The Bare Facts: Nude v. Naked

How One Man’s Broccoli is Another Man's Asparagus in the Southcoast, MA – HERE’S A POST THAT ATTEMPTS TO BLEND WHAT I BELIEVE IS SIMILAR ABOUT MARKETING AND ART –  Why?  It’s partly an exercise and a leap of faith.  Much of drawing is about focused observation.  By that, I mean, really looking at what you’re looking at.  Observation feeds perception and perception frames reality.  In business, you have to be observant.  Vigilant.  Every nuance.  Every inflection.  Everything offers a clue.  But, you have to know what you’re looking at.  You can’t jump to any conclusions.  You have to be aware of patterns and trends.

When you look, regardless of who you are, business (marketer) person or draftsman (artist), what are you looking at?  What do you see?  The old chestnut of one man’s trash being another man’s treasure is the same as one man’s opportunity is another man’s threat comes down to one thing – perception.  My college art instructor Herb Cummings used to have his own  version of that old chestnut: One man’s broccoli is another man’s asparagus. 

What it means is, that there is a danger of allowing our preconceptions to cloud or distort our judgement.  Eye witness reports are unreliable for that very reason.  What you see may not be what you’re actually seeing because you’re not looking at what you’re looking at objectively or, with objectivity.  Much of art (appreciation) is about objectivity.  Case in point: A work of art depicting an unclothed woman.  One observer sees a nude figure.  The other sees a naked woman.  The painting or sculpture hasn’t changed.  Why then, are the observations entirely different?  Does education or experience, or the lack of either define the objectivity of the observation? 

In art school, live drawing classes or, figure drawing classes, utilize the unclothed human figure.  Some of you reading the preceding sentence read it as follows: In art school, live drawing classes, or figure drawing classes, utilize naked models. While, others read it as: In art school, live drawing classes, or figure drawing classes, utilize the nude figure.  Why?  Maybe, it’s a reflection of either your present state of mind, or your lack of perspective on the subject.  Maybe it’s straight-out stereotyping and prejudice as a result of your cultural or religious background.  Whether a model is nude or naked to you may be a matter of your sense of morality. Where to an artist, it’s a matter of aesthetics. 

Perhaps this may be helpful: The model is only nude when no sexual thought enters into your perception. Why are nude models used as part of drawing (art) instruction?  Because it is a tradition handed down to us from ancient Greece and Rome.  They believed the human body was to be glorified for what it was objectively.  It was not objectified.  That in a nutshell is the difference between nude and naked.  Learning how to draw the unclothed human figure is difficult for many reasons on many levels.  I plan on doing a post devoted exactly to this. 

Art instruction, (yeah, here comes the pun) strips away the student’s preconceptions of what drawing is, as well as, the subject, motif or model, clothed or otherwise, in front of them.  Looking exercises force them to really see what they’re looking at.  It does this through a series of objective (there’s that word again) exercises.  The students think the exercises are just drawing exercises when in reality, they’re looking exercises.  One of which has the students drawing everything that isn’t the subject, motif or model.  It helps students see the subject, motif or model from a different perspective.  Wasn’t it Christ who said, “…seek and you will find…”?   

Part of the spiritual awakening that comes with learning how to draw is the finding – the finding of yourself. He also said, in reference to his doubting apostle Thomas, "Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed."  If I’m going to tie drawing and spirituality together based on “Religion and art – the hallmarks of civilization...” then, I’m going to present to you that learning to draw (art) is a leap of faith requiring the student to trust the teacher and themselves. Speaking of faith; religion(s) has been entwined with Art through one, many or all of its manifestations of drawing/painting, music, dance and singing.  At several points in history, they were inseparable.  I have a whole theory of the current state of both but, I’ll visit that at another time.

 

This presence and level of trust determines what you see.  With all of this in mind, the difference between the observer (draftsman), or the viewer of the drawing, seeing an unclothed or, a nude figure is based on the same reason one business person sees an opportunity for what it is, or for what it may be – a threat.  What separates the two is perspective, which is an interesting word.  It is defined as one’s view or outlook of the subject, or point of view.  It is about posessing an ability to perceive the actual interrelations or comparative importance of things.  Much of marketing then is no different than art; it is about sustaining an acute level of observation and objectivity as well.

Most interestingly, perspective is also defined as a technique utilized by artists to represent three-dimensional objects and depth relationships on a two-dimensional surface. Linear perspective was both en vogue and the new standard in art during the Renaissance. Perspective changed a lot more than art.  It also changed how Westerners viewed themselves and the World.  It was as if Europeans were seeing space and their surroundings for the first time.  

Jacques Cauvin, the archaeologist who started his career in the Paleolithic era caves in France, spoke of a "revolution of symbols." He viewed this revolution as a shift in the ability of humans to conceptualize.  The revolution gave humans the ability to imagine gods.  Drawing went from an act of observing and duplicating (or, recording) the surrounding natural environment to imagining, through symbols (which developed into writing), the supernatural and a metaphysical universe beyond the perceived physical world to assist in answering who we are, why we’re here and whether or not we’re alone..

IMAGE: Jean Auguste Dominique Ingres - Little Bather or Inside a Harem - 1828

Promises & Pie Crust…

Short Stuff from the Southcoast, MA – After thirty-plus years in advertising and marketing, it’s hard to shut off the part of my brain where those skills and experiences reside. While working on, developing and preparing my anyone can draw concept, I realized that – it’s not about the drawing stupid!

When I surveyed students in my community learning based art classes as to why they were giving up several nights of prime-time television to learn how to draw or paint, their answers were almost universal. They were, attempting to or, determined to, go back to a point in their childhood where art was very important to them. They all felt as though the joy they experienced doing art was, taken away from or denied, them.

Many were also left with the nagging doubt or question(s) as to whether they were actually any good at art (drawing). Most of them described how they were either commanded or instructed to: focus on more important things. They also were told that they couldn’t make a living doing that so they should concentrate on a more serious profession.

These adult students were, in effect, the walking wounded. Yet, despite this yearning to reconnect with the joy they experienced in their childhoods, they still misunderstood, or perhaps more correctly, didn’t quite realize that what they experienced as children was both spiritual and emotional. Drawing, as I’ve submitted previously is spiritual. It is either an individual (private) or community (public) expression of their reality. It is then, very spiritual and, as such, is highly emotional as well.

However, as with most religions, which are organized communal demonstrations of faith; there are precepts and cannons to follow. And, if Saint Augustine was correct, then, the reward of faith is belief. Just to be clear here, religion is communal, organizes the system of belief and offers individuals proof of the value of their faith. Drawing then, in my opinion, is no different.

If I may - if drawing is the religion - then there are rites, rituals and rules which define it. Therefore, there must be levels of participation starting with induction after a specified period of training and indoctrination. After the individual is accepted into the fold, they continue their spiritual education which is marked by specific events or milestones.

To learn how to Draw requires a structured indoctrination. The idea of free-spirited expression may be charming but, as with anything of true and lasting value; it requires patience, discipline and practice. Many first-time students become frustrated because they cannot curb their enthusiasm. And since we also live in a world of instant gratification; it’s harder to be patient. There are no shortcuts. There are no tricks per say.

There are, however, proven methods, manners and practices. For example, how to set up and use an easel. How to properly hold the drawing or mark making tool. How to isolate a scene or motif and so much more. How does this deliver the promise of a spiritual and emotional journey of self-discovery? Well, Mary Poppins said that a, "pie crust promise is easily made and easily broken.” So I want to be perfectly clear here. I can keep my promise to you of this spiritual and emotional journey of self-discovery if you give yourself the chance to allow me to prove it to you.

Once a student allows the teacher to guide them on this journey that is more mysterious and unknown than the student may realize; the self-discovery begins. So, instead of my drawing course being about learning a craft, it’s about learning about yourself and the world around you. You can learn and use drawing as a form of meditation that will offer you not only a spiritual and emotional journey of self-discovery but something concrete that you can share with others – your drawing!

I'm continuing on my journey to define drawing and to improve on its instruction in a manner in which anyone can learn to draw. I continue as well to develop my drawing blog in order to assist me to learn and be a better teacher. In the meantime, please join me.

Sign up for The Joy of Drawing starting on June 7^th (Tues 6:30-8:30 pm) at Artworks in New Bedford. I'll teach you the Seven Ts of learning to draw - Teacher, Trust, Time, Tools, Talent, Technique and Temperament

OK - PC? WTF? BS! Enough Already!

Short Stuff from Southcoast, MA - This (I believe) is my first political-type post so, here goes. Oh, and this may be my last! Is anyone worried about offending Catholics, WASPS or Jews? Lot's of kids? Must be Catholic. OMG! Get over it, true Catholics don't practice birth control. And, the World is still spinning on its axis.

Straight laced and humorless? Must be a WASP. Calvinism still exists. Or, as a WASP friend asked me once, "What do you see when four WASPS are sitting at a table? A fifth!" You need to know the culture to understand the joke or get the punchline. Yet, the World is still spinning on its axis.

See a Jew eating bacon? Its not your business, it's theirs. They don't keep Kosher. And still, the World continues spinning on its axis. Okay? When did we in the U.S.A. get so stupid? There's a big difference between stereotyping, prejudice and being PC - Politically Correct. Do we need political correctness to govern our humanity? Perhaps PC should be replaced by common sense. Look what it's done for us so far!

PC? A.K.A. - F.U.D. (Fear, Urgency and Doubt). Maybe Fredrich Nietzsche had the best idea and advice of all, "You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist."

What I'm leading to is the third branch (God, is someone going to get on me because of the ranking? First came Judaism, then Christianity and finally...) of the tree of Abraham - Islam. Is is respect we give this faith and it's followers because respect - the Golden Rule - is what should guide people of good conscience; or fear?

In France, Muslim refugees protested at being offered Gauloise Stew, a traditional French dish. The food was free and available through a soup kitchen. The "soup" served in the soup kitchens of France is considered on par with the finest establishments. The French take their food seriously! The government's reaction? Eat or don't eat. Of course, a true Frenchman is never PC!

There are more examples. What triggered this was the killing of (call it what you want, he's still dead) Osama Bin Laden during a raid on his compound. Why do these guys hang around in lairs and compounds? There have been comments on the web and the blogosphere about his disposal (not burial - I buried my cat, he was disposed of) being in keeping with or in respect to Islamic law and sentiment. Are these people nuts? His body had to be disposed of for purely strategic reasons! No body. No martyr's grave. No touchstone for further terrorist inspiration. The word burial used in news reports triggered a lot of this hoopla.

He was armed (that's better?). He wasn't armed (not better?) He used his wife as a shield? She shielded him? Who cares! He died as he lived - in violence. Why is everyone so interested in proof? There was proof of the Jewish extermination. Who believed it? Who stopped it? Gustave Flaubert, the author of the literary classic Madame Bovary said, "The Earth has its boundaries, but human stupidity is limitless."

There was a saying about Monday Morning Quarterbacks but since there's Monday Night Football - well, I hope you get my drift. Anyway, now there's the big issue in today's news about the damn photo of his dead body and we didn't land on the Moon and Area 51 is; real, not, real, not...

Here's my point, we're not dealing with a religion. We're dealing with individuals who have a warped sense of religion. Not all Muslims are quick to anger psychopaths. Was Christianity to blame for Jim Jones or David Koresh? Why are we so careful, or is it afraid of disrespecting (or, is it angering) these terrorists whose fundamentalism is extreme?

Maybe having family who have been part of or who have played a major part in World War II, Korea and the wars on drugs, terrorism and crime gives me a different perspective. They were in covert operations. The most recent member of that world, I can't and won't get myself to speak to them just to ask them stupid questions. Why? They were a part of the initial response to 9-11 and I don't want them to relive any of it. They saw what BS all of this clattering is. They saw the idiocy of PC!

Bin Laden's body was disposed of not to tick-off a religion but to stem further insanity. Show the picture or don't. I don't care. Is he dead or isn't he? Doesn't really matter - the job isn't done. I saw a comment on some blog or Tweet saying - look at these people dancing in the street - they can't even name the three branches of government.

The flag flying isn't what it was in the year following 9-11. Voter registration and voting are no better now than before 9-11. Our men and women continue to stand on "that wall" ten years later (longer than WWII, Korea and Vietnam put together) to protect us from terrorism but they can't protect us from ourselves.

Bill Clinton had a note near his desk that said, It's the Economy Stupid! If we have a global economy then why wouldn't it apply to other countries? Religion is to blame for the Inquisition, the Conquistadors, the Crusades and so much more. What religion was to blame during the Holocaust?

One more time - It's the Economy Stupid! - it's about the haves and have nots and it's the reason for the Rain Forest, the Middle East and other atrocities against Nature and Man.

When in Rome, do as the Romans - Saint Ambrose

Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's - Matthew 22:21

Let me say this loud and clear. There is a world of difference between terrorist acts and the Islamic Shari'a. Islam is not only a religion, but a way of life. And at its heart lie the sacred principles of tolerance and dialogue. - King Hussein I

Can't we all... just... get along? - Rodney King

Yeah, I know you PC types noticed - I put the Muslim and Black guy quotes last - OMG! Obviously you either didn't read or understand the quotes and their contextual positioning.

The Buddha said it best, "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.

Connections – Do I Have Memes to an End?

Southcoast, MA – This post is the second addressing my developing concept of the act of drawing as spiritual. As I compose this post, I’m stimulated by new ideas, concepts and thought connections. In my first post on this subject (Aha! – Eureka! – OMG!), I described how I was thunderstruck by the realization that as I was attempting to explain what the act of drawing is, I discovered what I believe it really is; a spiritual exercise. Wondering why cavemen were drawing as early as early as 32,000 years ago, I offered a personal opinion. This opinion based on experiences teaching art history.

Although the experts consider the activity of drawing (cave painting) as a part of a religious or spiritual act, I offer to you that it was more than that. It was the religion – they were drawing because it was a spiritual act! At this point is perhaps best to clarify that religion is a group concept and exercise. And, although spirituality is a significant part of religion, it is also very individualized.

After reading - What Defines a Meme – (May 2011 issue of Smithsonian Magazine), I was inspired to continue my exploration of this idea that drawing as a spiritual act, especially when I read what Richard Dawkins was quoted in the article. In 1986, he declared, “What lies at the heart of every living thing is not a fire, not warm breath, not a ‘spark of life.’ It is information, words, instructions.” Based on Dawkins’ statement, could art (drawing) be included in his concept? If so, then Paleolithic cave art was performed an act of providing and sharing (social networking) this information and instruction in pictures since language wasn’t fully developed and writing didn’t exist. As language did develop though, drawing became cruder. Even though I’m only focusing on drawing; sculpture, tool and jewelry making played their own parts. Drawing (art) remained inextricably linked to religion from the prehistoric, to the ancient and all of the ages that followed right up to present time.

Before I ramble further, I have to take this quick side-trip about the marriage of art and religion over the millennia. In one of my favorite books of all time, one that was recommended to me by my sculpture teacher George Mellor - The Necessity of Art: A Marxist Approach – the author, Ernst Fischer wrote:

Man, became man through work, who stepped out of the animal kingdom as transformer of the natural into the artificial, who became therefore the magician, man the creator of social reality, will always stay the great magician, will always be Prometheus bringing fire from heaven to earth, will always be Orpheus enthralling nature with his music. Not until humanity itself dies will art die.

And here I stop for a moment to offer an apology to George Mellor, my sculpture instructor at the then SMU (Southeastern Massachusetts University) – I’m sorry that I didn’t listen to you George. We were always at odds. I didn’t read the book you assigned (The Necessity of Art: A Marxist Approach) until years after while preparing for an art history lecture on prehistoric art – wow! If, I only had read the book for your class, I could have told you what learned. In the end though, you got through to me! Because of you, Ernst Fischer taught me that, “…work for an artist is a highly conscious, rational process at the end of which the work of art emerges as mastered reality – not at all a state of intoxicated inspiration.”

This rational process, drawing specifically, does emerge as reality mastered but, it’s not the end product. The product is an illusion of reality. The mastery is in the process! Fischer believed, “By his work, man transforms the world like a magician: a piece of wood, a bone, a flint is fashioned to resemble a model and thereby transformed into that very model; material objects are transformed into signs, names and concepts; man himself is transformed from an animal into a man.” But what is drawing then if not a process in which to produce an illusion of reality? It is, by personal experience, not what is referred to as creating. It is also not about replicating, or copying reality. It is also not about creating an illusion of reality. What is it then? This exercise, for a lack of a better description, is about self-actualization. It is about defining our personal space in a manner highly personal to each one of us. Picasso, I believe comes close to what I’m attempting to define for you. He said, “Some painters transform the sun into a yellow spot, others transform a yellow spot into the sun.”

Drawing is a personal act and experience. However, when it is seen, viewed or experienced by others, a whole new dynamic occurs. This dynamic is social and although a drawing is interpreted individually, it may also be interpreted collectively. Fischer said that God is a name for the collective. Applying this concept to art, the art conveys information, instruction and more. Both the individual and the individuals within a collective are needed since without receivers, experiences and viewers, art does not exist. Therefore, there is no music without a listener and words without readers. It seems simple enough in a complicated sort of way. The process is what it’s all about for the artist or creator if you prefer. Then, there is the work (art) itself.

But, there’s something else going on here – to once again quote Fischer - Man takes possession of the natural by transforming it. Work is transformation of the natural. Man also dreams of working magic upon nature, of being able to change objects and give them new form by magic means. This is the equivalent in the imagination of what work means in reality. Man is, from the outset, a magician. Is Man the magician or is the art magic? And, if the art is magic, does that then make who created it a magician as Fischer stated?

Is it solely the imagination, combined with the work process that creates an illusion of reality? If so, where does the physical nature of observation and execution (drawing) fit in? What is imagination? The dictionary definition states that imagination is the act of forming mental images or concepts of what is not actually present to the senses. Not actually present to the senses? Drawing, real drawing, is not about imagination, it is about observing what is present to the sense of sight and rendering (execution) it as faithfully as possible. The process is continual, evolves through observation, work (the act of making art – drawing) and improves through trial and error. It also involves what Fischer called making alike, giving the creator (artist) a power over their environment. There are many forms of power. Sir Francis Bacon said that knowledge is power. Knowledge comes from experience. Information is knowledge disseminated.

Before I move on, let’s look at religion, faith and belief. Fischer described religion as the collective. Hebrews 11:1 tells us …faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Finally, belief is confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately apparent. With this in mind, the act of drawing is a spiritual act and the completed work (drawing) is based on the belief of our perceptions. It will be accepted as truth based on the faith that what is seen; exists within the collective consciousness. Wow, the tail is chasing the dog. Let me try to look at this human activity in another way from the relatively new perspective of memetics.

Memetics is a theory that was proposed in Richard Dawkins' book The Selfish Gene (1976) and describes the transfer of information culturally. A meme (rhymes with genes), is then both similar and parallel in concept to a gene. A meme is described as a unit of culture containing ideas, beliefs, behavior patterns and the like hosted in one or several individual’s minds. These memes can reproduce or replicate from mind to mind.

In The Selfish Gene, Dawkins wrote, “It is staring us in the face. It is still in its infancy, still drifting clumsily about in its primeval soup, but already it is achieving evolutionary change at a rate that leaves the old gene panting far behind.” That “soup” is human culture; the vector of transmission is language, and the spawning ground is the brain. According to James Gleick who wrote - What Defines a Meme? Our world is a place where information can behave like human genes and ideas can replicate, mutate and evolve. So why then can’t drawing be looked at in the same light? Drawing is a form of information – visual information. Gleick states in the article, “The belief in God is an example Dawkins offers—an ancient idea, replicating itself not just in words but in music and art. The belief that Earth orbits the Sun is no less a meme, competing with others for survival.“

Art (drawing) and religion have a long relationship going back to the Paleolithic era. If we reference Genesis 1:26 - And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness… we perhaps can better understand Gleick’s comment on Dawkins’ concept – “Wherever there is life, there must be replicators.” And, if Fischer’s perspective is that God is a name for the collective, then conversely, without the collective (believers) there is no, or there are no gods. Drawing then, was the genesis of the collective’s religious belief. It was, in and of itself, the religion. As language developed, drawing took a back seat of sorts. The images became supportive of the philosophy.

In the midst of receiving the tablets from Yahweh himself, Moses finds the Israelites worshiping an idol. In Exodus 32:4 we read that Aaron, in an attempt to placate the people who were distressed because of Moses’ delayed return from Sinai, ordered the people to Break off the golden earrings which are in the ears of your wives, your sons, and your daughters, and bring them to me… And he received the gold from their hand, and he fashioned it with an engraving tool, and made a molded calf."

Back in the Paleolithic there were replicas of Venus of Willendorf figures throughout Western Europe – why? The entire belief system of the ancient Egyptians was their art. The ancient Greeks, illustrated that (Acts 14:11-12) that, “...men were turned into gods and gods were turned into men.” Early Christians adopted the religious iconography of the Greco-Roman world. The image of Jesus that we have come to know was patterned after the god Apollo. The early Orthodox Church was split by the Iconoclasm and religious art helped drive Catholicism through the Gothic Age and the Renaissance. Art and religion were inseparable it seemed. At some point in time, however, perhaps its beginnings can be traced to the Seventeenth Century, the collective’s concept of God shifted from a mystical, untouchable being to one found in every rock and plant (a throwback of sorts). God then, was Nature; therefore, the imagery of God was the landscape. Then, God was perceived as Science as Man’s knowledge expanded.

Modernism reflected the emerging technological age. Impressionism was a scientific view of nature. After the Second World War, Art was pretty much a standalone religion again. Then fast forward, as I wrote in my - A Jar of Change & Cable TV – See it Ain’t So Bad! post - The Sixties gave us Vatican Two and the Birth control pill. Women left the Church in droves. It was the Sixties – and society, tradition and conformity were old and tired ideas. Art stumbled along until just around the time of Jean-Michel Basquiat’s death. Now what? Art is dead. Religion is dead. Or, are they really? Perhaps it’s the organizations that controlled Art and Religion that are dead. According to Friedrich Nietzsche who wrote in his book – The Gay Science:

God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him.

How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers?

What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned

has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us?

What water is there for us to clean ourselves?

What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent?

Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us?

Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?"

He continued - God is dead: but considering the state Man is in, there will perhaps be caves, for ages yet, in which his shadow will be shown. Will we see his shadow again and where are those caves?

I’ll close with Fischer again who said, “The usefulness of a work of art is determined not by its capacity to satisfy a determinate human need, but by its capacity to satisfy the general need that man feels to humanize everything he comes in contact with… Art is the creation of objects that essentially satisfy only spiritual needs; that is, these objects are distant not only from direct, physical, immediate needs, but also from the practical needs that are satisfied by the products of labor.”

[AUTHOR’S NOTE: This theory or concept is going to take a lot of work and revisiting this time and time again.]