These days the nude appears to have become more controversial as the line between nudity and sexuality has been blurred. The prevalence of porn and sexualized images In the media have led to an automatic association between nudity and sex. A belief that nudity is dirty, wrong, and disgraceful. All of this has led to nude art being pushed to the back corner, far from being the classic and honored subject of artists everywhere.

There is no image of vulnerability more powerful than that of a naked child. Take for example the iconic Vietnam Napalm photograph. Would this picture have as much impact if she was an adult? If she was clothed? The image of her running down the street, naked and screaming, is real, it’s powerful and it’s become a symbol for the horrors of war everywhere. This photograph won the Pulitzer and world press photo of the year.

A nude child is the image of vulnerability, of change. It automatically triggers protective instincts. Good art has the power to move us. It inspires emotion.

Would Bill Henson’s works be as emotive if the children were clothed? if they were small breasted adults? His works capture a moment in time. A fragile period in a teen’s life. These works make us empathize with the subject, I have heard abuse sufferers consider them both triggering works and uplifting and encouraging. Other see a coming of age, loss of innocence. fragile, strong. Whatever you see in this work you cannot deny that it has an emotional impact and that is the purpose of art.

The scandal with Brook Shields and the Gary Gross/Richard prince photographs is another good example. Gary Gross took photographs of a pre-teen Brook Shields for a magazine. These works were highly sexualized, with brook painted with oil and makeup. They were exceptionally adult, and in very poor taste. Brook shields did not get a say in modeling for these works, nor how they were used later on. Many years later Richard Prince took a photograph of the original Gary Gross, then changed it. The final work was seedier and turned the original on it’s ear. Where the first seemed to celebrate child pornography, the Prince version used the same image to condemn it. It still uses a sexualized image of an adolescent, but by using that image to make the viewers uncomfortable it made an excellent point about not turning a blind eye to child pornography.

Recently, I’ve been having a hard time painting, something was gnawing at the back of my mind. Like a face I couldn’t put a name to it was elusive and irritating.

Something was Not Quite Right in my last painting. The geometry of the gear was off. I didn’t like the model I chose to begin with and have since gotten some better gears, so I decided to redo from start. Or at least, redo the gear.

Just the act of making this decision was galvanizing. suddenly I wanted to be in the studio all the time again! On a roll, i also decided to revisit the gold embellishments on the bustle, to bring them into the shadows better and connect the shapes more. I painted furiously, and it has paid off. A little obsessive prod that was poking me has subsided. The itch stopping me from continuing to the next painting, that was thawing doubt up in the way has passed and I am fired up and ready to continue.

Sometimes obsessiveness can harm a piece, it can lead to overworking and losing a sense of motion, spontaneity and immediacy that draws people in.

On 24 March 2011, Attorney-General Robert McClelland referred the National Classification Scheme to the ALRC and asked it to conduct widespread public consultation across the community and industry.

The review will consider issues including:

existing Commonwealth, State and Territory classification laws
the current classification categories contained in the Classification Act, Code and Guidelines
the rapid pace of technological change
the need to improve classification information available to the community
the effect of media on children and
the desirability of a strong content and distribution industry in Australia.

[From National Classification Scheme Review | ALRC]

your response is due by 5pm tomorrow. please take 5 minutes to respond today.

Bravehearts executive director Hetty Johnston has written to the Baillieu Government asking it to crack down on images such as those created by controversial artist Bill Henson.

But artists say they should not be censored and current guidelines for art are adequate.

A Senate committee has recommended classifications be applied to all media, including art in galleries.

It also called for a review of child pornography laws and for the “artistic merit” defence to be axed from child pornography offences.

Ms Johnston said her group did not oppose art or photographs showing children in real life, but set-up shots of naked children for “artistic purposes” should be outlawed.

“It crosses moral boundaries, and we believe it puts children at risk and it could exploit children,” she said.

[From Call to ban art with nude children | Herald Sun]

Australia’s classification laws are under review and under attack once more.

Hetty Johnston and her band of fanatical cohorts are still not satisfied after Bill Henson’s confiscated works were reviewed by the clssifications board and deemed to be no more hazardous than PG. clearly it isn’t their views that are at fault, but the classifications board itself. when you don’t like the results- change the law. Clearly the problem with child pornography in Australia stems from artists. absolutely without a doubt.

I do believe, however, that the classifications rules do need to be reviewed and repaired. they are exceptionally ambiguous and are not helping us artists in our defences any more than they are helping Hetty. if anything they are already heavily on the Hetty side, but are so ambiguous that it comes down to the preferences and opinions of the board. characteristics such as breast size should not be a factor – breasts do not make a woman. they may as well choose testicle size as an indicator.

While a ban on the sexual depiction of minors will have strong community support, there’s a much greyer area involving adults or even animated characters who look young. Most adult movies (online or DVD) come from America and carry official government statements guaranteeing that all participants are over 18. These cut no ice in Australia. Furthermore, Hentai Manga (Japanese sexual comics) are so popular in Japan that they are freely available for browsing in 7-11 convenience stores and read openly on trains. But they are RC in Australia – potentially a rude shock for Japanese tourists visiting with such comics in their luggage.

Note too, that over the past year, the Classification Board has started using breast size as a criterion in defining child pornography: a less than precise indicator

[From ABC The Drum - Secrets of obscenity: the classification riddle]

I also believe that, more than the classifications system, the constitution of Australia needs to be reviewed, amended and honored. how many Australians even know there is a constitution here? who knows what’s in it? The US Constitution is one of the most powerful pieces of writing in the world. freedom of speech is one of the most honored of the freedoms and is celebrated. yes, occasionally it is abused, but it is such a sacred right that it cannot be denied. it seems to me that Australia needs some inalienable rights of it’s own.

artistic merit should not become a goto excuse for pornographers, that harms us more than it harms Hetty- but it must be allowed. we cannot create under a blanket of censorship and we cannot be the artists we need to be without freedom to create. art has the power to challenge our views, to make us think and and to change the world. I believe that the arts are one of the most powerful forces of humanity and should never be denied.

Lately, however, i’ve found myself a little trapped. I haven’t been able to explore all the work I would like for fear of being seen as a hypocrite. Because i’ve only presented one side. Nudity does not have to be sexual, you all know my stance on that, but it can also be sensual, and there is nothing wrong with that. As long as it doesn’t break any taboos. (I say taboos because I live in a country that has a new crazy law every week and nothing to protect free expression).

There is a difference, too, between sexual and sensual. There are as many shades of gray as there are stages of undress. Art can be arousing. It should be arousing. It should inspire passion. Not just sexually, but in all things. Arousal and passion are not just the pervue of sexuality, but of life. And art is life.

Bill Henson is once again exhibiting. This time in Melbourne. I was waiting to discuss the exhibition until after I had seen it In Person but this latest wave of protests have brought me out of my studio and indignant once more about the treatment of artists in this country.

After the press tried and failed to get people riled up about the latest exhibition the right wing nut jobs have taken a stand saying that thhe only thing that will protect the fair and delicate citizenry of Australia from the tyranny of artists is to force artists to undergo the same classifications procedures that movies and tv shows do. Here are some of the reasons this won’t work.

1. Classifications are expensive. Production houses can afford it, individual artists can’t.
2. When the classifications board reviewed henson’s work and came back with a PG rating the protesters were enraged. Even though this was something they requested. They won’t be happy regardless.
3. The ratings system in Australia is fundamentally flawed. Ask any gamer. It isn’t flexible enough to cover art.
4. How do you classify something as subjective as art any way?
5. By increasing the costs for artists you will be raising the price of art for all. In this economy this will probably drive the market further down and for ce more galleries to close.
6. This will fundamentally shift the way australian artists create. It will engender self censorship, make artists less likely to create for fear of the process, the costs and the issues. They may not create their best work, stick to safe things and in the end this may hurt the arts industry more.

I am not unreasonable. By all means make the classification board accessible to all artists to help in disputes, or even to prevent them for the artists that can afford it. But making it compulsory for all artists is irresponsible and despotic to say the least. In the States a bill like this would never reach the floor, here, well I only hope more sensible heads prevail.

@naturistnews: @minxdragon why is female nudity more acceptable than male nudity? Why is nudity considered shameful?

Original Message

I was asked these questions via twitter, and there was no way I could answer them in 140 characters or less and do them justice, in fact, I don’t think I could satisfactorily answer them in an entire blog post! I will try it in two.

I think female nudity is generally more acceptable than male nudity for a number of reasons. largely, however it seems to come down to aesthetics and homophobia.

Despite all our efforts to the contrary we still live largely in a patriarchal society. While males dominate industry, advertising and the media there will still be a slight locker room mentality. While nudity remains mainly sexual in the minds of the general public, it will be more acceptable for that locker room mentality to gaze upon nude women than men.

Many men fear nude men, but women do not fear nude women. I do not know why this is. It could be media and advertising, it could be that we grow up seeing semi nude women constantly or it could just be that there is a homophobic backlash still in effect.

Women are more aesthetically pleasing than men nude. It’s the truth. No matter the shape of the woman she is beautiful. Men are interesting nude, but not necessarily beautiful. There is an inherent charm in the swell of a hip, the curve of the breast. We have been taught since ancient times to revere the female figure.

Sadly, sometimes if the art is a little lacking, it isn’t the fault of the committee or a lack of funding (or too much as this article seems to suggest), it’s a lack of artists submitting their works. Grants are intimidating, they’re difficult and artists are often afraid that they will be rejected and that is enough of a reason not apply. But doing the hard work can pay off, not just in allowing you to create the work you want, but to also bring art to thousands who may never otherwise get a chance to see it.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

I’ve had a hard time getting started this year, the weight of so many things to do has left me running around in circles wondering what to start first. in my usual style I start things in dribs and drabs then get caught up in something else, then something else, then I get lost and end up adding more to my list than I took away!

which is why, when I saw this post topic from wordpress’ post a day and post a week challenges I decided I needed to write about it.

What’s the most important thing you’re putting off? And why haven’t you done it yet? What do you need to make it happen?

[From Topic: What’s the most important thing? | The Daily Post at WordPress.com]

The most important thing I’m putting off has to be painting. I always put it off. I don’t know why, painting is one of my greatest joys. I haven’t done any real painting since moving as my studio is still very much under construction. it will soon be in a useable state and then a huge pressure will be relieved. because I’ll tell you a little truth about being an artist- the less you paint the less you want to paint- the reverse of my statement in my post 8 reasons why making art is like making love
but that leads me back to my goals for 2011 and what I want to do about #5 on my list: I want to paint. I want to be disciplined and work effectively to create the paintings that are inside me. I don’t have a shortage of inspiration, I have a shortage of oomph. And that is something I want to correct!
it’s easy to say that I will paint when I have a perfect studio, but we all know there is no such thing, and I won’t even know what will make it a perfect studio until I get in there and paint in it! ah-ha! a catch 22!
but here is another truth about being an artist: suck it up princess, you just have to get in there and create! inspiration will come from creating, getting better will come from creating, feeling that wonderful sense of achievement and drive will come from creating
everything I want in my career can only be had if I paint. that’s the most important thing.
I will achieve my goals and paint more than ever by ditching that nagging bitching in my mind that tells me I can’t be perfect so why start.
how about you? what’s your most important thing?

The poster, which was unveiled a month back, is an artist’s take on what he calls the “horrors” of the American lifestyle.

“This art provocation is a form of violence
against the sensitivity of many people,” Norbert Napieraj told The Associated Press.

The Prosecutors, however, claim that the poster is art which does not violate the country’s laws against glorifying Nazism.
The poster has been vandalised twice since it was put up but gallery director Maria Czarnecka said that she does not plan to remove it.

Czarnecka told The Associated Press, “Art should be provocative and controversial.”

She insists that the poster does not intend to propagate Nazism but instead wants to explore “symbols and how they work.”

[From Mickey Mouse goes nude? - Hindustan Times]

I admit that I find this work fairly unimaginative, it reminds me of the sort of thing you see first year art students creating as they rail against the status quo. it’s angry and designed to offend. the good news is that this time it isn’t the nude that’s causing the furor- thank goodness for that! I agree that art should be ‘provocative and controversial’, that is one of the many points of art, but there is a fine line between designing something to be provocative and creating it in order to offend people. The massive swastika does seem to glorify nazism – how can it not? it’s the first thing you see. it’s the primary focus. perhaps adding more symbols to reinforce their key concept may detract from the implied glorification, I don’t know, but it seems a little inflammatory to me.

I’ve always wondered about artwork like this. when the message is so blatant, and the intent is worn on it’s sleeve (frame?) what is there to ponder? what makes you return to the work? what makes it relatable to people?