The Outsiders
A few weeks back I was mentioning to a very old friend that I wrote a photographic art blog. All well and good until I mentioned that it featured (tasteful) nudes. Note: I did stress the tasteful bit. This friend refused to ever speak to me again. I have lost several other close friends over the course of the last three years for the same reason. Yes, they all looked at the blog, yes they read it, and no matter how artistically I dressed it up, that was IT. I had crossed the line, and there was no going back. From that point onwards, Rich and I were, and now always will be, pornographers.
*Sigh*
Here we go again.
I am sure most of you have been through this many times before. It’s no big deal, right? Who cares what other people think? WE know it’s art. Sod everyone else! We have our little corner of the photographic world, we all support each other. We outcasts know the truth, even if no-one else is intelligent enough to recognise it. Nude photography is Art with a capital ‘A.’ it’s not our fault if the general public are too blind and repressed to realise that. Just ignore them. These so-called “friends” were never real friends to start with, otherwise they would accept us for who we are.
Yeah right.
Why do we do it? Why do we buck the trend and continue to rebel in the face of so much disapproval? Is being “out there on the edge” all it’s cracked up to be?
After nearly three years immersed in the photographic world, we are now so used to seeing nude photographs that they have become natural to us. Unremarkable. I am now so completely unfazed if the subject of a photograph is naked that I actually expect it. Nude images long ago lost their capacity to shock me, yes even really graphic ones.
Only a couple of years ago, seeing a photograph of a woman tied up would evoke a powerful emotional response in me. (I never was very good with coping with bondage.) These days, because of the circles in which I mix, such images have become curiously tame. I now look beyond the nakedness. I look for the photographer’s message, the emotional content, the lighting, the composition. I analyse, I dissect. I don’t see a nude photograph the way my non-photographic friends do. What I receive to be a normal artistic subject (i.e. the image of an unclothed female) the squeamish general public see as radical, rebellious, shocking, exhibitionist, pornographic, repulsive, perverted.
To be honest, when people judge Rich’s photography this way, it still really upsets me. His work is beautiful (or at least that's his intention.) Why can’t outsiders see that? Why are we perverts because we photograph people with no clothes on? Why are nude photographers automatically shocking, smutty and unclean? And what does it say about Rich and I that we now consider all types of nude photography – art nude, glamour, bondage, fetishism and so forth - as normal? We view the different nude photographic genres as we would a particularly attractive shade of wallpaper: Different, interesting, decorative, pleasing to the eye, but no longer shocking or offensive. No, never that.
We do not consider ourselves to be pornographers. We are not obsessed with sex or porn. We are ordinary people. So who are the real Outsiders here? Us (for being rebels?) or the “normal people” who consider our photographs to be aberrations, perversions, no more than pornographic smut to be deleted if the images are accidentally discovered whilst browsing online?
Are we really that Dirty?
Images are of Ivory Flame
*Sigh*
Here we go again.
I am sure most of you have been through this many times before. It’s no big deal, right? Who cares what other people think? WE know it’s art. Sod everyone else! We have our little corner of the photographic world, we all support each other. We outcasts know the truth, even if no-one else is intelligent enough to recognise it. Nude photography is Art with a capital ‘A.’ it’s not our fault if the general public are too blind and repressed to realise that. Just ignore them. These so-called “friends” were never real friends to start with, otherwise they would accept us for who we are.
Yeah right.
Why do we do it? Why do we buck the trend and continue to rebel in the face of so much disapproval? Is being “out there on the edge” all it’s cracked up to be?
After nearly three years immersed in the photographic world, we are now so used to seeing nude photographs that they have become natural to us. Unremarkable. I am now so completely unfazed if the subject of a photograph is naked that I actually expect it. Nude images long ago lost their capacity to shock me, yes even really graphic ones.
Only a couple of years ago, seeing a photograph of a woman tied up would evoke a powerful emotional response in me. (I never was very good with coping with bondage.) These days, because of the circles in which I mix, such images have become curiously tame. I now look beyond the nakedness. I look for the photographer’s message, the emotional content, the lighting, the composition. I analyse, I dissect. I don’t see a nude photograph the way my non-photographic friends do. What I receive to be a normal artistic subject (i.e. the image of an unclothed female) the squeamish general public see as radical, rebellious, shocking, exhibitionist, pornographic, repulsive, perverted.
To be honest, when people judge Rich’s photography this way, it still really upsets me. His work is beautiful (or at least that's his intention.) Why can’t outsiders see that? Why are we perverts because we photograph people with no clothes on? Why are nude photographers automatically shocking, smutty and unclean? And what does it say about Rich and I that we now consider all types of nude photography – art nude, glamour, bondage, fetishism and so forth - as normal? We view the different nude photographic genres as we would a particularly attractive shade of wallpaper: Different, interesting, decorative, pleasing to the eye, but no longer shocking or offensive. No, never that.
We do not consider ourselves to be pornographers. We are not obsessed with sex or porn. We are ordinary people. So who are the real Outsiders here? Us (for being rebels?) or the “normal people” who consider our photographs to be aberrations, perversions, no more than pornographic smut to be deleted if the images are accidentally discovered whilst browsing online?
Are we really that Dirty?
Images are of Ivory Flame
Labels: IvoryFlame, Naked chicks, Philosophy
posted by Lin at 10:34 AM
17 Comments:
This is the power of the Blog-World, the knowledge that you're not alone.
I face this same issue daily with co-workers and friends who 'tolerate my hobby'.
Yes, it is possible to be a good, moral person and still see the human body for the miracle of art that it is. It mystifies me why others can't see the same but as long as I have a community of support (thank you all!) I'll keep trying to make art from God's favorite subject - people!
Thanks Lin for another meaningful post.
Bob
Lin-- Could you please post this one instead of the first one I wrote?
There is a positive side to this, leastwise for pornographers. (Although it doesn't help you out too much.)
People like you give pornographers a good name.
All comes back to the age old question - "What is Pornography?"
It still has the same age old answer unfortunately - "I know it when I see it."
As you said, one person's art is another's porn, and the standards for individuals shift with time and experience. It's just too bad that some people think their standards are those which should apply to the universe.
(Oh, BTW, I agree with Jimmy's comment - although I haven't seen any porn from him yet by MY standards)
It’s a sad prudish world we live in. I have been able to keep a rather low profile with my work locally but the more I move into the public arena the more concerned I get. My philosophy has always been that at age sixty I should be able to shoot anything I like, excluding children of course. My art has always been considered tame rather than graphic. When I venture into graphic it’s always been soft focus and some movement to my images. I feel my work is “tasteful” and not a threat to anyone’s sensibilities nor do I find anything I’ve found on your pages distasteful in the least. But I don’t think that’s what driving people to try to ban certain website. A moralistic few can’t seem to find it in their hearts and minds to let people enjoy their lives and to enjoy their nudity. They seem to be affronted by the very thought of people going about their business and enjoying themselves and having a community that supports them. They feel they have a right, a moral obligation to stamp out any behavior that offends them especially one that portrays any sexual pleasure that they don’t practice period. I think in the end their moralism is driven by the fear that someone might be having a better time than they are.
I think in the end their moralism is driven by the fear that someone might be having a better time than they are.
Yep, Michael, you nailed it. And truth be told, we ARE having a better time than they are :-)
Jerking my chain again, are you?
A story: In 2002, shortly after I first started photographing the nude, we were still invitees to an annual Christmas party thrown by one of the uber-rich former executives at the company where I worked until retiring early in 1997.
That year I took a bottle of wine as a gift for the couple, attaching to it a card with one of my photos on the cover. Big mistake.
We've never been invited back. Cut off. Blackballed. Not only by that former executive, but by others within the same "moral" sphere.
We have some closer friends from that era who tolerate my aberrant behavior, so long as I don't discuss it within hearing. Fortunately, the remainder of my social circles are friendlier to my activities.
Of course, there is the other story, that of My Nemesis, which you know but which won't be repeated here (or likely anywhere)....
I do hope you've ordered that book, Lin.
"Why do we buck the trend and continue to rebel in the face of so much disapproval? Is being “out there on the edge” all it’s cracked up to be?"
Lin, we often seem to touch on similar themes in synchrony. Since I posted "Justify My Love," I have been thinking about Mary's comment that people always push us to justify ourselves.
Michael commented here: "My philosophy has always been that at age sixty I should be able to shoot anything I like, excluding children of course."
That may be why I am past justifying what I do. Lim when you're 64 and still posing nude and probably photographing a few of them, you will understand why I don't care what anyone thinks of it any more.
I've lost a couple friends over this, too, but I've made twenty news ones for each one lost. Bob is correct about the value of the community we have formed here.
We are the ones who should ask others to justify their narrow points of view, their lack of art appreciation, much less such a thing as artistic vision.
I work with people who sleep with each other but wanted to fire me for my outside hobby of photography which never involved coworkers.
Words – love’em or hate’em - ya gotta use them – gestures and sign language only work if you can see the person you’re trying to communicate with – but wouldn’t it be nice if we could somehow live without labels and definitions? Oh yes that great word - definition.
1. the act of defining or making definite, distinct, or clear.
2. the formal statement of the meaning or significance of a word, phrase, etc.
3. the condition of being definite, distinct, or clearly outlined.
I think #4 should be – this is the meaning that we kind of think, well maybe, yet not quite sure, well that most, but not all agree on.
So if we look at definitions maybe you’re not looking at the right one for your heading.
Maybe you’re not an Outsider.
out•sid•er (out-sī'dər)
a. One who is excluded from a party, association, or set.
b. One who is isolated or detached from the activities or concerns of his or her own community.
Maybe you’re an Insider.
in⋅sid⋅er [in-sahy-der]
1. a person who is a member of a group, organization, society, etc.
2. a person belonging to a limited circle of persons who understand the actual facts in a situation or share private knowledge: Insiders knew that the president would veto the bill.
3. a person who has some special advantage or influence.
That makes “Them” the outsiders. I like that better.
Let us look at a few other words.
(tasteful) nudes, pornographers, outcasts, Nude, Art, blind, repressed, friends, accept, naked, shock, graphic, powerful, emotional, bondage, tame, nakedness, content, normal, artistic, squeamish, radical, rebellious, shocking, exhibitionist, pornographic, repulsive, perverted, Beautiful, perverts, smutty, unclean, glamour, fetishism, attractive, Different, interesting, decorative, pleasing offensive, sex, porn, ordinary, perversions, smut, Dirty.
I took these words from your post.
I know that if you put any number of people in a room and ask them to define each one of them you will get a multitude of answers. Each one would feel that they are giving a clear, definite and distinct definition. And they would – for them. Because the reason each would give for their answer would be based on their own unique perspective. Then we look at how they came to that perspective, parents, culture, education, religion, experience, peer pressure, job, emotion, seeing or feeling, pain, suffering, sickness, joy, good, bad, or any other of the things that shape each one of us.
So as I see it – it all comes down to what an English teacher used to often tell us – “it’s semantics”. It is a statement I often use when confronted with a conversation that is going nowhere or the people involved keep beating the same horse over and over – because semantics is commonly used to refer to a trivial point or distinction that revolves around mere words rather than significant issues. Yes you can say “this is a significant issue, this ART vs PORNOGRAPHY” and rightly so. But one that will never be resolved because mere words have to be used to debate the issue and while every one uses the same words not everyone uses the same definitions.
Damn Lin – Too much thinking – my head hurts again.
D.L. Wood
"I work with people who sleep with each other but wanted to fire me for my outside hobby of photography which never involved coworkers."
Why does this not come as a surprise? I guess our immoral behaviors in nude photography have pushes our common sense over the edge.
Lin! Have you seen what you've started?
Your post inspired mine (www.studiomarcotte.com) which inspired a well thought comment on my post by JimmyD (http://prettygirlshooter.blogspot.com) and that inspired a post from Dr. L (http://drlightness.blogspot.com/2008/12/doing-what-comes-naturally.html)!
I think the ball is back in your court...unless one of your readers would like to express a few thoughts on THEIR blog?
What a dinner party this would be!
Wise as ever Mr Wood, and a good answer too. Everyone's opinion is subjective, unique, influenced by their background. You're right about that.
However it still doesn't escape the fact that the majority of people in western society see our photography as dirty. Not that we mind being in the minority of course, but it does have a somewhat negative effect on one's public perception, not to mention our social lives (or lack thereof.)
I'm so surprised by this kind of silly attitude... These people have to consult a psychiatrist, right now. This kind of thoughts are very sgnificant about their inhibition and darkful ignorance.
Of course, it's Art, since the beginning of our civilisation. We know it. And it's enough to keep going on.
Cheers Lin, and thanks a lot for you so kind support during my last hard days...
Chris
It's me again.
“How it infuriates a bigot, when he is forced to drag out his dark convictions!”
Logan Pearsall Smith
1865-1946, Anglo-American Essayist, Aphorist
“Fear is a darkroom where negatives develop.”
Usman B. Asif
“Dignity is a mask we wear to hide our ignorance.”
Elbert Hubbard
1859-1915, American Author, Publisher
I think a lot of the animosity comes from the fact that most of that majority you feel that is against you really deep down are fearful of the power you have. You are comfortable with being and observing “naked”. You are comfortable with who you are when stripped down to the bare essentials. You are comfortable with sex, the erotic, the tasteful and the extreme. They are not. And by creating your art you make them face their dark demons and fears. I think Mr. Hubbard is right – their dignity is a mask.
I also think that a lot of the majority you mention – deep down and in the privacy of their living room – really don’t give a damn about whether it’s art or not. But they have to appear to as not to be seen as collaborators in the decadent lifestyle you free thinkers lead. ;-)
“No man likes to live under the eye of perpetual disapprobation.”
Samuel Johnson
1709-1784, British Author
Unfortunately that is what happens to artists that delve into the areas of art where the majority hold beliefs that are contrary to the artists. You look at Jock Sturges or Sally Mann and what could be more innocent as images of naked people…yet because the majority are of children… they are perceived as bad, evil, pornographic trash. Luckily neither caved under the strain of public outcry and persecution and I can buy their books and images if I desire. Is this what is called suffering for you art?
Did Oscar know you were coming?
“She is absolutely inadmissible into society. Many a woman has a past, but I am told that she has at least a dozen, and that they all fit.”
Oscar Wilde 1856-1900, British Author, Wit
“Every civilization reaches a point when the standard of living can no longer be maintained through moral means.”
Richard Althaus
Hell if nothing else we can put gold stars next to all the names of people that participate in the arts that expose us unsuspecting people to the indefinable views of the form and functions of the naked body as contributors to the moral decline of civilization as we know it.
I was thinking after I wrote my first comment about what shapes our views. I remembered that the first books of erotica I came across as a young boy were the complete works of the Marquis de Sade and the Story of O. I found them in a box of books that had fallen on the side of the road. I was sooooo glad I stopped my bike to look in the box. I had those books for years. I wonder if my mother ever had any thoughts on why I used so much kleenx? :-)
Do you think that this early imprinting could be used as a excuse for my predilections and tolerances as an adult?
D.L. Wood
most of that majority you feel that is against you really deep down are fearful of the power you have.
Ooh, I like the idea of feeling powerful! I can definitely live with that analysis :-)
I used to have an elderly uncle who came to stay with us every summer. Ol' Uncle Jeff was a big fan of spicy erotica. I used to sneak into his room (aged 14) and sneak a peek at his books, and yes, that included The Story of O. I remember I temporarily borrowed The Tropic of Cancer once and read it in the early hours by torch-light when my parents were asleep.
Explains a lot about both of us, doesn't it?!
It's just so weird to me that people would stop being friends with someone for the reasons mentioned. I know lots of different kinds of people, and I do nudes too. But, I've never had this experience. Sad the way some people are.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home