Wut R U Lookin@!?

The meaning of a work of art – that is, the meaning intended by the artist, not the meaning assigned to it by the audience – is often a matter of context. Not just art, but human expression in general. It all boils down to context.

I SPEYE

I SPEYE

Look back at that famous Freudian saying: “Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.” Objectively, that sentence is meaningless on its own. A cigar is always a cigar. Contextually, however, it refers to dreams about dongs, but with the caveat that not all things shaped like dongs in a dream actually represent dongs. Sometimes a dong-shaped object is simply a dong-shaped object, and not a dong. See? Context.

Another example, and one that is perhaps more controversial: Louis C.K. using the word “nigger” in his stand-up comedy. Louis C.K. is a white man, and white people should never, ever use that word… right? Except he’s using it to call out bullshit subtle racism in the media, which, to me, seems like a good thing. If it is bad to say a thing out loud, isn’t it just as bad to let everyone know you are thinking that thing with a wink and a nod? I think that some people who are very sensitive about that particular word will hear him say it and be shocked and outraged, but only because they are hearing only the word and not the context in which it is used.(1)

Representations of the human body are often taken out of context. Any images of women’s nipples, pubic areas, genitals or buttocks is pretty much automatically filed as “Erotica” or “Porn.” This is, of course, patently ridiculous. It’s as though people don’t realize that the human body can be nude without a contextual “wrapper” of sexuality. Here are a few examples of times when a human female can be nude, wholly or partially, without a sexual context:

  • while changing into an outfit for a funeral.
  • in the bath – a regular bath to get clean, not the kind with sensual bubbles and water-jets and heart-shaped tubs.
  • during a routine check for breast cancer.
  • in a chemical shower after being splashed with hazardous materials.

Basically, just because you see a breast with a nipple, it doesn’t make it “porn” or “erotica” or whatever bullshit label people apply to things to make it seem somehow more classy than porn. Take a look at Dr. Manhattan in The Watchmen (movie or comic, your choice) – he walks around with his wang hanging out. It’s not “erotica.” It’s a guy who no longer cares about human morality or social conventions because he has a vastly-wider view of the universe. It’s symbolic of his disconnection with humanity, precisely because it’s a feature that superficially identifies him as “human.” Sometimes a naked body is just a naked body.

I’ve seen perfume, liquor and makeup advertisements that are more sexually charged than a whole sea of naked titties. The model is more or less fully-clothed – or at least has her nipples, genitals and most of her pubic area and/or buttocks covered with artfully-draped fabric – but she has moist, glistening lips parted oh so slightly, a faint flush on her cheeks and neck, and pupils dilated by digital artists to make her look sexually aroused. Maybe she’s licking a sweating bottle suggestively. Or running a dripping ice cube over her forward-thrust chest. But this is acceptable for the general public because three or four tiny spots are masked from view. You can even let your kids see it. (2)

I’ve been combing through the deviantART community for a while now, and it appears that a lot of its members don’t seem to understand this idea of context. That’s not exclusive to dA, either. It’s pretty much everywhere on this here wide, wide world of Internets. While I will never attempt to tell people how they should look at art, I feel I must at least attempt to offer some guidance that I hope will allow my faithful readers to better appreciate and understand what they are looking at, and how they can make meaningful contributions to the art world by offering constructive feedback on what they see.

One thing I have noticed that is particular to depictions of the human body is the tendency of viewers to comment on the model’s attractiveness. We know our models are attractive – that’s why we use the models we use. Of course they have beautiful bodies, that’s why we want to paint them. The models know they are attractive – that’s why they become models. Telling an artist that his model has a beautiful body is not constructive or helpful. It just means that you haven’t been paying attention to anything else about the work, and if that’s what you are looking for, you may be better off viewing pornography where beautiful bodies artfully displayed is the entire point. Be honest with yourself.

A last note about context: the comment that inspired all of this came from a photographer who has an outstanding sense of colour and composition.  Check out his photographs at http://wnattawan.wordpress.com/

(1) – I should point out that I am very much anti-racism, and am not advocating that white people should run around using “nigger” with wild abandon. The word is offensive and I feel guilty even typing it in quotation marks. As a cynic and misanthrope, I hate you all exactly equally, regardless of superficial characteristics. It’s the vile filth inside all of us that really counts.
(2) – It should go without saying that I’m not advocating child abuse. Deliberately exposing children to such material is criminal and beyond disgusting.
Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Wut R U Lookin@!?

  1. It’s an interesting post and I had no idea that it’s inspired by me until I read the last paragraph. I had to recall what I commented and tried to understand what you meant. In fact, when I got your reply on the previous post, I didn’t totally understand what you meant until now.

    If the last part of my comment insulted you or your work, I’m apologize. It didn’t mean to categorize your work as pornography nor saw it that way.

    But, I’d like to highlight one thing related to your post. The meaning of a piece of art is given by the artist and not how the audience perceive it. Similarly, my comment shall represent what I think not what you think. However, we often make conclusion from how we interpret information. 🙂

    • No apology necessary, good sir! This was inspired by your comment but not directed at you – if I was insulted, I would not have included a link to your blog 😉

      The meaning of a work is entirely subjective. The meaning we take from a thing may not be the meaning implied by its creator, but that doesn’t mean the interpretation is necessarily wrong.

      I like your photos, by the way.

  2. Hey. I’m glad that you like my photos, thank you. I have more to say about this post since it has waken my sleeping nerve on art. I come from a science side, I would say, and am bad at art. I can tell if I like or not like, but find that it’s difficult to give details on aesthetic subjects. Thus, your post was educative for me. As a result, it will help me to improve my photos.

    In the previous post, I might be too simplistic on my own comment but now I find a way to explain in words. In fact, I like the way you captured emotion on her face and the given colors as well as the name of the painting. Usually, I don’t like this kind of paint stroke but it was okay in your painting. However, I can’t refuse that I still think she (doesn’t need to be a real person) has a beautiful body.

    Last but not least, just the sake of my curiosity, what make you think that I’m not a girl?

    • I’m happy the exchange has been beneficial!

      Sometimes simple things are difficult to express in words. You know you like something, but the exact details that create this feeling may elude deeper examination.

      I tend to assume every faceless internet stranger is male.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s