Well, since this is technically a blog about the arts, and not just Mormon Single Life, I should probably cover some things that relate to my original intended topics. I usually try to stay away from the sensational celebrity tabloid fare, since I really have no interest in such things, but this one really ticks me off, and I have a thing or two to say about it. Firstly, I’m going to say that I’ve never watched Hannah Montana, and I don’t think I ever will. It’s just not my style of show, or music. However, I do have a number of relatives (or whatever you call relatives of people who have married into your family) who are quite taken with it.
With that said, I think it’s a very sad statement on our nation when a fuss of this level is raised over a picture such as the recent Vanity Fair picture of Miley Cyrus. Yes, she has exposed her back. Whoopity-do. I mean, really. That’s how I feel about it. Yes, I’m an artist. And yes, I think, from an artist’s perspective, that the picture is absolutely gorgeous. I think it perfectly captures a mixture of innocence and vulnerablity in Miss Cyrus that is hard to find in pictures today. In short, I think that the photographer captured the essence of a girl on the brink of womanhood, which is nothing short of an amazing accomplishment. Neither Miss Cyrus, her parents, the photographer, nor anyone involved in the shoot, should have anything to apologize for. I can’t see anything particularly sensual about these pictures–they were very tastefully taken, and given what I feel was captured, I believe they were completely appropriate, even for a 15 year old.
I don’t know what it is–maybe my perspective is warped. Maybe all of my art training–the years spent drawing nude (and later, clothed–it’s much more advanced to draw clothes) models, the focus on light and shadow, the looking to capture expressions and moments has desensitized me to an unhealthy point. But I don’t think think so. I think it’s sad that our country has such a focus on sexuality and immorality that something as simple as a girl having a bare back in a photo becomes some kind of sexual exploitation of a minor.
Now, with that said, I’m all for modesty. However, modesty is a personal choice. I’m not talking about values here. And I don’t know that this picture says anything, good or bad, about Miss Cyrus’ values. Taken in conjunction with the myspace photos which have showed up in the last week, maybe there is an issue. But that’s not my point here. What I am lamenting is the public outcry that surrounds this particular beautiful picture. We were created nude in the Garden. It wasn’t until man transgressed that we were given clothes. The Lord does not create things that are dirty–he only creates beauty. Yes, we have a crisis in our society today. Pornography is everywhere, and it is worse than any plague, because with it is the power to destroy our very souls. Yet we, as Americans in particular, seem to have an almost unhealthy aversion to the human form.
I’m not going to try to defend high fashion and hollywood. Many of the clothing designers and entertainment producers are obsessed with creating seductive clothing and illicit entertainment. That is a definitive abuse of the beauty that God has created. However, art celebrates beauty. Yes, there are times when lines are crossed, but I don’t believe for a moment that our Heavenly Father condemns depictions of the nude human form unilaterally. One of my favorite classes in high school was Humanities. We studied art throughout the ages, from Mesopotamia up through the modern day. And yes, many of the pictures we studied in great detail involved nudity. Do I regret taking that class? No. Would I want my children to take that class? I would probably insist on it.
I was working on one of my 3D modeling projects the other night in one of my classes while my students worked on their own projects. It is a female character, and at this stage, she is still nude, as I have not created any clothing for her yet (in CG, one usually creates clothing from copies of the body mesh that are then tweaked to add folds, creases, wrinkles, and other clothing detail). Several students were looking at it, as I was pointing out the important edgeloops and topology, and then one of the youngest caught a glimpse and started snickering. At that moment, three of the older students told him to grow up, since he wanted to be an artist. I was proud–these guys haven’t had many traditional art classes, but they understood the concepts.
Honestly, I think that part of the problem we have as a society today is that the adversary has pushed our righteous desire to avoid immorality to the other extreme, where we become ashamed of the beauty of our own creation by our Heavenly Father. When any form of nudity becomes pornographic in our eyes, we reject our own bodies as obscene. While I choose to not exhibit works of art which contain nudity in my own home, that is simply because I don’t consider my home to be an art showcase. They all have their place. And in my opinion, whether it contains nudity or not, when a creative piece uplifts and celebrates the beauty that is in our Heavenly Father’s creation, it is a worthy piece of art.
2 responses so far ↓
1 Top of the Mountains » Beauty or blasphemy // May 14, 2008 at 8:08 pm
[…] post by Joe a couple weeks ago (I’m behind on my Google Reader reading :)) on art and the modern world, specifically about nudity: Honestly, I think that part of the problem we have as a society today […]
2 Candace Salima // Jun 5, 2008 at 3:47 pm
I thought the uproar was a bit over the top as well, although I don’t know that I look at it quite like you do. But having a brother and a close friend as an artist I understand where you’re coming from. You make excellent points. But I do believe a picture such as that should have been restricted to the family photo album and the vulnerability of a 15-year-old not splashed out into the world.
Leave a Comment