I am also wondering: do you see these works as pornographic? Why or why not? Pornography seems to be an issue in art nowadays. When did that start? What is pornography? (I have my definition....I want yours.)
Interesting post. Certainly the paintings aren't pornographic (although like the Supreme Court I can't define pornography but know it when I see it). The depiction of the female nude has a long history in art, and so, for that matter, does the male nude. Does anyone consider Michelangelo's David porn? The very question is absurd.
THANK YOU, PROFESSOR! I'm tempted to frivolously define pornography as "I know it when I see it", but to be serious for a second these paintings are not pornographic because they do not arouse or titillate anyone other than adolescent boys (and let's face it, there's no hope for THOSE turkeys :^)). I'll read the rest of your kind submission later, I've got to get ready for work. Thank you again.
Have to run out for a while...the last few pings on various art threads, you've made some points that I want to address...if I can find the time to freep!
Wow! Could you please add me to your ping list? I'm not sure my 13 year old homeschooler is ready for some of this, but I don't want to lose these threads.
THANK YOU!
I do not believe these are pornographic. There needs to be some kind of lewdness to it that I just don't see here. I know many Christian ladies who would consider this porn merely because of the nudity, but it's missing something... I guess I'm not so puritannical about art. :)
Personally, I like the older, more realistic style better. Particularly in the Titian example. It seems to me that the more realistic the viewer's overall impression is, the greater the artist's skill. I.e., Titian exhibits more artistic skill than Manet, Manet exhibits more skill than Van Gogh, Van Gogh exhibits more than Picasso, Picasso exhibits more than Jackson Pollack.
Caveat: I am basing this on my impressions of their works most familiar to me; it's entirely possible, for instance that Picasso had an artistic ability greater than any of the others, but (IMO) did not employ it much in his more famous pieces.
Also note that by 'realistic' I don't mean to disparage surreal works like Magritte's, just that whatever content there is looks better with realistic textures, shadows, perspective, etc.
Not sure about the pornographic issue.
Put me on your ping list, please...
I thought (maybe incorrrectly) that Manet was a Mannerist painter...