Some months ago Maiken and I were talking and she asked me the following question (paraphrased because my memory is terrible):
What is the role of nudity in art?
As I remember it, one of Maiken's concerns was that so often it is women who are the subject (object?) and men the subjectors (objectifiers?) and that it feels like a form of exploitation. Maiken and I were reading Art & Soul at the time and one of the profiled artists is a Christian who oftern uses nudity in his pieces. So, I ask you, what is the point of nudity in art; especially for us Christians.
5 comments:
Hey all,
thanks for this. Contextually speaking, i think it is quite obvious that the human form, much like everything else in the world, has become a commodity that is used to grab people's attention in order to sell them something. I def. see the value of nudes as an expression of beauty, but for the christian, this type of expression is tenuous. Aside from the moral argument that accounts for people's weaknesses with lust, it is most problematic b/c of the inordinate amount of self-love that is prevalent in humanity. Using the human body as an expression of beauty today is like using trees for paper. It's become commonplace and quite useful, but is that what it was actually created for? The problem isn't with the nudity as such, just like paper isn't 'bad'. What's troubling is the way we perceive nudes--not as beauty in any holy sense, but beauty for beauty's sake. Putting our bodies on such a pedestal sets them up for violation and pillaging. It's like the ancient Chinese philosophers say: When you secure all your belongings in a tight little bundle, protected by ropes and locks, it becomes easier for the thief to come and steal everything you own. His only hope is that your ropes and locks don't break as he carries your stuff away! Nudity, then, becomes privileged access into what we're not 'supposed' to see--that which we spend our entire lives covering up. We see our bodies as belonging to us, as the most intimate parts of our identity. Whereas in the time before "the fall", our bodies were not "ours" to groom and chisel, but were mere vessels of experience in communion with God. I think the nudist colony subcultures, or certain European beaches, can be applauded for at least trying to raise our consciousness to some point of non-ego selflessness, liberty, and purity, but could we ever have a nudist colony that could claim to be the freedom we have in Christ? I don't know, it seems there will always be that creepy guy lurking around stealing that which was is offered up in the name of grace and vulnerability. So, i guess, what would be important for nudity in the art of Jesus followers is 1) a transformed consciousness that saw the body only as an empty vessel longing for the blood of Christ to flow through it, and 2) a community context that would be raising a standard of shared values on nudity: an 'art as life' experiment in emptiness and spiritual poverty... however in this highly individualized aesthetic culture, i find it to be nearly impossible.
-j
Thanks for responding so quickly Joshua. You've already written a ton but I need you to write just a bit more to help me unpack some of what you wrote.
At the end of your comment you gave 2 requirements for nudity in the art of Jesus followers. The first seems obvious enough, we need to be "transformed through the renewing of [our] minds" so that we can observe & use the body for its intended purposes and not be swayed by the mores of this world and our sinful nature. It's the second requirement that's messing me up. What is "a community context that would be raising a standard of shared values on nudity: an 'art as life' experiment in emptiness and spiritual poverty"? What is the context? What values does the community have to agree on? How exactly does emptiness/spiritual poverty factor in?
Help a brother out!
I agree with Joshua on a lot of what he is saying. But at the same time i disagree...
God created us in His own image, and in so doing gave us an image that we can use to worship Him. I think it is still very possible to create holistic, holy art that includes nudity... the catch is that you have to find a way to make the viewer see it as worship rather than a provocative image. Not that i'm saying we all need to run out and start making "christian-ese" art now - but there is certain questions that one would need to ask oneself before starting a nudist piece of art:
1 - What is my message behind this piece? If you are drawing a nude body just for the sake of drawing a nude body, then any number of ideas, including unhealthy ones, could be portrayed. However, say you were trying to portray how naked and lonely you are without Christ, or how vulnerable to His love you can become, the nude figure could be one of your best assets for portraying this point.
2 - Will this edify the viewers? And will i be shining Christ through this image? As Christians in the arts we need to realize that we are being watched... always... people want to find things to criticize us for. We walk a fine line as believers because we have the duty of edifying the church and bringing them deeper into worship through our talents but we also have to create images that can be jumping points for non-believers. Images that will create questions and longing and draw non-believers into Christ's love is something that we should strive for.
dan,
i should preface my responses to your questions with two clarifications that were indirectly hinted at in my previous comment. First, i'm trained in the 'filmic' arts and so my initial reactions to nudity pertain to the realism of cinema and photography, not painting or sculpture. My arguments operate under the assumption that we are referring to a realist nudity that could be problematic to Christians on moral grounds. Second, I have a particular conviction pertaining to art in the Way of Jesus, and my responses flow out of that conviction. Ok. I believe that the modern, Western, dualistic understanding of the artist and artifact is an unhealthy example of how a Christ follower should do art. For one, the artist as 'auteur' puts an unhealthy emphasis on the artist's mind and body as a performer, rather than a mere vessel in which we are made simply to have the mind of Christ and gather as his body. This is one of the reasons why i am quite uncomfortable with Christian worship bands on a stage. (sorry underground.) Second, the artifact as the work of the artist's hands is another way to de-emphasize the work of Christ (which is what Beauty in all of its forms is...), and glorify the idolatrous ego. Now, I understand these are sweeping generalizations, but in the context of American culture, such aesthetic norms are a part of the spirit of the times, and if a Christ follower participates in them, he risks the gospel being drowned out in either a massive tidal wave of myriad consumer artifacts, or, if it's good art, a competition for status and critical acclaim. Now, to answer your questions: the community context would be the church, the shared value would be 'to live as Christ', and i believe the most healthy way a Christian could explore this, *if at all*, would be to *live* in absolute spiritual poverty--devoid of any self-conscious awareness of the nakedness of one's own body, like adam and eve once did--as opposed to creating some work of art consisting of nude images and trying to pass them off as a return to 'innocence', 'purity', or 'beauty'. Any nude imagery (in the realist sense) of this day and age can be interpreted perversely, thus completely subverting the gospel message. In other words, I don't think (realist) nudity in Christian art is a good idea. So when can we all get together and take off our clothes? When Jesus comes back and shows us how!
LeAnn--
thanks for your comments. They made me realize that there are def. many ways we could look at this issue in light of either masculine or feminine perspectives. I guess it never occurred to me, but the female perspective of the nude would be very different than a male perspective. I certainly resonate with your comment on 'holistic, holy art', and the value of the metaphorical use of nudity. As per your second point, i personally would avoid seeker-sensitivity as an artist--and only because i don't see art in any way trying to impose from without via imagery, morality, or the like. Contarily, I value art for the ways it can get 'all up in ya'! This is what differentiates it from logic and propaganda--art can haunt you and burden you internally for days without you ever understanding it! Come to think of it, nudity decontextualized from sexuality may be very effective from this perspective. hmmmm....
Post a Comment