

Going back to the nudes/ public display, Saint Gaudens made a sheet copper sculpture of Diana the huntress 18 feet tall for the top of STanford White's Madison Square Garden building's tower.
Saint Gaudens did the sculpture nude which was a scandal of it's own, but he also did it as a labor of love- White covered all the materials and expenses. When the sculpture was installed about November 1891 many were upset about it being nude and asked if this was "proper" in a public place.

Be that as it may- a nude piece of sheet copper on a tower some 347 feet tall..., they discovered the scale was too big! so Saint Gaudens had to scale another copy down to 12 feet tall and the two were switched.
Diana the nude copper sculpture stayed on top of White's tower till the building was demolished around 1925. More than a sculpture she was on a bearing and was a functional weathervane.

Some photos and story of this sculpture;

http://www.jssgallery.org/Other_Arti...the_Tower.html

Last edited by Landseer : 05-12-2006 at 02:24 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 05-12-2006, 10:58 AM
GWayne's Avatar
GWayne GWayne is offline
Level 5 user
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 90
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

To put Kooons into the same category as Duchamp is like comparing a Ford Pinto to a Ferrari. Duchamp is mainly known for his envelope pushing art philosophies, but he also was a techincally sound painter, sculptor, and theatre set designer. Duchamp had legitimate ideas and artistic ability vs. Koons who is a "Con Artist" that lacks talent and has to rely on gimmicks and shock value in order to make a name for himself.

GWayne

http://www.georgewayne.com
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 05-12-2006, 11:45 AM
ilona ilona is offline
Level 7 user
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: SC, USA
Posts: 153
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

I have to agree, GWayne. We had one of his "readymades" in our library in Art school and I loved looking at it. I love Joseph Cornell's work, too, to me they are similar in their assemblage style. They both take everyday objects and bring them to our attention in engaging relationships with each other and within their packaging. And "Bride stripped bare by her bachelors, even" is to me a brilliant painting, among many of his other works.

I may have to take this opportunity to delve into Koons' work more deeply and see if there is anything in his repertoire I appreciate. I can usually find something I like by almost any artist.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 05-12-2006, 01:37 PM
Ries's Avatar
Ries Ries is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Edison Washington
Posts: 1,154
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

I am not a big Jeff Koons fan, but I have to point out he didnt "copy" porn shots of Ciccolina- HE MARRIED HER!.
Yes, he has copied other people's artwork, and gotten sued and lost the lawsuit.

But in the case of Ciccolina, he actually took his own pictures of her.
She has long since divorced him.
__________________
Been There.
Got in Trouble for that.
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 05-12-2006, 05:51 PM
anatomist1 anatomist1 is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 604
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

I'm not an art history expert by any means, but I was comparing the sort of historical paradigm Duchamp represents, not the two artists in detail. It seems to me that putting a urinal in that art show is very similar to what Koons is doing, and it is also taken as a sort of milestone in art history. Prior ideas about beauty, craftsmanship, and other elements more traditionally considered to be part of art went out the window at that point.

Not everyone thinks this way, but it seems to be the new dominant paradigm at many universities and big-time art scenes. Art changed into a public 'dialog' something more like a hybrid between ahistorical philosophy and a fashion scene. What matters is how you talk about it, how it relates to prior parts of the dialogue, and your reputation, not much to do with the pieces themselves.

I was constantly under assault by this mentality when I worked at the UW Madison art studios. I was constantly encouraged to forget about craftsmanship and sculpting skill and come up with art that changed in radical new directions. If I had listened to them, I barely would have even learned basic welding.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 05-13-2006, 06:55 AM
ilona ilona is offline
Level 7 user
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: SC, USA
Posts: 153
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

There is a certain group of people in the art world who follow this trend you refer to, anatomist. But there is a much larger group that doesn't, in my opinion.

I think that in art school the idea is to get students to think, and question, and push the edges of "what art is", and define it for themselves. To me, learning that skill is very important to an artist's development. It also helps the artist to discover their own process and direction.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 05-13-2006, 05:32 PM
anatomist1 anatomist1 is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 604
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

I wouldn't know about how many are in which camp, but my impression is that the fashion scene/conceptual set is dominant in terms of the big time art magazines, best rated art schools, and most prestigious galleries in the biggest cities.

As far as what they are trying to do in school, it varies radically school by school. I had the misfortune of going to a school where almost no emphasis was placed on craftsmanship, except in the jewelery and furniture areas, and there was a huge emphasis placed on trying to blow people's minds with one's radicalness and facility with obscure theory. This really has almost no appeal to me.

I find most art-world rhetoric anything but mind-blowing, as I have a degree in the history of western philosophy. Most of what I see is a nonsensical jumble of borrowed language and ideas from philosophy history lacking any understanding of where they came from. I just don't see the academic and intellectual rigor necessary to pull that off. It seems like the reason so many get away with it is that their audience/community is populated almost exlusively with people who are ignorant of the other, much more rigorous, disciplines from which they sloppily borrow.

Partly in reaction to this, I've become largely anti-intellectual about art. I like to see craftsmanship, hard work, passion, and emotion - something that I can feel and experience without a lot of explanation and reference to contemporary art history.

Last edited by anatomist1 : 05-13-2006 at 05:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 05-13-2006, 06:29 PM
ilona ilona is offline
Level 7 user
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: SC, USA
Posts: 153
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

Quote:
Originally Posted by anatomist1
I wouldn't know about how many are in which camp, but my impression is that the fashion scene/conceptual set is dominant in terms of the big time art magazines, best rated art schools, and most prestigious galleries in the biggest cities.

As far as what they are trying to do in school, it varies radically school by school. I had the misfortune of going to a school where almost no emphasis was placed on craftsmanship, except in the jewelery and furniture areas, and there was a huge emphasis placed on trying to blow people's minds with one's radicalness and facility with obscure theory. This really has almost no appeal to me.

I find most art-world rhetoric anything but mind-blowing, as I have a degree in the history of western philosophy. Most of what I see is a nonsensical jumble of borrowed language and ideas from philosophy history lacking any understanding of where they came from. I just don't see the academic and intellectual rigor necessary to pull that off. It seems like the reason so many get away with it is that their audience/community is populated almost exlusively with people who are ignorant of the other, much more rigorous, disciplines from which they sloppily borrow.

Partly in reaction to this, I've become largely anti-intellectual about art. I like to see craftsmanship, hard work, passion, and emotion - something that I can feel and experience without a lot of explanation and reference to contemporary art history.
I basically agree with you. I was fortunate enough to go to an Art school where both craftsmanship and intellectual thought process were equally encouraged.

When I was in school the debate seemed to often focus on functional versus non-functional art. Nowadays, I understand, this is not as important of a distinction in art conversations.

I am looking at the topic of this thread and wondering how we have strayed so far off...I apologize for my digression.

As for the fashion scene, however, I think that is a totally different animal and shouldn't be lumped in with the rest of the Art world.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 05-13-2006, 08:42 PM
anatomist1 anatomist1 is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 604
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

I wasn't talking about Versace and runway models. I was saying a lot of art IS itself a fashion scene, insofar as the same dynamics are at work. I think the fact that Koons hangs with a lot of the clothes fashion people is not a coincidence. It doesn't have to do with any overt connection between the two worlds, but the fact that the two worlds are so similar.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 05-15-2006, 03:03 AM
JasonGillespie's Avatar
JasonGillespie JasonGillespie is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 429
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

It is strange that Koon's work carries so much baggage with it. I would think that in the usually all embracing, everything goes world we currently live in his ethics and artistic derivations would hardly raise an eyebrow, but it seems that some of you have problems with him. (That being said, I am no proponent of his work.)

But isn't he doing exactly what many other artists do in trying to convince people that they are creating something significantly different from the rest? How many rip offs of Rothko, Rauschenburg, Maplethorpe, or Warhol do you see? Three quarters or more of the artists out there are rip off artists. How often do you really see something unique? Here, in and around New York, the amount of psuedo-intellectual/conceptual artwork is nigh staggering. The interesting thing to note is that much of it is interchangeable...or could have been produced by the same people. A good portion of it is Abstract Expressionism rehashed for the umpteenth time. If I had a nickel.....

Personally, I think that the issue isn't displaying the nude in public. More precise would be to say that Koons work is really about naked figures. The distinction between the two being a point for discussion. We had a seminar our first semester here at the academy about just that topic.....naked or nude. Kenneth Clark wrote a good book, The Nude: A Study in Ideal form, that covers the traditionally accepted view of what constitues a nude. In the last century or so, however, the nude has been supplanted by the naked. Manet's Lunch on the Grass is a good example. The woman is naked...she should be clothed but is not. She has been sexualized. She is no Venus who is nude because it is her natural state. Courbet was doing the same thing with many of his so-called "nudes". They were really naked women and not far removed from the erotic postcards one could get in Paris at the time. It seems to be a matter of taste (or lack of it) now just as it was then. Some think any figure unclothed in any action is fine without understanding that nudity/nakedness are societal conventions and vary from culture to culture. In the west these conventions have dictated the use of the nude figure and have retstrained the use of the naked figure. Koons is trampling on social conventions and has made a name for himself doing it....much like Eric Fischl.....much like Joel Peter Witkin.....Much like Robert Mapplethorpe...and the list keeps growing. Nothing new, just shock art. Finding out what makes the public gasp and creating as much of it as possible. This type of art requires the least creative ability and is seeking to interface with the lowest common denominator in human nature.

Should we be putting naked sculptures in public spaces...no...not in a country that is trying to protect its children. In galleries where people wanting that type of thing can go see them?..... sure. A nude figure in public spaces is different however.....mainly because it isn't sexualized and wasn't created to offend or shock. That sort of image does not present the body in a degrading way.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 05-15-2006, 03:48 PM
anatomist1 anatomist1 is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 604
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

I don't really buy this nude/naked distinction. In the supplied photos, the people are having sex, so they are 'supposed' to be unclothed. Porn in general that doesn't involve exhibitionist elements would be 'nude' by that criterion.

I have worse problems with the last bit. Many people engage in making and consuming porn, stripping, steaking, exhibitionism, burlesque shows, etc... without feeling themselves or anyone 'degraded'. I interpret your phrase 'protect its children' as 'indoctrinate its children into a moderately puritanical worldview'. I use the word moderate because many on the christian right make the same assertions with no exceptions for "nudity".
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 05-15-2006, 05:01 PM
ilona ilona is offline
Level 7 user
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: SC, USA
Posts: 153
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

I still think it is up to parents to 'protect' their own children, as they see fit, and not up to society in general. Of course some sort of line needs to be drawn, but society needs to be careful not to swing to one extreme or the other, but rather aim for the center and let individual preferences dictate straying from that line.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 05-15-2006, 10:02 PM
fritchie's Avatar
fritchie fritchie is offline
Sculptor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Orleans, LA
Posts: 3,456
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

This is the sort of discussion that could go on forever, but Jason's recent reply has prompted me to make some additional comments. I would say that idealization or remoteness; coolness, so to speak, plays a central part in this nude/naked issue. Practiced artists know the difference and how to go one way or the other.

To be sure, photography changed the situation dramatically, and people such as Mapplethorpe and Koons probably considered that they were pushing to extend the definition. That is, they were (are) engaged in semantics - sharpening or redefining the meanings of these words. That, too, is something that can go on forever, with the process being more self-conscious these days.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 05-16-2006, 12:23 PM
JasonGillespie's Avatar
JasonGillespie JasonGillespie is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 429
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

anatomist1,
This is in regard to your most recent post on the public display of nude art. As to the nude/naked distinction....fritchie hit it right by saying it is clear to those that have a working knowledge of their craft. It isn't really whether or not one's clothes are off. It is about the state of naturalness or appropriateness that a figure has being nude as opposed to a figure being naked which creates a sense that somehow this isn't the figure's natural state. Suffice to say it isn't what you are thinking it is.

Concerning your statement about protecting children from imagery they do not need to see being an effort by society to 'indoctrinate its children into a moderately puritanical worldview'....well, I guess you could say something like that, but do you know how it sounds? We have laws protecting children from just such materials. It has nothing to do with your assertion and everything to do with the negative effects of children being exposed to explicit sexuality at too early an age. This can have long term emotional damage and create vulnerabilities in a child's mind that opens him/her up to sexual predators. If you go to a few child sexual abuse survivor websites you can see that survivors often point to just such imagery and premature sexualization of children as one of the problems. I know from my own experience as a survivor I certainly do. It really doesn't have to have anything to do with right, left or any particular group....instead it has to do with people that care about the quality of life children have growing up and beyond into adulthood as opposed to those who don't care.
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 05-16-2006, 04:54 PM
anatomist1 anatomist1 is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 604
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

Sorry, I just don't buy any of it. Sexual repression is far more inherently harmful than exposure to nudity and sex. 'Naturalness' or 'appropriateness' or 'nudity vs. nakedness' is just an attempt to rationalize your own level of repression as it has been drilled into you by our society and your own personal upbringing.

Your anecdote about sexual abuse survivors is nothing but a random anecdote of association that implies nothing about causation, or anything about these issues. Child abuse is very complex phenomenon, and to imply that it is somehow caused by kids seeing naked people or porno magazines is ridiculous. On the contrary. If I had the time and space, I would construct an argument that sexual repression is far more likely the cause of child abuse - people with a healthy unrepressed sexuality do not get off on hurting children.

What seems to be sorely lacking in this discussion is any awareness of anthropology. Human beings and their evolutionary ancestors had a much healthier and less repressive attitude about nudity and sex for millenia upon millenia before the invention of religions and societal taboos came along to make us feel guilt shame and fear about it.

Some people in the world still do today. As someone else mentioned, many poor cultures live with whole families crammed into one room and the children are exposed to sex from day one. In some parts of the world people live naked or almost naked all the time, and they see both people and animals having sex from infancy. You may think they are 'primitive' but you might want to look into their rates of rape, murder, and war compared to ours before you judge.

We all have our own idiosyncrasies when it comes to sex. Some of them are genetic, but most of them are a product of social conditioning. This conditioning has nothing to do with any kind of absolute moral truths or the inherent state of the universe. It's all made-up. Plenty of people and cultures have done and do it differently.

In general, I see the level of sexual repression in a society as almost a barometer of how messed up it is. Look at heavily Islamic countries where women are forced to wear shrouds so no one can see them and are stoned to death if accused of adultery, etc... That is a further extension of the kind of repression being defended here. I'll bet they justify it in terms of 'protecting' people and 'caring' too.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 05-16-2006, 07:20 PM
JasonGillespie's Avatar
JasonGillespie JasonGillespie is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 429
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

anatomist1,
I'm sorry that you just don't see the simple truth, but facts are facts and you can theorize all you want. Your poor grasp of the realitiy of the effects of sexualization on our country's children shows that. Unless you've been there I would venture that you just don't know what you are talking about. Rant all you want. Until you've had your whole life altered by it you have no clue.

The U.S. might culturally have hangs up about sex, but child prostitution/pornography happens in other countries far more often than it does here. Worse, child slavery is a growing criminal enterprise in many European, Asian, and African countries. It isn't just societal conditioning we are talking about. These other cultures have far more unrestrained sexuality in their culture than we do. Many of these cultures you speak of have grave problems with a subculture where children become objects for pleasure. You just refuse to see a large global problem. Not that that is unusual.

The links below are relating to child slavery and child prostitution..they were only 3 out of 158,000 Google results on child slavery and over a million about child prostitution.

http://www.time.com/time/asia/featur...ery/index.html
www.american.edu/TED/chocolate-slave.htm -
http://www.anti-slaverysociety.addr....averysasia.htm

http://www.smart-art.at/strassenkinder/kia_pro-3-e.htm
http://www.canada.com/edmontonjourna...ce14e7&k=19587
http://www.ccnmatthews.com/news/rele...tionFor=588106

Wake up.

Back to the original topic....I don't have a problem with nudity. I do have a problem with much of Koons work (and those like him) being displayed in a public venue. I don't think you see the distinction in your rush to judgement. Again, not that that is unusual.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 05-16-2006, 07:31 PM
anatomist1 anatomist1 is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 604
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

I offered a fairly well-reasoned explanation of my views. In response, you have not directly addressed anything I said, and instead offered emotional histrionics, and exhortations like "you have no clue", "you refuse to see" and "Wake up!". I see nothing in your post that requires further response. Good day.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 05-17-2006, 09:56 AM
JasonGillespie's Avatar
JasonGillespie JasonGillespie is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 429
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

anatomist1,

I wanted to apologize for my own part in letting our postings on the topic of the "public display" degenerate somewhat. I can, however, unequivocally say that this is not about my repression of anything.

As I alluded earlier, just the sort of abuse I previously posted about has adversely affected my own life and my abuser did use pornographic material to open the door for subsequent abuse. (Perhaps it was my reference to this that prompted your comment about “emotional histrionics “?!) I also know others who have had the same experience. My assertions, however, were not emotional ones, rather they are based on experience and contemporary research backs them up. (Pornography is documented to be one of the most common ways abusers/pedophiles get their victims to become desensitized to what they want them to do.) I am not unaware that this may seem hard for one who has not experienced this firsthand to digest and retract my comments about your "cluelessness", and your need to "wake up". (While I think the latter may aptly describe what needs to happen, it is not the best way to state that thought.) I don't know your background, but I know my own and shouldn't expect you to be as well informed on this reality unless it is a part of your life as well. Your marginalizing of the effect of materials such as pornography and other explicit imagery as a tool for sexual predators is a result of this I imagine.

My response, if you read it, did address your statements. I reiterate, ….you assert that other cultures have healthier attitudes towards sex, but that fact is not borne out by the rampant child pornography and child prostitution in Asia, Africa, and Europe. (Child slavery as well is a symptom of the cultural malaise that allows the other two to occur.) That was my response to your premise. Historical anthropology aside, all you have to do to see this truth is to research it upon the web. What might have been is not the issue, and repression doesn't account for it either. (Although historically children have been sexualized since the beginning of recorded history to one degree or another) Much of the worst abuse of children takes place in countries that have lax attitudes about public nudity and open displays of a sexual nature. There is a world wide epidemic and it is because the healthier attitudes towards sex don't exist in the ways you suggest...not on a macro, multicultural level. In smaller, more specific contexts I know they do. In a global context, however, it is not a reality.

A mitigating factor to some of the earlier confusion maybe that I am not discussing mere nudity, but the explicit displays such as Koons work exemplifies. I agree that nudity, the unsexualized display of the body, isn't anything to get worked up about. As fritichie said, it is a distinction mature artists usually make because the choice to use one or the other sends different messages. Koons obviously is sending a different message than say Fredrick Hartt did with his use of nudity.

Regardless of our differences, I do not want to foster antipathy as a result of our disagreement. My apologies for any bad feelings that have resulted.
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 05-17-2006, 02:03 PM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonGillespie
anatomist1,

I wanted to apologize for my own part in letting our postings on the topic of the "public display" degenerate somewhat. I can, however,
I didn't see any serious deterioration, really.

Quote:
As I alluded earlier, just the sort of abuse I previously posted about has adversely affected my own life and my abuser did use pornographic material to open the door for subsequent abuse.
I am sorry to read that, it has happened to me as well starting age 8 with a priest at St Patricks in NYC exposing himself to me, but there's two ways to deal with this sort of thing- let it affect your entir elife, or learn to accept what you can't change, don't take the blame or fault for what happened, and move on.

Quote:
(Pornography is documented to be one of the most common ways abusers/pedophiles get their victims to become desensitized to what they want them to do.) I am not unaware that this may seem hard for one who has not experienced this firsthand to digest and retract my comments
Ok here is where I do have some trouble, I won't go into the hugely long article, references and commentary I posted about this sort of thing elsewhere in regards to "studies" and "surveys" and other such being used in part out of context for a political agenda to pass a stupid law in Washington State recently. The jist was, certain figures were blatantly cited as facts and taken out of context, when I did some research I discovered a totally DIFFERENT picture. This involved already incarcerated juvenile offenders, the majority between the ages of about 9 and 14 and in one facility, of about 130 individuals filling out anonymous self questionaires on their sexual histories.

The results were used not only out of context but in a totally subversive fashion to pass a law , it was astounding and outrageous.

Point is, when people cite statistics or statements such as "Pornography is documented to be one of the most common ways abusers/pedophiles get their victims to become desensitized" one has to be very careful and research the true source of this information and go verify for yourselves. I have run into MANY pedos as a kid and teen, NONE displayed any porn to me of any kind, and given the above Washington law and how information was misused I am skeptical when I read these statements.

I will go on record and say I don't like porn, I think it's idiotic, fake, a waste of money and time and people get obsessed with it- owning 50,000 images, 10,000 video tapes and so on is an obsession.


Quote:
Your marginalizing of the effect of materials such as pornography and other explicit imagery as a tool for sexual predators is a result of this I imagine.
I still believe this focus on that is misguided and inaccurate, if they didn't use porn it's something else, all the pedos I ran into as a kid were very friendly, smooth talkers- con artists.

edited in;

Quote:
(Although historically children have been sexualized since the beginning of recorded history to one degree or another) Much of the worst abuse of children takes place in countries that have lax attitudes about public nudity and open displays of a sexual nature. There is a world wide epidemic and it is because the healthier attitudes towards sex don't exist in the ways you suggest...
I think you are mixing two issues here for one thing, and another thing- these things have been going on since the dark ages, this is nothing new, it's just heard about more in the media and internet. The Greeks, Romans and other cultures all had very open sexuality and all that, in most third world countries where entire families live in ONE ROOM, the children are exposed to seeing adult relations from the start. It's not treated as "dirty" or "shameful" or to be hidden like it is here in the US. You can go overseas and see women in public parks etc topless, people are used to it because the culture is that way. The breasts cease to be either this mysterious growth or disgusting sex organ when they are normalized and not kept hidden like some shameful wart.

Quote:
A mitigating factor to some of the earlier confusion maybe that I am not discussing mere nudity, but the explicit displays such as Koons work exemplifies. I agree that nudity, the unsexualized display of the body, isn't anything to get worked up about. As fritichie said, it is a distinction mature artists usually make because the choice to use one or the other sends different messages. Koons obviously is sending a different message than say Fredrick Hartt did with his use of nudity.
Koon's work is pornogrified, it's meant to titilate, Saint Gaudens nude Diana on top of White's tower was simply a naturally nude figure.
Personally I have no interest in nude bodies or other people that way, and I don't care for porn as I said, but Koon's photo work is just boring for me. I don't care if I see it on the web I just have zero interest in it and for me to view these pictures, well, I might as well be browsing images of the inside of the septic tank or a shipping crate.

Last edited by Landseer : 05-17-2006 at 08:26 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 05-17-2006, 04:05 PM
anatomist1 anatomist1 is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 604
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

I do not dispute that child abuse is bad, but I don't see it as a pivotal issue when it comes to issues about the legality or public acceptability of nudity or sexual imagery. It seems to me like this is primarily a law enforcement issue. To say that restricting (non-child) pornography or promoting sexual repression in any form is significant to addressing the problem seems batty to me. If this is your issue, focus on educating kids to stay away from predators and paying for more detectives and cops to go out and bust them.

As for the roots of the worldwide problem of sex slavery and child prostitution, I still think you are completely upside-down in your thinking on this. Fetishism of any kind is the result of repressed, unhealthy sexuality. Sexual predators and child-fetishists didn't get so twisted from seeing sex in movies, porno magazines, naked people on billboards, or because their parents allowed them to cavort naked with their friends when they were kids. They got that way due to some combination of genetic predisposition and having suffered abuse as children themselves. Do you really think that parents that let their kids see nudity and sex and consider it no big deal are more likely to raise predators than parents that treat sex like something filthy, shameful, secretive, and bad?

In a larger context, as far as correlating a country's liberalness with regards to nudity and sex with increases in child abuse, you'll have to show me the studies. I doubt it.

Even if it is true, it pales statistically in comparison to the correlation between such liberalness and the conditions for women. Sexual abusees are a small minority of any population, whereas women are roughly half. In cultures with extreme sexual repression, women are treated as sub-humans - practically livestock - whereas in sexually liberal countries, women are much closer to equal with men.

This is just the biggest criteria. The quality of life in more socially liberal countries is better across the board. Even if you can show that such liberalness correlates with a higher rate of child sexual abuse, I say it's worth it. It can be counterracted by proactive education and law enforcement. Censorship and repression are not the answer. If you really value extreme uptightness about sex and the 'safety' it confers to the population so highly, there are plenty of muslim-dominated countries to which you could immigrate...
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 05-17-2006, 08:37 PM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

Quote:
Originally Posted by anatomist1
To say that restricting (non-child) pornography or promoting sexual repression in any form is significant to addressing the problem seems batty to me. If this is your issue, focus on educating kids to stay away from predators
I agree, this is the whole root of it- prevention and parents watching THEIR kids like they should be. The porn is a totally and insignificant side issue, it's like connecting smokers to pedophilia because a significant number of them smoke (lets say) and banning smoking to prevent this.

Quote:
Fetishism of any kind is the result of repressed, unhealthy sexuality.
I disagree with that totally, and suggest reading research works on the subject by R. Masters and others to learn more. This is a stereotype and one which is similar to the thinking that gay people molest children, when in fact the two are two seperate entities, tho like in all facets- there can be some degree of overlap of interests in some individuals.

Quote:
They got that way due to some combination of genetic predisposition and having suffered abuse as children themselves.
I disagree with the latter portion of that, abuse is not always a factor and it certainly is not "the" cause, it can be part of the total equasion in SOME individuals, but abuse usually manifests itself in other ways- usually violence, often fatal, drug abuse, alcoholism and the jails are full of people with these problems who had rotten childhoods.
But having a rotten childhood is neither a guarantee the kid will turn out violent, nor is having a great childhood a guarantee the kid will become Bill Gates.


Quote:
In a larger context, as far as correlating a country's liberalness with regards to nudity and sex with increases in child abuse, you'll have to show me the studies. I doubt it.
I'd like to see that as well.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 05-17-2006, 08:43 PM
JasonGillespie's Avatar
JasonGillespie JasonGillespie is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 429
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

Landseer,
I respect your comments in reference to the use or misuse of statistics as they are related to the topic at hand. My wife has a math degree and statistics is her area of focus so I know the ways they can be skewed. The information is out there however. There are too many empirical instances where this has been reported for it to be a worldwide conspiracy to mislead the public. One can only be so cynical. Skepticism is only useful until it blinds you to being able to tell the difference between the truth and a lie.

I'm really not interested in debating something most of the professionals I'm aware of accept as a given. Sure, pedophiles also use drugs and alcohol, anything they can. Usually it is a mix of whatever will get the child to trust him/her. Some just use talk/charm or their positions of authority. When they do use props, porn is one of the top ones nowadays. The world has changed since you were a kid...heck since I was a kid. The internet and technology have seen to that. Don't confuse today's tech savvy predator with pervs in the past that had only their wits or candy to sweet talk a child into doing what they wanted.

Here is a profile of a pedophile behavior by an expert that was complied to be used in a california sexual molestation case. It is a bit long, but read it and you will see that the modern pedophile is a different animal.


1. Child molesters or pedophiles receive sexual gratification and satisfaction from actual, physical contact with children and from fantasy involving use of pictures, other photographic or art mediums, and writings on or about sexual activity with children;
2. Child molesters or pedophiles collect sexually explicit materials consisting of photographs, magazines, motion pictures, video tapes, books, and slides which they use for their own sexual gratification and fantasy;
3. Child molesters or pedophiles use sexually explicit materials, including those listed above for lowering the inhibitions of children, sexually stimulating children and themselves, and for demonstrating the desired sexual acts, before, during and after sexual activity with children;
4. Child molesters or pedophiles rarely, if ever, dispose of their sexually explicit materials, especially when it is used in the seduction of their victims, and those materials are treated as prized possessions;

5. Child molesters or pedophiles often correspond or meet with one another to share information and identities of their victims as a means of gaining status, trust, acceptance, and psychological support;
6. Child molesters or pedophiles rarely destroy correspondence received from other people with similar interests unless they are specifically requested to do so;
7. The majority of child molesters or pedophiles prefer contact with children of one sex, as well as in a particular age or developmental range peculiar to each individual;
8. Child molesters or pedophiles engage in activity or gravitate to programs which will be of interest to the type of victims they desire to attract and will provide them with easy access to these children;
9. Child molesters or pedophiles obtain, collect, and maintain photographs of the children they are or have been involved with. These photos may depict children fully clothed, in various states of undress or totally nude, in various activities, not necessarily sexually explicit. These photos are rarely, if ever, disposed of and are revered with such devotion that they are often kept upon the person's person in wallets and such. If a picture of a child is taken by such a person depicting the child in the nude, there is a high probability the child was molested before, during, or after the photo taking session, because the act of posing is such a great stimuli for the individual;
10. Child molesters or pedophiles use such photos as described above as a means of reliving fantasies or actual encounters with the depicted children. They also utilize the photos as keepsakes and as a means of gaining acceptance, status, trust, and psychological support by exchanging, trading, or selling them to other people with similar interests. These photos are carried and kept by these people as a constant threat to the child of blackmail and exposure;
11. Child molesters or pedophiles cut pictures of children out of magazines, newspapers, books and other publications which they use as a means of fantasy relationship. These "cutouts" help to identify the age and sexual preference of the person under investigation;
12. Child molesters or pedophiles collect books, magazines, newspapers, and other writings on the subject of sexual activities with children. They maintain these as a way of understanding their own feelings towards children;
13. Child molesters or pedophiles who are afraid of discovery often maintain and run their own photographic production and reproduction equipment. This may be as simple as the use of "instant" photo equipment such as Polaroid makes, video equipment, or as complex as a completely outfitted photo lab;
14. Child molesters or pedophiles go to great lengths to conceal and protect from discovery, theft, and damage, their collections of illicit materials. This often includes the rental or use of safe deposit boxes or other storage facilities outside their immediate residence;
15. Child molesters or pedophiles often collect, read, copy or maintain names, addresses or phone numbers or lists of persons who have similar sexual interests. These may have been collected by personal contact or through advertisements in various publications. These contacts are maintained as a means of personal referral, exchange, and commercial profit. These names may be maintained in the original publication, in phone or note books, or merely on scraps of paper;
16. Child molesters or pedophiles often keep the names of the children they are involved with or with whom they have had sexual contact. They maintain these names in much the same manner as that described in the preceding paragraph and for much the same reasons;
17. Child molesters or pedophiles use sexual aides such as dildos fashioned after a man's penis of various sizes and shapes in addition to other sexual aides in the seduction of their victims. They often utilize these as a means of exciting their victims and of arousing the curiosity of the children;
18. Child molesters or pedophiles maintain diaries of their sexual encounters with children. These accounts of their sexual experiences are used as a means of reliving the encounter when the offender has no children to molest. Such diaries might consist of a notebook, scraps of paper, or a formal diary; depending upon the resources available to the offender, they may be contained on audio tape or computer entries in a "home computer";
19. Child molesters or pedophiles collect and maintain books, magazines, articles, and other various writings on the subject of sexual activity. These books and materials may be on the topics of human sexuality, sexual education, or consist of sex manuals discussing or showing various sexual acts, positions, or sexual activities. These books and materials are used as a means of seduction of the victim by arousing curiosity, demonstration of propriety of the acts desired, explaining or demonstrating what the offender desires to be done, and as a means of sexual arousal on the part of the offender - particularly when naked children are shown or depicted in the materials;
20. Child molesters or pedophiles often use drugs as a means of inducement to get a child to a particular location such as the offender's home. Alcohol is also used in this fashion. Both drugs and alcohol are used as a means of seduction reducing the child's inhibitions and for sexual excitement;
21. Child molesters or pedophiles often collect and maintain artifacts, statues, paintings or other media which depict children or young persons in nude poses or sexual acts. These are kept or "left" in places where the victims can find or "discover" them;
22. Child molesters or pedophiles obtain and keep things of interest to their victims. These may consist of magazines, books, and toys for the age level of the victims they desire to attract and may be as complicated as video games, toy train sets, and computers;
23. Child molesters or pedophiles often keep mementos of their relationships with specific children as a means of remembrance. These may consist of underwear or other garments or things which are unique to the relationship they had with the child;
24. Child molesters or pedophiles have relationships with more than one child;
25. Child molesters or pedophiles use planned attempts, repeated attempts, and high risk attempts, including in the presence of third parties, at molestation of children;
26. Child molesters' or pedophiles' homes or workplaces are a magnet for neighborhood or friends' children;
27. Child molesters or pedophiles invite children to use hot tubs or pools;
28. Child molesters or pedophiles don't sustain good sexual relationships with their peer group;
29. Child molesters or pedophiles have an identifiable gender and age target;
30. Child molesters or pedophiles can better identify with children than their own peer group;
31. Child molesters or pedophiles hold parties or social functions to bring parents to seemingly legitimate functions in order to secure access to children;
32. Child molesters or pedophiles attempt to seduce children with attention, affection, and providing them with gifts;
33. Child molesters or pedophiles use seduction techniques, competition, peer pressure, child and group psychology, motivation techniques, threats, and blackmail;
34. Child molesters or pedophiles have hobbies and interests which appeal to children;
35. Child molesters or pedophiles use material items to appeal to children such as computers, video games, athletic equipment, swimming pools, hot tubs, or toys;
36. Child molesters or pedophiles use tickling and horseplay to lower reluctance of children to be touched;
37. Child molesters or pedophiles show sexually explicit materials to children to lower their inhibitions;
38. Child molesters or pedophiles collect both adult and child pornography for fantasy and sexual arousal;
39. Child molesters or pedophiles consider their pornography collection one of the most important things in their life;

40. Child molesters or pedophiles spend a lot of time with their collection;
41. Child molesters or pedophiles rarely discard their collection.


That being said, my original point was about the danger of sexualizing children through exposure to explicit imagery, Koons, nudity vs naked, etc....I did not intend for it to swerve quite this far in this direction.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 05-17-2006, 10:57 PM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonGillespie
Landseer,
I respect your comments in reference to the use or misuse of statistics as they are related to the topic at hand. My wife has a math degree and statistics is her area of focus so I know the ways they can be skewed.
Thanks, then you know how statistics can be skewed and misleading, that was one of my points- information being used improperly and out of context, and then people cite these as broad facts to paint a very broad picture that covers everyone and everything.

Quote:
The information is out there however. There are too many empirical instances where this has been reported for it to be a worldwide conspiracy to mislead the public.
I did not say NO pedophiles use this material and that it's a lie, I don't see it as any more than a minor side issue, these guys WILL do this to children with or without the visuals. Some of the more violent ones will simply kidnap- that happened here with the late Jessica Gage kidnapped by a friend of the family they knew.

Quote:
When they do use props, porn is one of the top ones nowadays. The world has changed since you were a kid...heck since I was a kid. The internet and technology have seen to that. Don't confuse today's tech savvy predator
"When they do use.." pretty well says it- that a percentage use it, another percentage DOESN'T, (I don't know the percentages, does it matter what the actual figure is?) both will do the act with or without it which was another point I made. Eliminating all nudes and porn will not stop the act and to think in any way it would is not reality.

I am not 75 or 80 with a childhood left 3/4 of a century behind me in the days when there were trolly cars and 5 cent sandwiches!
The 1970's and 1980's is the time frame of what I had in mind, and I don't think these people have changed all that much in so short a period of time.
We have the internet now which makes access easier and wider but before the net public parks, schools, playgrounds, Cub scout events, sporting events etc etc were quite well populated with these people. I certainly ran into many in the park, and by school in a book store, the library, on an airplane, walking down the street, sitting on a bench in front of a nursing home and so on.

I would believe however that the porn would be of more use to the male trying to convince a FEMALE child, but most 13-14-15 year old boys probably wouldn't need much beyond the talking/friendship scenario.

Of the 45 lines of article you posted, most of the statements are redundent of one another or offer the same ideas, however, line 11 shows proof that the visual material doesn't even HAVE to be nude, and can consist of such normal everyday inoculous items as your local K-Mart catalogues and sales circulars- I have read of that in the news. So If the X rated material is not handy, a K-Mart catalogue would be a suitable substitute;

11. Child molesters or pedophiles cut pictures of children out of magazines, newspapers, books and other publications which they use as a means of fantasy relationship.

I'm not sure we as a society can just lock up children from public view, prevent all pictures from ever being taken of them, or seal them in bubble-wrap. Where does it end? ban statues, paintings, revealing clothes- those short bathing suits have to go as they show the kid's legs, no more kids in K-Mart catalogues, no more young girls in mini skirts or strapless blouses, no more perfume, eye shadow, or especially MAKEUP! etc etc.
People can sexualize and eroticize ANYTHING, objects as well. It's still up to the parents to take charge and do their job with their own kids- not me, not you, not the Government, not the FCC, media or other censorship.

As Iona pointed out, she monitors and controls what her child sees according to his age, I suspect she keeps close physical watch on him as well.
If a parent finds a porn image on the kids computer etc., instead of reacting like a histerical nincompoop and creating a scene which leads the kid to think bodies are grotesque and sex is filthy- THAT is the time to sit the kid down and explain things, explain WHY the material is degrading and harmful to women, how shady companies rake in millions of dollars from idiots who pay for this over priced garbage and so on.

THAT is the time to explain the difference between degrading cesspool porn, Koon's photos, and an image of something like Michaelangel's David or Saint Gauden's Diana.
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 05-18-2006, 01:17 AM
JasonGillespie's Avatar
JasonGillespie JasonGillespie is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 429
Re: Public displaying of Nude Art

Landseer,
It seems you get my point...mostly. I wasn't saying that every pedophile uses porn, just that it is one of their main materials when they do choose to use lures.
I said, "Pornography is documented to be one of the most common ways abusers/pedophiles get their victims to become desensitized to what they want them to do." It says what it says...it doesn't say everyone of them use it all the time.

Concerning the above, I disagree with your statement that,
Quote:
I don't see it as any more than a minor side issue
Did you happen to note the importance that the profile said many pedophiles place on their collection of pornography?
Quote:
Child molesters or pedophiles consider their pornography collection one of the most important things in their life;
It isn't as minor as you make it out to be...it factors very heavily into their fantasy life and real life. But enough of that....

By the way, I didn't mean to make it seem that you were an old codger. Twenty or thirty years has made a huge difference in the resources available to the predators out there. Now they have the world wide web and back then we had Pac Man and Asteroids.



Quote:
People can sexualize and eroticize ANYTHING, objects as well. It's still up to the parents to take charge and do their job with their own kids- not me, not you, not the Government, not the FCC, media or other censorship.
I agree with the first part, but believe the government/society/all of "us" have a responsibility to make our country a place where children are safe...even if they don't have good parental figures to watch over them.....especially since we know that many parents don't give a flip what their kids get into. Do we just shrug our shoulders and and say, "guess those kids have to figure it out for themselves?" Whatever happened to people looking out for each other? Is our national selfishness at such a high level that we just say, "I got my own under control and that is all that matters?"
I'm sorry but I think it is good to care about and watch out for people other than myself and my immediate family...and watching what is put into the public arena is a part of that. Not that that will keep Koons and the like from continuing to try and make money through controversy. The public has a right to not to be subjected to purient material masquerading under the guise of art. Koons rights end where my, your and everyone elses begin. (In case anyone is unsure...by purient I don't mean nudity in general....just sexually explicit.)


This is an aside...... what is this artistic fixation with censorship? It is one of the most monolithic of concepts. You can almost hear some artists start choking the moment you mention something that even sounds like it could be (gasp)...censorship. "Don't say we can't do that...we can do anything...we're artists." I only ask because it comes up a lot in posts in this community. It is one of the biggest kneejerk reactions...even at the NYAA it comes up. Perhaps this is a thread unto itself. I don't know......as an adult, it doesn't bother me when someone tells me I have certain parameters that I must work within...I realize that getting my way is not the only thing that matters. Censorship isn't always a bad thing...sometimes it can be a good thing. Sometimes we need to be protected. I'm not talking big brother, but not everything is good for us. The ego says "I want my way and no one is going to tell me what to do"...I guess. Or is it fear? Any thoughts anyone?....it is indirectly related to this thread....I think.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Sculpture Community, Sculpture.net
International Sculpture Center, Sculpture.org
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Russ RuBert