Archive for November 1st, 2006

© Imogen Cunningham - Helena Mayer, Canyon de Chelly 3, 1939

So tell me, what's makes this image an "art" nude as opposed to just some naked woman lying on the rocks, or even pornography?

Does an image have to fulfil certain conditions before it can be considered art?

Things like:

  • Has it been published?
  • Has it been exhibited?
  • Did someone arbitrarily say "Ooh, nice art."?
  • Do you have to "know" someone specific?
  • Do you have to BE someone specific?
  • Are there specific aesthetic conditions that it must meet?
  • Can "art nude" only be acceptable in black and white?

So what makes this "art" and another image just "coffee table porn" as it was described to me recently?

Join in the discussion and maybe we can work it out? Or does it really matter? Is it ALL subjective - one person's art is another's porn is another's art...etc.?

Related posts

Comments 3 Comments »

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 UK: Scotland
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 UK: Scotland