jim111 Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 Why is this acceptable, or is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim111 Posted May 1, 2013 Author Share Posted May 1, 2013 What makes art good. What is the purpose of not putting clothes on people if not to incite lust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 Are you honestly saying that the one and only purpose of a nude figure in art is to incite lust? I am afraid we will not be able to have a discussion on this subject if that is what you are actually saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 (edited) You appear to be of the opinion, Jim, that the human body inherently is something to be ashamed of. This is not the Catholic way. I wonder if you have some Manichaeist or Jansenist tendencies that you may not be aware of. Edited May 1, 2013 by Nihil Obstat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arfink Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 Jim, the people who lust over nude art (as opposed to pornography) have an unhealthy fixation on nudity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 I think you are a little obsessed with nudity, modesty, and the like. If this is not the case perhaps you should try making threads about other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatholicsAreKewl Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 (edited) This is a very interesting topic. Thanks for starting this thread. Some art might make certain individuals feel hot and heavy, true. But normally the intention is to admire the beauty of it. A greater exposure to art might dull out such stimulating effects. There is a wide list of things that can turn people on. Some get a kick out of balloons, others like to dress up as furry animals (they do this in public too). It's almost impossible to not expect something seemingly innocuous to lead at least one person to sin. The artists aren't the ones who should be concerned about this. Edited May 1, 2013 by CatholicsAreKewl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim111 Posted May 1, 2013 Author Share Posted May 1, 2013 (edited) You appear to be of the opinion, Jim, that the human body inherently is something to be ashamed of. This is not the Catholic way. I wonder if you have some Manichaeist or Jansenist tendencies that you may not be aware of. No, but original sin has disordered our lower appetite, so that we desire things improperly. What is the purpose of painting a person naked instead of clothed. Edited May 1, 2013 by jim111 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatholicsAreKewl Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 (edited) No, but original sin has disordered our lower appetite, so that we desire things improperly. What is the purpose of painting a person naked instead of clothed. Think of God as an artist. When a Christian paints a nude figure, he/she is imagining the beauty of the creation itself. We can detach ourselves from viewing the human body sexually, though even the sexual aspects are beautiful. Edited May 1, 2013 by CatholicsAreKewl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 No, but original sin has disordered our lower appetite, so that we desire things improperly. What is the purpose of painting a person naked instead of clothed. Recognition/celebration of the beauty and dignity of the human body? Development of artistic skills? Representation of mankind in an unfallen state? Representation of mankind as a fallen yet redeemable creature? I am not even an artist and I thought of those in about five seconds. If you are so afraid of nude art, then do not look at it, but please avoid trying to force your eccentricities on everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmilyAnn Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 No, but original sin has disordered our lower appetite, so that we desire things improperly. What is the purpose of painting a person naked instead of clothed. It is near impossible to learn to properly paint the human figure clothed without first learning to paint it unclothed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatholicsAreKewl Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 (edited) I would be careful not to worry too much about this, Jim. It can be easy to obsess over whether human urges, thoughts and desires are sinful. I'm sure you're only curious. However, I'm concerned that it might be easy to fall into a scrupulosity matching the symptoms of obsessive compulsive disorder. Thoughts, feelings, and desires should be accepted as they are, not fought out of guilt. The more one actively fights these things, the more often they'll recur. Plus, overexerting oneself by controlling every thought might lead one to being less able to actually control himself/herself, especially his or her emotional state. Edited May 1, 2013 by CatholicsAreKewl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arfink Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 (edited) It is near impossible to learn to properly paint the human figure clothed without first learning to paint it unclothed. Please don't ever go to art school Jim. Also, please don't ever tell me you like works of art like this: Because your views would mean that the process needed to produce this are also immoral. Edited May 1, 2013 by arfink Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim111 Posted May 1, 2013 Author Share Posted May 1, 2013 Recognition/celebration of the beauty and dignity of the human body? Development of artistic skills? Representation of mankind in an unfallen state? Representation of mankind as a fallen yet redeemable creature? I am not even an artist and I thought of those in about five seconds. If you are so afraid of nude art, then do not look at it, but please avoid trying to force your eccentricities on everyone else. It is my understanding is that the reason women are to keep covered is because they are an occasion for sin. The reason I am saying bodies in art should be covered is because it is an occasion for sin. My reasoning my be false, but that's how i see it. I can look at naked people in real life and see the beauty and dignity of the human body, this does not make it OK to look at naked women. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 It is my understanding is that the reason women are to keep covered is because they are an occasion for sin. The reason I am saying bodies in art should be covered is because it is an occasion for sin. My reasoning my be false, but that's how i see it. I can look at naked people in real life and see the beauty and dignity of the human body, this does not make it OK to look at naked women. The human body is not inherently sinful to look upon. That is why your argument is unsound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now