Discussion

[madshutterbug]

Two quotes Quotes (from a posting thread on Flickr):
'An artist friend of mine told me years ago that no matter what you portray in a nude, the face is what makes it beautiful, sensual, erotic or interesting. Without the face there is no reference of pleasure, sadness, pain, or feeling. A nude needs a face.'

And in response: '...I agree. Most nudes tend to be either academic or pornographic without a face.' (name is redacted with the ellipsis)

Comments?

Comments

[selvatica.livejournal.com]

Obviously a man thing as all the pictures shown here are of the female form.
I have no interest in nudity in pictures, male or female :)

[madshutterbug.livejournal.com]

A legitimate point that personal interest in the subject comes to bear. Possibly less so as to gender, though I may agree if 'orientation' is included.

What piqued my curiosity/interest is the second statement quoted, the response. I fail to see where inclusion/exclusion of a face makes any representation either academic, pornographic, or art. This need not be restricted to nudes; as someone once pointed out to me someone who has a shoe fetish will likely find footwear advertisements as being titillating and potentially pornographic.

Thank you for commenting.

[aineotter.livejournal.com]

I dunno, I'm female and I enjoy female nudes. I like drawing/painting them, and I used to sit for life drawing classes. I think bodies can be portrayed in a way that is beautiful and has nothing (or very little) to do with sexuality.