Lil Red Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 is nudity in art good or bad? explain your position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kafka Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 Bad. Why? Art is a high expression of beauty, and ultimately a reflection of God who is Beauty. Now public nudity goes against the moral law which God has written in the nature of men. So art that is immoral cannot be an expression of beauty or a reflection of God since it breaks his laws which are meant to lead men by love towards Him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anomaly Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 [quote name='kafka' post='1341536' date='Jul 26 2007, 05:13 PM']Bad. Why? Art is a high expression of beauty, and ultimately a reflection of God who is Beauty. Now public nudity goes against the moral law which God has written in the nature of men. So art that is immoral cannot be an expression of beauty or a reflection of God since it breaks his laws which are meant to lead men by love towards Him.[/quote]kewel. the body god made us with is inherently immoral unless humans add clothes to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 well, we could start by looking through similar discussions [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=51067"]here[/url], [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=44625"]here[/url], [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=11094"]here, [/url] and [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=2091"]here.[/url] My view is that it is OK as long as it's not erotic. There is a difference between portraying the body in a way that is intended to elicit lustful desire in the viewer (i.e., pornography) and portraying it in a way that is intended to elicit an appreciation for the inherent goodness and beauty of God's creation (i.e., Michelangelo's David). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cow of Shame Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 [quote name='Anomaly' post='1341537' date='Jul 26 2007, 05:15 PM']kewel. the body god made us with is inherently immoral unless humans add clothes to it.[/quote] sweet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aalpha1989 Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 [quote name='kafka' post='1341536' date='Jul 26 2007, 04:13 PM']Bad. Why? Art is a high expression of beauty, and ultimately a reflection of God who is Beauty. Now public nudity goes against the moral law which God has written in the nature of men. So art that is immoral cannot be an expression of beauty or a reflection of God since it breaks his laws which are meant to lead men by love towards Him.[/quote] Public nudity doesn't go against the moral law which God has written in the nature of men. Haven't you read the creation story, dude? Adam and Eve didn't wear clothes until after they sinned...obviously then it wasn't a sin for them to be naked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiquitunga Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 (edited) There are a couple threads about this at the Catholic Answers Forum - [url="http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=142487"]Nudity and Art[/url] From what I've read, when they restored the Sistine Chapel, they restored the figures of Adam and Eve without clothes, as Michelangelo originally painted them. Some popes had requested that clothes be painted on them, but John Paul II was in favor of the original. In Genesis it specifically says Adam and Eve were naked and were without shame. The naked human body is not evil, but God's creation. We are, however a fallen race now. I think a lot depends on things like the culture, the times, intention of the artist, subject of the art. Not all nudity in art is bad, but certainly I think a great deal of it these days is immoral, and should be avoided. Edited July 26, 2007 by Margaret Clare Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted July 26, 2007 Author Share Posted July 26, 2007 Here is my position: quoting from [u]Theology of the Body for Beginners[/u] [quote name=' (page46-47)']Purity, therefore, is not prudishhness. It does not reject the body. "Purity is the glory of the human body before God. It is God's glory in the human body, through which masculinity and femininity are manifested" (March 18, 1981). Purity in its fullness will only be restored in heaven. Yet, as the Catechism teaches, "Even now [purity of heart] enables us to see according to God...it lets us perceive the human body - ours and our neighbors's - as a temple of the Holy Spirit, a manifestation of divine beauty" (CCC, n.2519). We have to reckon with the fact that we have a Pope who, in the restoration project of the Sistine Chapel, ordered the removal of several loincloths that previous popes had painted over Michelangelo's original nudes. And he did this in the name of Christian purity. During the homily dedicating the restored frescoes, John Paul proclaimed the Sisten Chapel "the sanctuary of the theology of the human body." He added, "It seems that Michelangelo, in his own way, allowed himself to be guided by the evocative words of the Book of Genesis which...reveals: 'The man and his wife were both naked, yet felt no shame' (Gen 2:25)." (April 13, 1994) What then, is the difference between pornography and a proper artistic portrayal of nakedness? The Pope says the difference lies in the intention of the artist. Pornographic portrayals of the body raise objection "not because of their object, since the human body in itself always has its inalienable dignity - but because of the quality or way of its reproduction" (May 6, 1981). The pornographer seeks only to arouse lust in the viewer, while the true artist (such as Michelangelo) helps us see "the whole personal mystery of man." Proper portrayals of the naked body teach us "in a way that nuptial meaning of the body which corresponds to, and is the measure of 'purity of heart'" (May 6, 1981). Those who experience mature purity understand the naked body for what it is - the revelation of God's plan of love.[/quote] the way that i've heard it said: it is not that pornography shows too much, it is that is shows too little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kateri05 Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 [quote]it is not that pornography shows too much, it is that is shows too little.[/quote] i couldn't agree more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiquitunga Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 (edited) That's very well said. It's too bad evil has come into the world and tainted God's creation through abuses like pornography. The devil is quite unhappy with us, and the gifts God has given us. He will never be united to God again, and tries his best to corrupt the human race, twisting God's gift of human sexuality, which reflects the great mystery of God Himself, the Holy Trinity, into such immoral and cheapening abuses like pornography. Yesterday I reported one of my own posts with the beautiful pictures of Our Lady, because I realized a link in the link I provided had a some pictures/photographs and links to art that I felt was on the verge of being inappropriate. They reminded me of some of the ways in which the devil tormented Padre Pio with visions of naked dancing young women. But yeah, the correct understanding of the matter is written well here. I am reminded of another of Christopher West's series on the Theology of the Body, [i]Naked Without Shame.[/i] We are blessed in our day to have so much written well on the subject for our understanding, which is vital to our very beings as humans, created for love, and destined, [i]or rather[/i] created, to be united to Love Himself. Edited July 26, 2007 by Margaret Clare Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightec Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 It all depends on how it is used. If it is used to arouse sexuality then I would say no. I took an art class where we studied the human body in terms of form and a representation of nature. There was nothing sexual about it. Michaelangelo's David is art, Playboy is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 Here's an interesting question ... those of you who answered that you're not opposed to nude art, would anyone actually pose in the nude for an artist? Would you put up a nude portrait of someone you knew? Please explain your answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 ah the VATICAN Museum has nude art... are ya gonna object to Michelangelo???????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 [quote name='Terra Firma' post='1341731' date='Jul 26 2007, 08:01 PM']Here's an interesting question ... those of you who answered that you're not opposed to nude art, would anyone actually pose in the nude for an artist? Would you put up a nude portrait of someone you knew? Please explain your answer.[/quote] Yes and yes. God didn't make me with clothes on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kafka Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 [quote name='aalpha1989' post='1341542' date='Jul 26 2007, 04:31 PM']Public nudity doesn't go against the moral law which God has written in the nature of men. Haven't you read the creation story, dude? Adam and Eve didn't wear clothes until after they sinned...obviously then it wasn't a sin for them to be naked.[/quote] Of course I read the Creation story, dude. That was before the Fall. [quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1341736' date='Jul 26 2007, 07:05 PM']ah the VATICAN Museum has nude art... are ya gonna object to Michelangelo????????[/quote] Object Michelangelo? Sure why not he was only an artist, a man, a sinner like the rest of us I dont care how talented he was 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