Opinions on Nude Art?

I believe the Orthodox I've read about are more modest.

And under NO CIRCUMSTANCES, does that pic of a shirtless Putin on a horse, qualify as "art"!!!

RobNJ said:

And under NO CIRCUMSTANCES, does that pic of a shirtless Putin on a horse, qualify as "art"!!!

Click to expand...

Putin claims that photo is photoshopped.

joshua 1 9 said:

Putin claims that photo is photoshopped.

Click to expand...

Well, it HAS been photoshopped into about 678754578633578974323456 different meme's, all over the neenernet... But, as for the original

'I see no need to hide behind the bushes': Putin defends shirtless photos of himself

depends on the context. certainly modesty for iconography.

RobNJ said:

And under NO CIRCUMSTANCES, does that pic of a shirtless Putin on a horse, qualify as "art"!!!

Click to expand...

I agree. But if he were riding shirtless on a Russian brown bear, now that would be art.

I think it's okay in some contexts. Here's an interesting page I found after a quick search. Naked Hermits: Should a Hermit Wear Clothes?

And when it comes to iconography, ancient icons of (Christ's?) baptism and of the expulsion from paradise were both "nude" in a sense. Baptism used to be done in the nude as well.

Baptism of Christ (I guess the figure on the left is supposed to be the Father? Not sure on that):


Adam and Eve:


Some icons of St Mary of Egypt show her wearing a minimal rag, and her chest is somewhat exposed in some (some modern icons have her whole chest covered). Note the bottom left inset icon, too. It's not graphic, but St Mary is not wearing any clothes.


I think it's interesting in Expulsion from Paradise icons that Eve's torso is covered with the same frequency as Adam's. Usually it is their waist-areas that are covered, or their whole body. Example of a 16th century Russian Church Door:
Paradise | Expulsion | Mourning

That being said, I don't know if it's proper to call any of these "nude art." The purpose of such Icons, even though they may depict (partially or wholly) unclad figures, is not to praise nudity or elevate it or anything like that, which I'm guessing is the intent in the Renaissance era europe. (I'm no art historian though, so I'm open to correction.) Rather, it is the manifestation of saints and Biblical events in our lives, for us to be strengthened and inspired, illumined, and deified by venerating.

I don't know that Michelangelo had theosis in mind when he was sculpting David.

So to answer your original question --
Nudity? Yes. Nude art? Not sure, haha

David Neos said:

I was thinking about David's statue.

View attachment 267361

Click to expand...

I tend to be okay with that as far as art goes, since it's not made for sensuality's sake.

408632"]Here it is
View attachment 267360[/QUOTE]

Looks like he is bearing everything there.

That can't be right. I find it to be unbearable!!

RobNJ said:

And under NO CIRCUMSTANCES, does that pic of a shirtless Putin on a horse, qualify as "art"!!!

Click to expand...

Awww!! I'm so disappointed! I thought for sure that was a masterpiece!

I have to admit I do have comic books with nude art variant covers.
There was always secular art such as statues of men and women depicting them naked. I dont think it was widespread during the Christian era but they were not torn down neither as they still exist.