July 29, 2005

"We find a naked body every bit as beautiful as a clothed one. If they came only out of lust, we have to accept that. We stand for the truth."

A "prestigious" museum in Vienna gets the attention of the Washington Post with a nudity gimmick: They're letting you in free if you take off all your clothes (or wear a swimsuit). Do they lose money this way? I would think it's quite the opposite. Those let in free are putting on a display for the paying patrons. Unlike the regular artists, the nudies draw no pay. And then there's all that extra publicity.
Most of those who showed up in little or no attire Friday opted for swimsuits, but a few hardy souls dared to bare more. Among them was Bettina Huth of Stuttgart, Germany, who roamed the exhibition wearing only sandals and a black bikini bottom.

Although she used a program at one point to shield herself from a phalanx of TV cameras, Huth, 52, said she didn't understand what all the fuss was about.

"I go into the steam bath every week, so I'm used to being naked," she said. "I think there's a double morality, especially in America. We lived in California for two years, and I found it strange that my children had to cover themselves up at the beach when they were only 3 or 4 years old. That's ridiculous."
Oh, yeah, those terrible Americans. What hypocrites!

I'm amused by the way nudists flatter themselves, always claiming to be especially honest. But then they always say things that sound so disingenuous, that they are just being natural and why is everyone making such a fuss?

19 comments:

Drethelin said...

I will be a fan of clothing until the time when we all have the bodies of greek gods.

Just because something is "natural" does not mean it is beautiful. Decay is natural.

Lars said...

Why did she wear a bikini bottom? Are there weeds in her Love Garden? No shekels for a half-Monty.

SippicanCottage said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dean said...

Why use a program to shield herself from the TV cameras?

Nothing would dim my appreciation of art faster than seeing my fat, white nude body. Even in a bathing suit. Yuck.

Goesh said...

3-4 yr. old kids running nude at the beach = sunburnt butts with alot of sand stuck in their butts and alot of crankiness on the way home in the backseat of the car, fussing and bickering and pestering each other - not a fun ending to a great day at the beach with the family that's for sure.

Mom Underground said...

Apparently the enlightened European is not familiar with the American philosophy of Sam the Eagle. As he reminded us many times on The Muppet Show, "We're naked underneath our clothes."

Or something like that.

Menlo Bob said...

My guess is that museum goers viewing idealized depictions of nudity will make note of the stark reality confronting them. It isn't just terrible American's at fault here. I've got a mirror that reveals unwelcome thoughts about nudity.

mcg said...

I have a body like a god. Too bad it's buddha.

DirtCrashr said...

Nudists are big egoists, the European variety sees itself embracing Nature, the way Rousseau intended it - it's their casually sophisticatted entitlement to enlightenment. Also, neener-neener on the prudish.
Naturism is also their small, fairly socially-acceptable rebellion against the great unnatural edifices they build. All those damn castles and regulations, "Papiere, bitte!"
Down on the Danube there are numerous "Frei" schwimmplatz, gravelly beaches with stunted trees and willow bushes where even the Baptist church youth-group with whom I spent Sundays, would go skinny-dipping.
Euro-Baptists are a lot more fun that some Ami-Baptists, that's for sure - and the Vienniese girls, oh yeh... One of the guys in the youth-group had the last name of Klimt - his grandfather's notorious and scandalous pictures hang in that museum. Something of a black-sheep in the family, but the Vienniese love a juicy and shocking scandal. It's like a social defibrillator that breaks up the dull monotony of life off in a corner of a decaying and forgotten Old Empire in the hinterland of Europe.
Then they go out and buy the tres-chic and molto-expensivo shoes of the Manolo, who doesn't even like to see the shorts in public, "Manolo says, unless you live in the Bermuda, or are the male stripper, the shorts at the place of the work they are unacceptable."

purple_kangaroo said...

Well, I had a nightmare about something like this a few nights ago . . . one of those dreams where you're walking around in public and suddenly look down and realize you forgot to put on your clothes. Ugh.

Dirty Harry said...

There simply needs to be an international law that stops the homely from walking around nude.

Pastor_Jeff said...

Mcg - hilarious!

Purple Kangaroo,

Ah yes, the old dream about showing up naked in public. Do nudists dream that they show up at the beach with clothes on?

JB said...

This is a little off-topic, but, I think, mostly on-topic too.

Clothes are one of those things that I see as a constant reminder of the story of the Garden of Eden. It's interesting because Adam and Eve were naked before the fall.

I know one can come up for a lot of justifications about why people started wearing clothes, but I think it's difficult to come up with one, just because to create this "societal expectation" of clothedness seems difficult if it were just a result of needed warmth or something else. The shame came from somewhere...where?

It's interesting because there's this post, and then the one earlier about the Scopes trial and the dreadful accounting of history that the play and movie give, and naturally negatively portray people who believe in the Genesis Creation.

It is a certain kind of arrogance, dare I say, the "wisdom of man" to have no real way to know what happened even 4000 years ago well, and declare that we know what happened 1,000,000 years ago, and shut out the very relevant explanations for our creation.

Nels said...

I agree that we have strange ideas here regarding nude children.

Until my sister was about 7 or 8, whenever we'd go to the condo pool, she wore bathing trunks for boys, and no top. As her hair was very short other residents assumed she was a boy - all her life people have made this mistake. However, at some point one of the residents learned that she was a girl, and a great hubbub ensued, the result of which she was forced to cover up her non-existent chest or be banned from the pool.

So during the time everyone had thought she was a boy, all was fine and decent, but once exposed as a girl her behavior was somehow depraved.

ploopusgirl said...

Uh, it's call science, JB. I'm pretty sure there's some scientific evidence that points to what was going on 4000 years ago, and I don't believe any of it points to some mystical garden.

Also, to counter your point: Ancient Greek people had little if any shame about their naked bodies, and, as evidenced by the article Ann linked to, Europeans have much less shame when it comes to nudity than Americans do. So if Creationism is the cause of shame of nudity.. then creationism must have happened a lot more recently than the Bible would have us believe.

JB said...

And you know the interesting thing about Science ploopusgirl is...that 4000 years ago the "science" tells us pretty much the same thing that the Bible does, that shortly after the time of what would be the tower of Babel (Babylon's establishment) shortly thereafter, new Nations started coming into existence, ironically, all coming out of the general direction of where Babylon is. Science and the Bible also gnerally agree on the general place of which humankind arose (the fertile crescent).

The difference is, "Science" says that if we extrapolate 10 years of data back over 100 million it shows it was this way 100 million years ago. I would say...that's a little presumptuous.

And your few exceptions hardly prove the rule, the Ancient Greeks may have "prized" nudity, yet my impression is that it still was the exception to be nude. People nowadays "prize" nudity looking at the pornography is ravenously consumed, it's still the exception for those people to go out naked.

At this point (actually I little bit ago) I'm probably hijacking this thread, so I'll cool it. (My apologies).

PatCA said...

Yeah, right, it's just art, like this is just politics.

Breasts, not Bombs

miklos rosza said...

I remember when Germaine Greer said that women should go "bottomless" so that men would be confronted with the female genital. This would be liberating for women and awe-inspiring and educational for men.

Eldridge Cleaver designed pants with penis-sheaths sticking out. These pants didn't really catch on.

I wonder if Greer would still be in favor of female exposure now that pubic hair fashion has dramatically changed. At least among those wearing thong bikinis or thong underwear.

bos0x said...

JB: And "science" also proves that everyone on earth spoke the same language and decided to build a massive tower, but then the Lord said "Lo!" and knocked down the tower and scattered all of the people around the world and changed all of their languages.... Right?

If both "science" and the ~**~HOLY BIBLE~**~ agree about the date of the existence of new nations or whatever, nothing is proved about either "science" or ~**~HOLY BIBLE~**~ - just that the author of that particular passage was a fan of historical fiction.