Classical pornography In the strangest of places if you look at it right

Today’s Washington Post had an article on classical art that caught my eye. Sculpture of nude women will do that and the Naiad by Canova is well sculpted, displaying a very attractive woman.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/06/AR2009110600041.html?hpid=artslot

The author relates the link between what we view as classical art – stripped of much of its sexuality- and the pornography of the day. Of particular interest was a reference to a series of sonnets penned in 1525 /26 by Pietro Aretino. I Sonetti Lussuriosi, along with 16 or graphic illustrations were banned by the Vatican, along with I Modi (The Sexual Positions) engravings by Marcantonio Raimondi (1475-1534), after the original designs by Giulio Romano (1499-1546. Some few copies were saved and the sonnets with 16 accompanying illustrations can be purchased today for as little as $4800.00 if one is of a mind to own such a document. Some of the drawings can be viewed on line if one invests the time. If one invests time and money, all can be viewed on line.

Mind you, I’m not posting a link to these drawings, the decision to view them should be entirely yours and I will not point you any more directly to them than I already have.

Suffice it to say that classical nudes are not the “chaste nudes” that curators and art historians described in the 50’s and 60’s to keep the censors and fundamentalists out the parts of museums and libraries that required adult thought processes. These drawings and many other works were conceived of and executed as erotic art, the porn of its day.

When I have the opportunity to view classical nudes in any media, paintings, stone, drawings, I’m always appreciative of the fact that the women depicted are, in general, physically appealing and possessed of lines and curves that are in proportion to their height and apparent weight. Reubens’ women always appear, well, Reubenesque. Goya’s Maja is realistic in appearance. Botticelli’s Venus stresses reality, if one ignores the absence of freckles, moles, warts, scars, and other nicks and gouges that we all acquire as we age.

This sense of reality when viewing the classical works of art is, for me at least, one of the things I enjoy in viewing them. I have always enjoyed art museums and periodically find books containing the works of a particular artist in the library and check them out in an attempt to broaden my knowledge base. It has been a long time since the required art appreciation course in university. And that course was too quickly over after covering too little material.

Like every male of my age, I’ve read the articles in one or more “Play Boy." I’ve seen more than one or two porn films but find myself looking for a better script, often before the opening credits have completed. I don’t get the same sense of enjoyment and frank wonder at the artist’s talents when I happen to see what we market as pornography today. The models/actresses are so unrealistic as to be unappealing. Their proportions, thanks to silicone or saline, are just plain wrong. The wonderful fluid motion that characterizes women walking, running, or engaged in any common activity, is not there. I might as well be watching a department store mannequin. Due to the loss of proportion and the lack of motion, there’s nothing below a face with too much makeup to hold my attention or interest. Show me any woman without surgical augmentation and I can find some of the beauty that a truly great artist can see easily. Like the fashion industry, the pornography industry has chosen to focus only on the outer aspects of the bell curve that is female pulchritude. The freaks, self-starved or surgically altered, dominate the eyes of too many of today’s artists and too many of today’s fashion designers. The beauty that originates in the women who fill the bell curve is seldom seen. That is their loss and ours.  My wife, Gloria, has those classical proportions, form and lines, that thrill me and would thrill any real artist.  I am a most fortunate man.

While I chose not to post a link to what is decidedly pornography from the 16th century, I have no qualms about posting a link to Nudes in art history.

http://www.ocaiw.com/galleria_niah/index.php?lang=en

"Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither..."(Job 1:21)

Don’t worry about finding anything but real art by recognized masters at this site. Enjoy the paintings and sculpture.

There was an article on CBS “Sunday Morning” today concerning the fashion industry’s discovery that most models look nothing like most women. The average American woman is apparently classified as a “plus size” when trying to find clothes that fit. Even in an article about designing for “average” women, the designer they interviewed said, emphatically, that “clothes look better on skinny models.” For “skinny” substitute anorexic. There is nothing about an anorexic human, clothed or naked, that I find appealing in any manner. I’m reminded of stacks of bodies, prisoners starved to death, in the camps of the Third Reich. And, in fact, another quote in the article, from an un-named German fashion critic was, “Who wants to see a round woman?”

It has always seemed to me that fashion designers hate women. They continually try to put them into shoes that ruin their feet and clothes that require starvation. Yet women seem to accept this as normal and make no organized effort to change it.

I would think that a yearlong boycott of all fashion houses, a refusal by women to buy anything not designed, constructed, and marketed for, for, and to average-sized women could be quite effective in changing the course of the industry. I’d love to see it happen. I’d love to see the fashion industry shown that women can exist without it. But I’m not holding my breath.

Dinner last night was excellent. We drove into Jonesborough and had our evening repast at The Dining Room. Gloria had a Cuban roast pork sandwich with onions, cilantro, Manchego cheese with black beans and rice. I had a pressed Cuban sandwich, also with black beans and rice. We finished off the meal with expresso, came home and crashed early.

Today has been a bright sunny day filled with joy and fun.

Dinner tonight is eggplant sautéed with sauce Bolognese, put back into the shells, and baked with Romano and provolone,

As Veterans’ Day approaches, I’ll close with a link to another well written article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/opinion/08alexander.html?emc=eta1

the logo’s the thing in which to catch the money of the mob.

Cassi Creek by S Lenon 29-Oct-09 11:31

Cassi Creek in the style of French impressionism


We used to call this wasted film and might never have selected it for printing. Hang a label from a known painter on it and it somehow gains relative value for a portion of the population. Then it might become possible to print this, number/sign this and sell it to people who think they know about art.

This is sort of like the inanity that happens to a pair of ripped and torn jeans, stained by working in dirty, greasy job sites. They are of no value to anyone but the owner and unacceptable for sale or resale. Change the label from what it was to that of a fashion house, and suddenly those same jeans can be sold for hundreds of dollars to people who think fashion matters.

We all know people who will wear anything with the right label on it regardless of how poorly made the item may be. It matters not that it makes them look ridiculous, or that it appears to have been designed by someone who hates women. Many women actually seem to worry about fashion as if it mattered to anyone beyond the industry. Very little of the women’s clothing products I have ever seen is concerned with function.

Of course, there is an entire segment of women’s clothing that is entirely about function. Function defines form quite nicely in this segment. Perhaps women are designing much of this segment. That brings to mind another topic for another day.Whoever is designing the high end of this segment, please continue. It often proofs out as some of the best clothing ever designed since the dawn of history.

Men are somewhat less guilty of this as men’s fashions rarely change that much. Business wear is decided upon by men who are impressed more by how much something cost than if it is comfortable and well made. Men’s fashions are somewhat more determined by function than are women’s.

Among the worst offenders are the manufacturers of women’s shoes. Women will buy shoes that provide absolutely no protection for their feet. They buy shoes that are going to distort and damage the bones and joints in their feet and ankles. They buy shoes that force them to walk with their foot in an un-natural shape. And to add insult to injury, they will buy them in sizes that they know are too small. Watch any woman who comes to work in high-heeled shoes. The moment she is behind her desk, the shoes come off. Why buy and wear something that is too small, that will hurt every minute it is worn, that is going to damage your feet forever?

Fetishism must play some part in design. Many men seem to have at least a moderate fetish concerning women’s high-heeled shoes. I don’t. That may explain some of the designers and their designs but it doesn’t explain why women are willing to let men dictate that they should wear shoes that are bad for them. Even in situations where power resides with women, such as with dominatrixes, the dominatrix if usually depicted as wearing high heeled shoes or boots. I’m at a loss to explain this.

My clothing is essentially defined by function. I don’t work in the business world so I don’t wear suits and ties. In fact, I don’t own a suit. I do own a few sports jackets and blazers. But I rarely wear them. I own one pair of shoes which could be defined as dress or business style men’s shoes. I bought them to wear when we were married. I bought them with future use for dancing in mind. For other purposes, their soles are too thin to wear out of doors and too slick for any other surface than a dance floor. They’re well made and will last years more. The rest of my shoes are either boot-like in construction or very light with soles designed for protection. Lately, Keen and Merrill are the brands I like for shoes.

As for pants and shirts, I want pockets, comfortable fit, and durability. Canvas, chambray, twill, and denim all reside in my closet. If you look at labels you’ll find no fashion houses. No Hilger, Polo, Armani, no designer’s names will appear on my clothing.
The labels in my closet include L.L. Bean, Orvis,Cabelas Marmot, Ex-Officio, and on an older down jacket, The North Face. My fly rods are TFO’ a moderately priced but excellent line with a few Orvis rods in the mix. Gloria’s are the same. Our waders & wading boots are in the same price range as are our fly reels. These are all labels that purport to value function over form, and generally do so.

If I am honest, I must admit that I would not consider buying a fly rod from K-mart or Wal-Mart. I wouldn’t buy waders or reels from them. There’s a reason. I’ve bought such things from them before and watched it fail due to poor construction and poor design. I’ve also bought clothing from both stores and it often lasts long enough to wash but never long enough to count upon it. So over the years, I’ve found it more cost effective to buy fewer but better items from reputable sellers and manufacturers who don’t import the most cheaply made products they can find. It costs more per item, but I have them long enough to wear them out. I’m glad that is the case. I’d hate to think I might be label conscious.

When I created this blog, I promised random musings. This is about as close as I’ve come to stream of consciousness writing in some time. Perhaps tomorrow’s post will be of better intellectual nature. Perhaps I’ll do an organ recital. Most of you wouldn’t enjoy that as much as I would. So, tune in again tomorrow and maybe we’ll catch up to Moose and Squirrel on the road to Frostbite Falls, where none of the children are above average and no one knows what the women look like under all that down clothing.