Women/men as appealing subjects

[Linda Brandon]

Hi Ilaria, I sped-read that Greer book while browsing in the Tate library when I was in London last year. (I would have finished the whole thing, too, had I not gotten into a heated argument with a book shop employee over whether Sickert was Jack the Ripper.)

(I digress easily, sorry.)

Two other interesting minds which tackle the subject of male/female nudity in art are Sir Kenneth Clark and Camile Paglia.

I agree with a lot of what Kim is saying here - it's much less artistically tricky to portray passively posed female nudes than male nudes. In fact, if I were tackling a male nude (so to speak) I would probably twist him around, or place a sword, stick, or something simlar in the painting for him to be doing something.

I'm a fan of fantasy/comic art and what interests me is that there is much more opportunity for nude/scantily clad female "action figures" in that genre than there are in the "fine art world". If I can locate some Frazetta images I'll post them later.

[Michele Rushworth]

Frank Frazetta was aiming at the huge audience of 15 to 20 year old males who read comic books, and he was terrific at it. If the "fine art" buying audience was made up of the same demographic I suppose we'd all be painting young females with Barbie doll figures, holding swords and scantily dressed in exotic outfits.

[Linda Brandon]

So are you telling me, Michele, that this demographic grows up to prefer paintings of nude or tastefully draped young females with Barbie doll figures standing or lying around instead of brandishing swords?

And we call that progress?


This is reminding me that I almost had a client talked into a portrait where she was riding a leopard but saner minds eventually prevailed, I'm sorry to say. I've always regretted this.

[Richard Bingham]

Originally Posted by Michele Rushworth

. . . Frazetta was aiming at. . . . 15 to 20 year old males . . . with Barbie doll figures . . .

"Fantasy" illustration entailed a bit more complex "market" demography 30-40 years ago than you describe, Michele, and Frazetta set the standard.

With all due respect, I don't find his female figures "Barbies". On the whole, they're much broader in the beam than the "Playboy/Penthouse" standardl for titillation, and look seriously buff enough to handle that spear or sword and slay a dragon, charging polar bear, or army of weird aliens, thank you. (yet they retain their sensual "allure"!)

At least equally represented, if not actually dominant in his ouvre is
her male counterpart, also scantily clad and revealing believable brawn, and perhaps is one answer to this question as to an aesthetic direction one might apply in paintings of "appealing" males . . . ?

(I've got my own problems . . . triple portrait of three teen-aged brothers . . .)