A Nude Interview

[James Lemon]

 

[Asher Kelman]

James,

I like the strong pose. She seems a natural. The pale rendering of her skin works well moving her pose into the world of Greek sculpture.

Great effect!

Asher

 

[James Lemon]

James,

I like the strong pose. She seems a natural. The pale rendering of her skin works well moving her pose into the world of Greek sculpture.

Great effect!

Asher

Hi Asher

Thanks for your feed back! She is strong, agile and is good at what she does.

James

 

[Antonio Correia]

It is indeed a very successfull nude image !

Nice, very nice...

 

[James Lemon]

It is indeed a very successfull nude image !

Nice, very nice...

Hi Antonio

Thanks for your feedback... much appreciated!

James

 

[Tom dinning]

I've had this discussion before with some. Nevertheless, I have the urge to say it again.
I just don't get it!
I get the beauty of form and of the human body and the juxtaposition and all that. I get the technical proficiency and skills required to take the photo.
I even get the idiology and attempts at creativity.
But there is something deep inside me which objects. It just seems a bit humiliating. A bunch of blokes seeing what they can do with a pair of tits and a fanny. Oggling in the name of creativity and art.
Invariably, its women being photographed by men.
I know. You'll all get indignant and throw up a whole host of shots taken of men by women. But i can bet my britches you found more of the other option. Much more.

Beyond the photo as a photo, I just can't see anything more. Maybe its the idea that Doug was getting through in his wonderful and much more interesting photo of a ..... I'm not too sure.
Some photos just need to be explained.
Please explain.

 

[Asher Kelman]

I've had this discussion before with some. Nevertheless, I have the urge to say it again.
I just don't get it!
I get the beauty of form and of the human body and the juxtaposition and all that. I get the technical proficiency and skills required to take the photo.
I even get the idiology and attempts at creativity.
But there is something deep inside me which objects. It just seems a bit humiliating. A bunch of blokes seeing what they can do with a pair of tits and a fanny.

This vocabulary including such demeaning and dismissive terms as "tits" and "fanny" is foreign to me. Those who use it tend to be uncomfortable at the sight of the adult nude female form of someone other than a spouse. There may be giggles, shock, discomfort or unease. So yes, for such folk, I would not be surprised if the reaction was of "exploitation". That would seem to be a reasonable response that would even be immediate and eruptive! This is strictly a cultural phenomenon and I do not attach any "rightness" or "wrongness" to such attitudes as behaviors just need to be internally consistent within a particular society for folk to be comfortable.

However, in the culture of those art lovers who I have seen react to the nude female form, there is respect for the dignity of the woman and her special place of power and glorious authority as a wonderful form, even before she will even utter a single word.

In fact, if someone is offended, they should just avoid looking at these photographs as they have no value within that persons cultural norms and sense of decorum and suitable behavior.

Such negative comments offered for this picture here equally would apply to all or many of the other nude pictures here. There is no need to add this statement to such pictures as we take it for granted that this picture in many societies would be deemed unseemly.

That's why we have warnings.

Asher

 

[Tom dinning]

Why warnings?
I'm not offended. I'm curious. I live in a culture which also exploits and denigrates women as well as whatever you said.
How is it possible that the same culture can do both?
How is it that some may see this as embarrassing, humiliating, degrading and others can see it as artistic, praise, and noteworthy. .
Does the context alter its perspectives? Does the individual hold the right to the correct perspectives? Can an individual hold both perspectives at the same time.?
How do we know artist meant well? How does the woman know the art is seen in one light or the other?
I hold no prudish view. Nor do I see this as erotic. But like most photographs I do look for the other layers. They are mine. I don't need a warning to prepare me for shock or horror or delight or passion.
But I am entitled to an opinion, however offending to some it may be.
And I am entitled to ask the questions of the artist.
I don't always expect to be answered in honesty or answered at all.
I may or may not be speaking on behalf of all here, but what I say fits well into the current cultural thinking.
Women are still fighting for their rights and an equal position on this planet. If this photo in any way helps that I get it. But at the moment I don't.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Tom,

Your questions are interesting and valid, but not for this picture. We do not need to have a picture of actual nudity to debate and explore the issue you raise. The warnings are only to tell folk who might raise these reservations that such debate is outside the protected scope of the zone allowed for these pictures. So visiting here means that one has to accept the pictures as art and as bone fide symbols of respect for the women portrayed. If you do believe a particular picture is obviously exploitative well beyond artistic considerations, then PM me and I will investigate. However, there is no reason to have this discussion here as any picture here is here to be protected from such questioning!

We can discuss this elsewhere and this will be transferred to a suitable location as it is not in anyway particular to the o.p.'s thread or topic and can be applied to much of photography of women who are photographed nude or even dressed!

Asher

 

[Tom dinning]

what ever!

 

[Asher Kelman]

what ever!

That is so existentialist of you!

?

 

[Asher Kelman]

What is special here is the ability of the model to transform herself into a physicality that despite having the substance of feminity is not using that to achieve its esthetic value as some sort of structural spa to the window architecture. We do recognize the elements of the human anatomy but these are surprisingly incidental. She is much closer to a stone sculpture than to a woman one could share a joke with or explain a choice of a movie or the taste of a great wine!

Now Permit me to say, "Fabulous!"

Asher

 

[Tom dinning]

Tom,

Your questions are interesting and valid, but not for this picture. We do not need to have a picture of actual nudity to debate and explore the issue you raise.
Asher

Then what is the point of the image if not to evoke thought? Must it be limited to the heading on the page? Can one not deviate from the context and content and move to areas that are less tatseful to a refined palate?

My mother-in-law would never discuss religion and politics at the dinner table. In spite of her insistance, we still discussed religion and politics if the line of conversation went that way. She would leave the table. Coming from a large family, we just ate what was on her plate.
Theres a moral there somewhere?

 

[Tom dinning]

This vocabulary including such demeaning and dismissive terms as "tits" and "fanny" is foreign to me.

Asher

Yeah, right!

 

[Tom dinning]

What is special here is the ability of the model to transform herself into a physicality that despite having the substance of feminity is not using that to achieve its esthetic value as some sort of structural spa to the window architecture. We do recognize the elements of the human anatomy but these are surprisingly incidental. She is much closer to a stone sculpture than to a woman one could share a joke with or explain a choice of a movie or the taste of a great wine!

Now Permit me to say, "Fabulous!"

Asher

Permit me to say: 'Weird'
I'm inclined to ask her: 'what the **** are you doing on that window ledge? You'll catch a cold and attract a crowd, none of who's members will consider any artistic quality'

I wonder if there are any of you out there who would shoot your wife or sister or mother in this pose.
Just asking. Surely each body has its own value artistically. And, by the way, if you ask your wife, sister or mother, also ask them why they refuse.
Having permission does not resolve people from having the responsibilities that go with it. Nor might they be privy to the reasons why permission was given.

 

[Jerome Marot]

But there is something deep inside me which objects. It just seems a bit humiliating. A bunch of blokes seeing what they can do with a pair of tits and a fanny. Oggling in the name of creativity and art.
Invariably, its women being photographed by men.
I know. You'll all get indignant and throw up a whole host of shots taken of men by women. But i can bet my britches you found more of the other option. Much more.

The reason why nude photography is predominantly women photographed by men is entirely cultural. You were in Italy recently. You may have remarked that the country is full of antique sculptures and paintings. The vast majority of these sculptures represent the male form. Therefore, in a culture not so distant from yours or mine, the majority of artistic artefacts were of naked men made by men.

I am not aware of a culture where sculpture or paintings would be predominantly a female prerogative. However, I see no reason why women would not be as interested by the male form as men by the female form. And maybe, with the generalisation of photography in the form of the ubiquitous cellular phone we will find out sooner than we would like. Maybe some lady will suggest we both climb that window for her enjoyment (successively, I hope), how would you like that?

Joking aside, the pose certainly shows how fit and muscular that young lady is but seems rather contrived to me. Her right hand is also cut by the frame, and would need a bit more room. Last but not least, adult women are normally a bit less hairless, and I am not talking about their legs and armpits. But, and that is the important point, she new what she was doing at the time and agreed to the photograph. If she is ok with it, who am I to object?

 

[Doug Kerr]

Hi, Asher,

This vocabulary including such demeaning and dismissive terms as "tits" and "fanny" is foreign to me.

I do not agree that "tits" is of itself demeaning or dismissive. It think there is no difference between saying "Jane sure has nice tits" or "Jane sure has nice breasts" or "Jane sure has nice boobs" or "Jane sure has a nice bosom" or "Jane sure has nice headlights" or "Jane sure has nice mammae." Now I would probably say to Carla, 'Jane sure has nice tits'." But if the situation made it appropriate to being up the matter at all, I would say to Jane, "You sure have nice breasts."

We develop curious, arbitrary, illogical, and transitory conventions as to what colloquial terms are "acceptable". It may today be "OK" to say on a TV program "poop" but not "s​hit", or even "feces". At one time we could say "illegitimate child" but not "bastard". At one time we could say "with child" but not "pregnant".

I don't think that dismissiveness or demeanment comes from the choice of words from among colloquial synonyms.

Best regards,

Doug

 

[Asher Kelman]

Hi, Asher,



I do not agree that "tits" is of itself demeaning or dismissive. It think there is no difference between saying "Jane sure has nice tits" or "Jane sure has nice breasts" or "Jane sure has nice boobs" or "Jane sure has a nice bosom" or "Jane sure has nice headlights" or "Jane sure has nice mammae." Now I would probably say to Carla, 'Jane sure has nice tits'." But if the situation made it appropriate to being up the matter at all, I would say to Jane, "You sure have nice breasts."

We develop curious, arbitrary, illogical, and transitory conventions as to what colloquial terms are "acceptable". It may today be "OK" to say on a TV program "poop" but not "s​hit", or even "feces". At one time we could say "illegitimate child" but not "bastard". At one time we could say "with child" but not "pregnant".

I don't think that dismissiveness or demeanment comes from the choice of words from among colloquial synonyms.

Best regards,

Doug

All words are in themselves metaphors that draw on an expanding and societally relevant set of associations that drift over time. However the various words for the human female breast might be linked by their common reference to the same central anatomical form, the clouds of associated ideas, contextual and class of person using them add definite flavors to them.

"Breast" and "headlights" are not synonymous. The former is just the bare natural anatomical form, the latter focuses on the form of the woman with breasts uplifted, shaped and directed unnatural foreward as part of a fashion for decorating women who want to feel particularly noticed for various reasons. None of this is inherent in the word breast.

Also the term "tits' as the added sense of being visible, naughty and attractive.

Asher

 

[Asher Kelman]

That one hand is cut off is unimportant and in fact fits very well with a paradigm that we are seeing the structural aspect of this strong human form, as if she served as a strut. There's no sense of sexuality to me. Her being unshaven is again not important as that is how sculptures are made by some artists.

The nude seen thus allows us to temporarily escape the boundaries of modern convention of shame in nakedness. Certainly, when women are property, covering them might conserve their virginity longer and serve to permit their family to leverage that in bargaining for some trade in kind, such as 5 sheep and 12 hens.

I commend this picture as it does break boundaries and stimulates discussion. Those who object could do well either visit art galleries, get to know non-abused and liberated women and be more open. Alternatively, they can simply read the sign, ("Abandon all hope, ye who enter here."), above the doorway leading down the steps to descend into the caverns of the suffering in "Dante's Inferno!

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

Let me post a picture of a young tit to cheer you up.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Let me post a picture of a young tit to cheer you up.

Jerome, I find the little fellow delightful. But hasn't the face got expressions of angst?

Asher

 

[Jerome Marot]

Jerome, I find the little fellow delightful. But hasn't the face got expressions of angst?

Humans can change the shape of their mouth to express feelings, birds have a beak which has a fixed shape. You may misinterpret the shape of the beak of the little bird.

 

[Asher Kelman]

But that's how we view creatures, Jerome, isn't it? After all Bambi has cute eyes and the owl has a wise face, taking the cue from cuteness in a child and wisdom in the knowing, learned eyes of a sage!

Asher

 

[James Lemon]

Explicit nude photos should not cause moral panic!

James

 

[Asher Kelman]

There's no moral panic here, LOL!

This isn't the place to discuss attitudes. That belongs in Layback Cafe. Here just show pictures! I am impressed with your work and hope to see more!

Asher

 

[Tom dinning]

Explicit nude photos should not cause moral panic!

James

"should not" James?

Since when did you become keeper of moral judgement.
Is that the first commandment of the Gospel according to James?
And is 'panic' your choice of words? It's not mine, nor seems to belong to my part of the conversation.
It's your photo. I asked you to explain it to me. I don't get it. The content, subject matter, location, pose and purpose for posting here has me at sea.
I don't feel the need to defend myself; nor should you. Some here seem to think I was standing on a moral high ground. My moral high ground, as you know, is well below sea level, even before global warming.
I was asking the questions because they occurred to me as I viewed your picture, with interest, by the way. I have returned to it many times and nothing makes sense so I have endeavoured to investigate at my own level and experiences, background and knowledge; no more or less that anyone else here does.
I don't take nude of any sort. Never have, so I have no knowledge of the motivation behind such imagery. My association with nudes in photography is limited and with nudes as a subject for art it is limited to what I see in an art gallery.
Each nude I see conjures different imagery and thoughts in my brain. Some sexual, others, curiosity, disgust, concern, passion, abstraction, aesthetic and wanton lust. I don't fight any of them.
In addition, I see things that seemingly have no reaction other than: What the **** is that supposed to be about?
You guessed it. Your photo here is one such image. After all that has been said here and all the time I have spent looking at this image. all I see is a shaved **** and a pair of tits attached to a woman who seems desperately uncomfortable and insecure.

And if you think my attention span is gross, consider the likelihood of you meeting a person on the street. The first thing you do is look at the face. The next is their crutch. Funny, that. Does that mean we are all perves? No! It just means thats what we do.
So, here I am doing what I do and speaking about it.
I can only assume that, since I didnt get a response from you, even after I had done to the trouble of suggesting a few angles, that those perspectives of mine might hold some water.
Would you consider there is an element of debauchery here? And what of the denigration of women? Or soft porn in the name of art. Possibly to exploitation of a woman by paying her to pose nude for you?
Or are your values above that?

 

[Asher Kelman]

This discussion belongs here.

References to exploitation or other such aspects of photographing nudes belong in that place, not here! You can reference this thread.

Asher

 

[Tom dinning]

This discussion belongs here.

References to exploitation or other such aspects of photographing nudes belong in that place, not here! You can reference this thread.

Asher

Maths is in room 103
All other subjects have been allocated to the gym. A ball will be provided.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Just a matter of allowing everyone to contribute to this important topic. We don't particularly need a nude woman image to deal with the legitimacy or not of this kind of work.

This particular area is not visited by more than a few.

Asher

 

[Wolfgang Plattner]

...

Now Permit me to say, "Fabulous!"

After looking on the picture for several times and not finding the reason for why I'm not really satisfied with it I now did find the reason:
For me it would be fabulous, if the window in the left-under quarter would be broken ...