The Nude
- Thread starter stlukesguild
- Start date
stlukesguild
Well-known member
- Messages
- 2,763
Arty... as I posted in your thread on unpopular opinions, I am certain there is good and bad art. I've made more than my share of the latter myself. 
As to what qualifies as "good" or "bad" art... that's always open to debate. As I admitted above, I don't think any of the photos in my first post qualified as great art with the exception of the Bellocq... but I'm fine with that. I have more than a few artistic "guilty pleasures"... works of art I suspect are not "great"... but I love anyhow. I do think that the František Drtikol and the Blumenfeld photos are good... although I would admit they are not exactly my cup of tea either. I'll eventually get there, however.
As to what qualifies as "good" or "bad" art... that's always open to debate. As I admitted above, I don't think any of the photos in my first post qualified as great art with the exception of the Bellocq... but I'm fine with that. I have more than a few artistic "guilty pleasures"... works of art I suspect are not "great"... but I love anyhow. I do think that the František Drtikol and the Blumenfeld photos are good... although I would admit they are not exactly my cup of tea either. I'll eventually get there, however.
stlukesguild
Well-known member
- Messages
- 2,763
Didn't mean to derail the thread. But it's 21 years today.
Congrats! I never would have pictured you for the June Bride. My wife and I had a costume party wedding (which I mentioned on the fashion thread). We wanted to get married on Halloween... but the date was already booked more than a year in advance. It turned out fine, however. We noticed that Friday the 13th of October was open and the day turned out spectacular: the weather was sunny and in the mid-80s (perfect for an outdoor wedding under a gazebo) and our beloved Cleveland Indians won the pennant the same day! Enjoy your day!
Congrats! I never would have pictured you for the June Bride.
My wife and I had a costume party wedding (which I mentioned on the fashion thread). We wanted to get married on Halloween... but the date was already booked more than a year in advance. It turned out fine, however. We noticed that Friday the 13th of October was open and the day turned out spectacular: the weather was sunny and in the mid-80s (perfect for an outdoor wedding under a gazebo) and our beloved Cleveland Indians won the pennant the same day! Enjoy your day!
Artyczar
Moderator
- Messages
- 13,317
I think "good" and "bad" art is a lot different than what "is" or "isn't" art. I can absolutely hate certain art, but that doesn't mean it isn't art. I know you aren't saying that. I just wanted to make that clear. Not that I wasn't saying you thought I wasn't being clear either. LOL!
By the way, I was not a bride. We are living in sin. June 4th was our first sort of "date" when we "knew," if that makes sense. We moved in together about a year later.
October is my favorite time of year too.
By the way, I was not a bride. We are living in sin.
June 4th was our first sort of "date" when we "knew," if that makes sense. We moved in together about a year later. October is my favorite time of year too.
stlukesguild
Well-known member
- Messages
- 2,763
We are living in sin.
Gasp!
Gasp!
musket
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,031
I was truly baffled to hear about it. I had no idea.
Roni
Well-known member
- Messages
- 169
Here comes a real strange case of mixing art and porn: Jeff Koons' "Made in Heaven" (1991) with huge most explicit photographs and statues of his intercourse with "Cicciolina" (Ilona Staller) [combined with cute puppies and flowers].
I call it "strange" in the context of our above discussion, because here we don't have a case of "historic" (19th century, where men couldn't see many naked women) or long ago (Betty Page example) times, but the now and here. And we have it in a museum, where people usually don't go for the cause of sexual arousal and it was meant to be seen as art from the start.
Even these prints in a book make the point about looking for "sexual pleasure" questionable, since why should one buy a more expensive artbook, when he can have the same thing in abundance in a cheap porn-mag [or for free now on the net]?
There MUST be something else, something more about this sexual exploit, than only arousal. Whatever it is, it's more than just that.
I call it "strange" in the context of our above discussion, because here we don't have a case of "historic" (19th century, where men couldn't see many naked women) or long ago (Betty Page example) times, but the now and here. And we have it in a museum, where people usually don't go for the cause of sexual arousal and it was meant to be seen as art from the start.
Even these prints in a book make the point about looking for "sexual pleasure" questionable, since why should one buy a more expensive artbook, when he can have the same thing in abundance in a cheap porn-mag [or for free now on the net]?
There MUST be something else, something more about this sexual exploit, than only arousal. Whatever it is, it's more than just that.
stlukesguild
Well-known member
- Messages
- 2,763
I despise Koons as well. But I despise Damien Hirst more. Koons seems to have access to better craftsmen to fabricate his works... or perhaps he just pays better. 
I do think some of Koons' works are nice as just "eye candy"
Having said that... I find these to be far better in terms of "eye candy"... and far less expensive... and they have a practical use as well:
I do think some of Koons' works are nice as just "eye candy"Having said that... I find these to be far better in terms of "eye candy"... and far less expensive... and they have a practical use as well:
