To be surrounded by hundreds of naked people is an awesome, overwhelming sight. So many different shapes and sizes, in varying hues, blending into a uniform mass.Sounds appalling.
July 18, 2005
The temptation to cover nudity.
BBC reports on another one of those mass nudity art happenings. You can scarcely blame artists for doing things like this when the media can't resist the temptation to cover it:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
10 comments:
"...cover nudity." Heh.
-----
"Hi, I'm here to cover the nudity."
"Oh, OK, drive up the parkway and park on the driveway."
"Wow. Pretty ugly."
-----
Matthew: Do I need a bigger sledgehammer?
Whatever do you mean?
Please consider my comment like sign language for the subtlety-impaired...
BTW, your profile photo goes great with your comment. It just looks like that's what you're saying. :-D
Joe: That must be what makes it art.
Slocum: It's an aesthetic matter, not a moral one. Those people look awful, and as art it's just tired.
To be surrounded by hundreds of naked people is awesome
If one is at the Playboy Mansion perhaps, otherwise not.
Slocum: I agree they look human. I don't agree that they look "just human."
And "bleeech" sounds like an expression of disgust to me. Time to take back chiding me for being "squeamish."
Slocum: And my "sounds appalling" was in response to "So many different shapes and sizes, in varying hues, blending into a uniform mass." What the hell's the difference?
So many different shapes and sizes... sounds beautiful. Sounds inclusive. Maybe that's the turnoff. Nakedness is honest. Maybe that's the repulsion.
In this very image-conscious superficial culture we live in, honest nudity is shocking, but if you ponder it, transformational. It's just nature. If you don't want to look at it, don't, but it's not shallow.
Post a Comment