gimzer

I was astonished by the comments left on danila's artwork

http://www.thinkdraw.com/picture.php?pictureId=110244#comments

I understand we all have opinions, but does TD endorse trolling and attacking? What does a person do when a sock puppet denigrates a real person?

If i recall, there are numerous artwork pieces throughout the gallery that are inspired by the human body. Are the "naked people police" entitled to emotionally vomit on each of them?

Here's another one of my favorites:

http://www.thinkdraw.com/picture.php?pictureId=93507

Isn't this one actually displayed at the Museum of Modern Art in NYC? Are people like hxxhxx the reason security must be so tight?

ThinkDraw represents a safe place to express yourself creatively. Really, what do we do with such close-minded attacks? People like that are NOT here to learn or grow.

gimzer

Here's another BEAUTIFUL piece

http://www.thinkdraw.com/picture.php?pictureId=59231

Dragon

Quite some time ago solosater introduced a challenge called Tasteful Nudes. Her whole purpose in it was basically to try to open some minds about nudity in art and show that it could be done without being vulgar and distasteful. A great many people (including myself) applauded her efforts, many people did some absolutely beautiful works of art to enter the challenge and I don't recall a single one that wouldn't fall under the category of tasteful. There were definitly critics though and solo felt she had to cut the challenge short due to a number of people feeling the sudden inundation of nudes in the gallery may be seen by children who shouldn't see them. I suppose I do see the point of that but I really didn't feel any of those pictures were harmful or in any way pornographic.
I guess what it comes down to is this, if you think a picture is offensive then flag it. If it truly is offensive then others will flag it too. The hurtful comments and vitriol are completely unnecessary. I really hope that hxxhxx misunderstood the intention of danila's pic but I don't condone the anger in her comments about it. We should probably all step back a moment before posting something in anger and/or disgust and consider if we're looking at what we think we're looking at. Perhaps we're seeing something a lot differently than the artist intended.

gimzer

Thank you for that. It was well said, and helped me understand the history. I would hope that the negative and hurtful comments don't interfere with the creativity and beauty we see here.

Qsilv

Dragon's summarizing is spot on. I'd just like to add my own pov--

People who worry about objectification of women (or men, or a host of other problems in society and on the planet) almost always mean well. Granted a few are into self-aggrandizement, but the vast majority are intensely sincere.

The problem is they close doors rather than open them.

Closing doors is only appropriate for relatively short moments in time... for protection.

In the long run there's way more social value to gradually, gently, bringing people along into a wide-awake appreciation of what we are and can be.

Bodies (human, animal, plant, geological...) have inherent beauty... they're fun to explore and use pretty full while we each live our allotted span... they can be truly enjoyed... all WITHOUT enslavement or abuse of any sort.

If we don't allow each other to see the expression of this in safe ways, how shall we ever learn it?


(Q steps off her soap-box... leaves it for the next kind messenger of good sense and hope... )

matthew

Hee hee heee.... She said "naked"... Hee hee heee

clorophilla

I totally agree with Dragon: we have ways to make grievances without hurt or offend people. I'm amazed when I see how much some people feel hurted by innocent drawing, but I understand that culture and sensitivity vary from a person to another, from a Country to another.
We could feel embarassed, angry or hurted by any pic, but we have always to presume the artist is in good faith.
I make you an example. I'm vegan and love all animals. Sometime I could see a pic that could make me fell unconfortable: fishing, bullfights, steck and chips, and so on. But I understand that the intent of the drawer wasn't to hurt me, nor to enjoy for animal suffering. I ate meat in past; everyone has his own path, timing, sensitivity. Surely I too do things that hurt the sensitivity of someone, and I'm unaware to.

SO, I can flag (never occurred since now), or I can comment in a gentle way, giving both the possibility of share and confront different points of view. verbal violence is unnecessary and don't make the world better.

danila

Thank you all for so kindly supporting me, I didn't think I would ever get so hurted by a comment, it didn't offend me so much the first comment from RIKU, but felt terrible at the other comment to the point that I couldn't even stop and think. This because the language of the comment told me that the person is not too young, is probably american or however surely not from a Muslim Country, it told me many things and among this the accusation which i received as nasty, from a person that doesn't have the "good" intention that Qsilv thinks, she didn't mean well at all, and her excuse of "objectifying "
woman body came out from different factors, too bad for her, but badness for free, or as reaction to something else does not justify the words she used.
Look at her profile and her pictures and you'll understand more. I think I automatically apply the psychoanalytic system while reading comments or watching pictures, that I have learned and study, and I use every day in and out to survive where I live and in my job. I shouldn't get so sensitive? May be, but in the end, if I received such comment from some one here in Egypt (which never happened in more than 30 years) I would have answer by explaining the difference of that 'DEVIATED" interpretation AND REALITY. IT CAME INTO MY MIND A DOCUMENTARY OF 3-4 YEARS AGO, TAKEN SECRETLY in Iran, where a fantastic artist was convicted to Capital pain(is this the correct word? he should die by Hanging) for having painted a naked foot, or hands of ladies..but mostly for having corrupted other young students souls by teaching them on how to draw woman body..he paid off his sentence by paying a lot of money he got by selling through friends in the STATES, some of his wonderful Paintings...
I said too much...thank you all again ALSO FOR THE TIME YOU SPENT ON THIS ISSUE......

Shanley

I'd be extremely curious if this looks like i'm objectifying men: http://www.thinkdraw.com/picture.php?pictureId=100414 .
Just kidding, I know it's a sensitive subject, but Lynn's idea sounded cool to me.
Once again, I cannot igonre the diversity of opinions on this subject. However, pointing the finger may result in getting the opposite results. The psychological profile reveals somebody, with a different education, who misinterpreted the pic, not somebody ready to hang an artist.
Nevertheless, this matter rises another question for me on which I find interesting: should art have a message or should be art made just for art's sake? I know it's an old one, but can't help wondering how other TD-ers feel about this.

Qsilv

I love clorophilla's gentle wise words, and Shanley's humor...

and of COURSE we objectify beings!
the real question is can we do that without causing harm...
can we in fact actually increase appreciation that way...
some people don't even want to find out...
or for anyone else to try...
THEY cause harm.

"Should" is a rather dangerous term...
art that is wholly didactic winds up a tool of enslavement...
art that is wholly decorative winds up mere wallpaper.

Danila, I hope you don't feel that I was against your position! My deep apologies for not clearly enough stating my sympathy to *you*.

Shanley

Right you are, Qsilv, with each of those two affirtmations. The main objection to Danila's drawing was the fact that the artist used her talent for something 'rather wrong', instead of using it in a 'good way'. Therefore, the moral issue was raised in the matter (one more point for the 'different education' hypothesis). I tend to believe art is rather a way of expressing our personality, rather than a perpetuum choice between educating others and making ourselves 'puttable- on-walls '. Surely, study-cases and abstract art may not make aything obvious about the artist at a first glance, but as far as I'm able to understand this, the real journey is in the inside, either the inside may be regarded as soul or mind.

danila

THANKS SHANLEY, IT'S THE MORAL ISSUE THE ONE THAT HURTED ME. PERCEIVING IT AS SO UNJUST, OF COURSE MORALITY CHANGES ACCORDING TO CULTURE, TO CENTURIES, IF WE THINK OF WHAT WAS CONSIDERED IMMORAL IN THE 12TH CENTURY RATHER THAN THE 17TH OR 18TH CENTURIES..WE COULD GO ON FOREVER. I BELIEVE FOR WHAT IS MY CONCERN THAT THIS AS MANY OTHER FORM OF ART, IF NOT ALL, ARE THE ONE OF THE MOST POWERFUL EXPRESSION OF OUR "INNER" PART, WHICH CAN TOUCH MANY OTHERS IN A WAY OR ANOTHER, BUT HERE AGAIN WE COULD GO ON FOREVER. THANKS FOR YOU HUMOR WHICH IS GIVING THE RIGHT COLOR TO THIS :BLACK AND WHITE (SOME GRAY) PICTURE ISSUE!!!!!
AND TKS QSILV FOR YOUR RI-ASSURANCE OF YOUR INTENTIONS...

Login

Would this have been shocking had it been drawn in a flesh colour, rather than blue stone? http://www.thinkdraw.com/picture.php?pictureId=54031

danila

ops....TOO MUCH SHOCKING.....TKS...

Shanley

in a flesh color it would have lost its essence...

matthew

I like naked people... I am naked people...

five

Login, I did him in fleshy coloring. I don't think it's shocking.

http://www.thinkdraw.com/picture.php?pictureId=110971
http://www.thinkdraw.com/picture.php?pictureId=110968