Nudity in art

[LadyDay1545]

I agree with you fully Paradigm Man, I want to reiterate again that it's all about the heart. Woman and man alike, if you are an artist that battle with lust- do yourself a favor in not drawing, painting, sculpting, etc. nude models. That would be foolishness. However, brothers and sisters that have no issue whatsoever with lust (and whoever you are, let me know how you don't have issue with it) i would still look on with caution. We are humans and sexual beings, it's pretty easy for the devil to ensnare us. Thank God we don't rely on our own strength but the strength of God. Also be sure to have an accountability partner, I suggest another artist. That's what i intend to do as i enter college art classes. And if I feel i can't take it, i'll drop the class and go body part by body pary. A guys 6-pack by itself just doesn't have the same appeal as when you see the whole thing at once- as Christian artist we should of course always be more concerned with being pure than getting our technique down pact, God is the one who will create in us excellent art anyways. Alright i'll stop preaching now

 

[divinewind]

Dear Lizzie,

Hi, I am also a fine arts student and a Christian. I think drawing the body nude is fine and I agree that the body is a beautiful thing. I find that when I am in life drawing, I am concerntrating more on line, shape, form and tonal qualities rather than the fact that I am drawing a nude body. Our body is the temple of the holy spirit and that is something that dwells within each christian. I believe that if the nude body is approached in a sense where it is presented as something beautiful, as opposed to presenting it sexually as in the way the feminists artists have done in the past, then it is O.K. with God.

When God created Adam and Eve they were naked and they 'felt no shame'
Gen 1:25. He also created them in His likeness. It was only after the fall of man that they realised that their freedom from shame or moral innocence was lost due to sin. Gen. Ch. 3 verse 7 states that the eyes of both of them were open and they realised they were naked, so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves. In otherwords, only God is able to cover our shame and make us innocent and give us freedom that adam and eve once had. It is not the naked body that is sinful, but sin has made us ashamed of the naked body.

I believe that if we see the body as something beautiful that God has created and allow our creativity to be inspired by God, that beauty will be reiterated in our artwork.

Hope that helps,

divinewind

 

[ElElohe]

I am pretty sure I posted this earlier in this thread (but don't expect you to have read all of it, as lengthy and wonderful a discussion as it's been, because I haven't the time to read it all either!

The two that most often posed for my figure drawing class in college went to my very Bible preaching church . . .

You make an excellent observation, Paradigm Man. The vast majority of christians unopposed to drawing nudes would never pose nude themselves. As a former figure drawing teacher, I can attest to the fact that the vast majority (99%) of nude models aren't christians, so christians who draw nudes are drawing nude unbelievers. It's doubtful if drawing nudes could exist without the unbelieving population willing to disrobe for art classes.

 

[ElElohe]

Mannequins are a good replacement if a replacement is deemed necessary. As the post after yours boldy asserts in the first line, Nudity is not evil. And Every human body is different, and a mannequin is probably a better average than it should be (of course, we in America are much larger than we should be thanks to our diets and sedintary lifestyles . . . ).

Has anyone mentioned in this thread that Michaelangelo used male models for the Sistine Chapel? Because it was not appropriate for him to use females, the females in the chapel are all quite buff if you look at it

No, I'm sorry, it wouldn't. Mannequins are dead matter, not living flesh and it's not the same thing. Every human body is different: which is the point of learning how to draw from life; to get that sense of uniqueness that is in everyone.

 

[marmosa]

I agree with Paradigm Man and Tambora. Drawing nudes can only survive because the unsaved are willing to take it off. Once in a while a believer will, but they are a rare Christian. But "Christian" implies Christ like, so if a "Christian" bares it all, are they really being Christ like?

You make an excellent observation, Paradigm Man. The vast majority of christians unopposed to drawing nudes would never pose nude themselves. As a former figure drawing teacher, I can attest to the fact that the vast majority (99%) of nude models aren't christians, so christians who draw nudes are drawing nude unbelievers. It's doubtful if drawing nudes could exist without the unbelieving population willing to disrobe for art classes.

 

[HeatherJay]

I agree with Paradigm Man and Tambora. Drawing nudes can only survive because the unsaved are willing to take it off. Once in a while a believer will, but they are a rare Christian. But "Christian" implies Christ like, so if a "Christian" bares it all, are they really being Christ like?

Careful now...just because a person doesn't believe nudity is a sin, that doesn't make them less than Christian.

 

[Ants]

Hey! I'm really glad I ran into this thread. I just posted in the newbies section about my site which is about to discuss a similar issue (not just being naked though). I run a site called Niphal (niphal.com) and I'm interviewing 9 - 12 awesome Christian designers (like guys from Relevant, Design is Kinky, and other great sites) about their thoughts on the design industry and inappropriate contentography! anyway wow... I will have to put a post up here to see what you all think about it. I'm also interviewing the guys from XXXChurch.com to discuss their ministry and how they work with the inappropriate content industry.

Personally though I think nudity is beautiful, if done properly and without perversion. It's a hard thing to do sometimes but it's definitely a good thing. inappropriate content however... is dodgy.

 

[ElElohe]

Very good point here and I did read it in the thread, but reading it here again I've just drawn a personal parallel.

That parallel is in the Christian art programs at Christian colleges. I was very interested coming off of my BFA at a secular university in getting an MFA from a Christian school. I wanted that environment; I wanted the chance to learn more theology and Bible and it also seemed that my audience as an artist or art philosopher of sorts was mainly if not wholly Christians.

In researching this, I found a bit of a paradox. Firstly, there is not a Christian college that offers an MFA (there is a catholic school in Dallas, and Bob Jones offers graduate programs in studio art but--besides being Bob Jones--it was not an "MFA.")

However, all of the Christian colleges required their professors to have an MFA.

What would these Christian schools do if they couldn't get secularly educated (without delving into a sacred/secular debate, although that might be a warranted rabbit trail) professors? Things that make you go hmmmmm . . .

You make an excellent observation, Paradigm Man. The vast majority of christians unopposed to drawing nudes would never pose nude themselves. As a former figure drawing teacher, I can attest to the fact that the vast majority (99%) of nude models aren't christians, so christians who draw nudes are drawing nude unbelievers. It's doubtful if drawing nudes could exist without the unbelieving population willing to disrobe for art classes.

 

[cyclopes]

This is an interesting point of view coming from some one who should know

Can a person pose nude for art classes without being an exhibitionist (ie, desiring sexual attention)? I often wondered about this when I taught figure drawing classes. My observations were that most male models were motivated by the desire for sexual attention; they just liked the idea of being nude in front of women. Most female models, on the other hand, were motivated for artistic reasons; they saw themselves as helping the art world. I often wonder what would happen to the pool of models if exhibitionist were eliminated from the pool. To tell you the truth, I believe the pool of nude models would be drastically reduced if exhibitionist were excluded from the pool. This would really impact figure drawing classes in terms of having enough models. In fact, some universities and colleges wouldn't have any models at all, male models that is. Very few people are capable of posing nude with a clear conscious (ie, pure motives), but more than a few are capable with a dirty conscious (ie, impure motives).

 

[cyclopes]

This makes me go HHHhhmmm...

As a former nude model, I also ponder this point:

Why is it that so many christians unopposed to drawing nudes are so modest about their own bodies? They don't mind drawing nudes, but they would never be a nude. Is there a double standard at work? I run across this mentality all the time from christians unopposed to drawing nudes. If they cry modesty, then why their modesty and not the model's modesty? Could it be that they hold themselves to a higher moral standard than they hold the models to? Incidently, the nudes they are drawing are almost always not christians, so you have christians drawing nude non-christians. HHHhhmm .

 

[devoted daughter]

I agree with Paradigm Man and Tambora. Drawing nudes can only survive because the unsaved are willing to take it off. Once in a while a believer will, but they are a rare Christian. But "Christian" implies Christ like, so if a "Christian" bares it all, are they really being Christ like?

Having posed semi-nude in a loosely draped sheet in an art class years ago, I can attest to the fact that that indeed Christians DO do this. I’m no less Christian, and I felt comfortable, because as a trained artist myself, I know that student’s at the level at which they draw the human form aren’t really looking at me, or the model, they are looking at lines, angles, and perspective. I’m by no means an exhibitionist, in fact, I’m rather modest, but I knew how they were looking at me; in lines! We are talking about art, and not pictures created for the purpose of flaming someone’s desire, right? If that happens when someone looks at a piece of art, that’s THEIR issue. inappropriate content is a genre of itself. The human form is beautiful, the only ‘ugliness’ that occurs is in how one looks at it.

 

[devoted daughter]

Careful now...just because a person doesn't believe nudity is a sin, that doesn't make them less than Christian.

Amen

 

[tambora]

Posing semi-nude in a loosely draped sheet is qualitatively very different than posing nude!! Would you have felt comfortable if you had been nude? I did some nude modelling in my younger days before I started teaching figure drawing. If you had been posing nude, you most likely would have noticed a discernable difference in how the male students were viewing you at times because the mind wanders, if you know what I mean. Breast covered by a loose sheet is one thing, but breast with no sheet is something very different. You're mixing apples with oranges on this one.

Having posed semi-nude in a loosely draped sheet in an art class years ago, I can attest to the fact that that indeed Christians DO do this. I’m no less Christian, and I felt comfortable, because as a trained artist myself, I know that student’s at the level at which they draw the human form aren’t really looking at me, or the model, they are looking at lines, angles, and perspective. I’m by no means an exhibitionist, in fact, I’m rather modest, but I knew how they were looking at me; in lines!

 

[HeatherJay]

This is NOT a debate thread, nor a debate forum. However, there are those who seem to be debating with everyone who disagrees with them. You guys have made you opinions known...why not leave it for others who might wish to post their opinions without condemnation?? There are plenty of places on this board that you can go if you want a debate on whether or not nudity is a sin or if nude art is sinful. This is not the place for it.

 

[marmosa]

H.R. Rookmaaker stated the following:

"Purity in art means helping those who read or listen or see to have pure thoughts. It does not titillate, does not play on peoples wrong desires, it does not seduce. It helps man to see the good and the beautiful. It shows iniquity, it protest, but in a protests of love against the unjust and the debased and evil." (Modern Art and the Death of a Culture)

As an artist, I think the human body is beautiful. It's amazing and a wonderful challenge to draw and just something beautiful to draw.

However, as a Christian, I know that the body is a temple of the Holy Spirit and shouldn't be gawked at and often feel guilty for looking at pieces of art that has nudity in it. So my questions:

How do you feel about drawing people in the nude? Is it ok since you're not lusting after the person?

 

[Petercurious]

Posing semi-nude in a loosely draped sheet is qualitatively very different than posing nude!!

I'm unsure whether this is fair. I don't believe it's orange & apples. H.R.Rookmaaker, in "Modern Art & the death of a culture", makes the point

"lightly clothed figures are often much more erotic[than nudes]"

He goes on to say

"The erotic and sexual have a place in art, as they have in life. As such they they are not dirty or impure. They are a gift from God, and belong to humanity itself...Modesty in fact is a moral quality, and its expression is different in different cultures and society. Even where the body can be shown without clothes one can still speak of modesty and immodesty. Behavoiur is the expression of an attitude.

So we simply cannot say that the nude in art[and by implication modelling for it- my comment, not his!!] is impure...Purity is a norm, but not an easy rule that can be applied indiscriminately. We have to exercise our human judgment, with all our wisdom, understanding and prudence

...we should judge with care...However, there is often no need to give a final verdict. As Christians we may often(even must) leave the judgment in God's hands. What is more important is that we can each exercise our personal responsibility..."]

 

[devoted daughter]

Posing semi-nude in a loosely draped sheet is qualitatively very different than posing nude! I did some nude modelling in my younger days before I started teaching figure drawing. If you had been posing nude, you most likely would have noticed a discernable difference in how the male students were viewing you at times because the mind wanders, if you know what I mean.

OH REALLY????

Would you have felt comfortable if you had been nude?

Yes, I do know what you mean, and like I said, looking at a nude is all in how you ‘LOOK’ at it! I do think my male counterparts were looking at me in “lines”. As someone trained, I’d think you’d do the same, and to think otherwise is a form of reverse sexism. The only reason I didn’t pose TOTALLY nude was that it had nothing to do with the assignment at that time. As you would know, as you say you are an artist, part of the skill is drawing folds in fabric, which I’m sure you know is difficult.

. Breast covered by a loose sheet is one thing, but breast with no sheet is something very different. You're mixing apples with oranges on this one.

It was semi-nude....Mixing art and inappropriate contentography is ‘quantitatively’ different than mixing ‘apples with oranges’.
ROTFL
DD

 

[Ants]

sometimes the mind is stronger than the eye. All I know is that I don't have to see anything to lust... in fact, nudity might in some cases have completely the opposite consequences! ha ha ha.

 

[Human]

Isn't the bottom line that we are just unfamiliar with the human body because it is so covered up? I strongly suspect that is we were born into a society where nakedness was the rule (like all the other animals in the world and God's original intent for us), we would not have any of these bizarre problems?

Just a thought....

Human

 

[Ants]

no not really... if you read your bible you'll find Adam and Eve were ashamed of their nakedness after eating the fruit however they were naked before that... the difference is not in their being naked or not, but the change is in their minds/understanding/knowledge...

When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.
8 Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden. 9 But the LORD God called to the man, "Where are you?"
10 He answered, "I heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid."
11 And he said, "Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?"

so no it's not about "society" or "culture"... naked is good, humans however are not. naked is normal. surely the photos of me as a kid naked are not inappropriate content... oh dear! he's nude.