Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Hazel

Re: Your Opinion and Stereotypes about Life Drawing Models

Recommended Posts

Hi all, this is nothing related to Thai culture. Just that some time back, I saw a poster on a Uni's notice board recruiting students to model for life drawing sessions. In case one does not know, life drawing will require the model to be in the nude. Personally, I don't think there's anything which is remotely immoral or obscene about it as it is for arts (i.e. it is the intention that counts) and nothing sexual about it. Then again, I thought this may be an interesting topic worth debating (since I have not posted for quite some time) as some people may argue that drawing the human form does not require one to be in the nude. So what is your take on males and females doing this (artists and models)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took figure drawing in classes using live models. We had hired amateur models to pose for us, semi nude, with thongs on. (because we did not need to draw their sausage, prunes and clams) and yes, to get your drawing anatomically correct, muscle lines, shadows, and most importantly "the feelings". you must draw from the real thing, not from imagination nor from a photograph.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

took drawing class (3 years) at CPH design school. It's pretty much the same way as Tonia mentioned. But we did nude a lot, amateur models from age of 18 to 60. It's kind of fun in the beginning after some while I got bored. Here in CPH we have a museum calls "glyptoteket" I spent good amount of time there. There were lot of stone sculptures, like Cleopatra, Caesar, David etc. It's more fun than draw after amateur model. I love the Greek sculptures room. It contains sculptures from 700bc. from human torsos to lions. There were some bronze sculptures also but they are not my favorite. I haven't draw anything for some years now, my fingers are getting thicker. Garden works are not good for fingers and to be good in drawing you should have thin fingers, my teacher told me.

Edited by pandorea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi all, this is nothing related to Thai culture. Just that some time back, I saw a poster on a Uni's notice board recruiting students to model for life drawing sessions. In case one does not know, life drawing will require the model to be in the nude. Personally, I don't think there's anything which is remotely immoral or obscene about it as it is for arts (i.e. it is the intention that counts) and nothing sexual about it. Then again, I thought this may be an interesting topic worth debating (since I have not posted for quite some time) as some people may argue that drawing the human form does not require one to be in the nude. So what is your take on males and females doing this (artists and models)?

I think there is a reason behind this to train art students for the proportions and specialities (well, definitely not the sexual parts but muscles, connection of body parts by ligaments etc.) of the human body. I mean, you also have the training for still lifes, landscapes, portraits and other things. I mean, I am not able to draw at all so I cannot give a deep insight but I think that people who are gifted and are studying this kind of art will learn a lot. Maybe it's the same as e.g. me, who likes to formulate and to play with language and style, learned a lot from reading different books, from novels via short stories, non-fiction books to poetry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Garden work are not good for fingers and to be good in drawing you should have thin fingers, my teacher told me.

Maybe you should draw your flowers and garden arrangements after working on them, that might help your fingers.... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think there is a reason behind this to train art students for the proportions and specialities (well, definitely not the sexual parts but muscles, connection of body parts by ligaments etc.) of the human body. I mean, you also have the training for still lifes, landscapes, portraits and other things. I mean, I am not able to draw at all so I cannot give a deep insight but I think that people who are gifted and are studying this kind of art will learn a lot. Maybe it's the same as e.g. me, who likes to formulate and to play with language and style, learned a lot from reading different books, from novels via short stories, non-fiction books to poetry.

Yes, that's what I used to think too and is still my main opinion of the issue. However, after a life drawing artist told me that male artists generally prefer female models and female counterparts prefer male ones, and that to that artist, there is an element of excitement in seeing the opposite sex's sexual organ, I begin to think that beneath it all, all the artistic attitude and all, there is still that primitive drive which makes the whole issue of nudity sexualized and not so artistic after all. Maybe that artist is just speaking for oneself but it really makes me wonder how often innocent, aesthetic things can be so easily twisted and turned by the human mind.

And honestly, I must admit I feel rather disappointed and disillusioned by humanity when I heard that cos it seems even artists with all their much-touted high ideals of arts and beauty are unable to resist seeing their subject matter (a nude human) beyond just the rawness of sex and sweat. Maybe I hold artists too highly and forget to see that they are mere humans too *sigh* So in that case, will it ever come to the point when, because artists are mere humans, they themselves will despise their nude models for being in the nude since they just cannot see beyond it that it is for their arts (and of course as a form of causal, decent earning)?

Edited by Hazel
add qns

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, that's what I used to think too and is still my main opinion of the issue. However, after a life drawing artist told me that male artists generally prefer female models and female counterparts prefer male ones, and that to that artist, there is an element of excitement in seeing the opposite sex's sexual organ, I begin to think that beneath it all, all the artistic attitude and all, there is still that primitive drive which makes the whole issue of nudity sexualized and not so artistic after all. Maybe that artist is just speaking for oneself but it really makes me wonder how often innocent, aesthetic things can be so easily twisted and turned by the human mind.

And honestly, I must admit I feel rather disappointed and disillusioned by humanity when I heard that cos it seems even artists with all their much-touted high ideals of arts and beauty are unable to resist seeing their subject matter (a nude human) beyond just the rawness of sex and sweat. Maybe I hold artists too highly and forget to see that they are mere humans too *sigh* So in that case, will it ever come to the point when, because artists are mere humans, they themselves will despise their nude models for being in the nude since they just cannot see beyond it that it is for their arts (and of course as a form of causal, decent earning)?

Eeey, I think that artists are the social group being among those having the highest rate of promiscuity, often even saying that exactly this is what inspires them. So I'm not really surprised if this already starts at the level of beginners :)!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eeey, I think that artists are the social group being among those having the highest rate of promiscuity, often even saying that exactly this is what inspires them. So I'm not really surprised if this already starts at the level of beginners :)!

Serious? I'm not being sarcastic; I'm genuinely surprised! I thought artists are very professional people who are able to parcel their inspirations and emotions during artistic work from their real lives!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Serious? I'm not being sarcastic; I'm genuinely surprised! I thought artists are very professional people who are able to parcel their inspirations and emotions during artistic work from their real lives!

A certain percentage for sure, but you just have to go through history to find out what kind of "wild lives" some of the most famous artists had. And nowadays, there is not much difference, it might be even more intense due to the world getting smaller.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A certain percentage for sure, but you just have to go through history to find out what kind of "wild lives" some of the most famous artists had. And nowadays, there is not much difference, it might be even more intense due to the world getting smaller.

Historians believed that Michelangelo expressed his homoerotic emotions/desire through his works.

While clearly having a keen appreciation for the nude form resurgent in the Renaissance, fundamental to Michelangelo's art is his love of male beauty which seems to have particularly attracted him both aesthetically and emotionally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, that's what I used to think too and is still my main opinion of the issue. However, after a life drawing artist told me that male artists generally prefer female models and female counterparts prefer male ones, and that to that artist, there is an element of excitement in seeing the opposite sex's sexual organ, I begin to think that beneath it all, all the artistic attitude and all, there is still that primitive drive which makes the whole issue of nudity sexualized and not so artistic after all. Maybe that artist is just speaking for oneself but it really makes me wonder how often innocent, aesthetic things can be so easily twisted and turned by the human mind.

And honestly, I must admit I feel rather disappointed and disillusioned by humanity when I heard that cos it seems even artists with all their much-touted high ideals of arts and beauty are unable to resist seeing their subject matter (a nude human) beyond just the rawness of sex and sweat. Maybe I hold artists too highly and forget to see that they are mere humans too *sigh* So in that case, will it ever come to the point when, because artists are mere humans, they themselves will despise their nude models for being in the nude since they just cannot see beyond it that it is for their arts (and of course as a form of causal, decent earning)?

It still shocks me that people want to put humans on a higher plane above that of animals.... we are on this earth to live, eat, fight ****, and die..... anything else in between is just pure bollocks.

Painting a naked woman, arouses passion and lust more than anything else, hence it being the perfect subject. **** tree's when you can stare at a naked lady!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought artists are very professional people who are able to parcel their inspirations and emotions during artistic work from their real lives!

I agree to that, most famous artists painted threw their inspirations and emotions. Take vanGogh self-portrait in year 1889 for exp.

529px-Vincent_Willem_van_Gogh_106.jpg

What I've learned in Thailand about the painting is totally different from what I've learned here in DK. In TH they said, VanGogh was inlove with a prostitute, he cut his ear off and sent it to her. But in DK they told me that vanGogh had depression/mentality illness all of his life, and he was moving around Europe. He met Gauguin in France (I think) and they were living together in an apartment in DK (Gauguin was married to a Danish woman) and he worked in DK as a broker. They lived together in year 1888. vanGogh was much inlove with Gauguin and vanGogh had became obsessive with Gauguin. They were argue alot and when Gauguin decided to leave him. vanGogh can't take it, he cut his ear off to protest and paint self-portrait. He sent the ear to a prostitute for no reason other than he was mentality unstable.

Check and compare vanGogh painting style and Gauguin, you will see that vanGogh paintings showed depression and the line was unstable. Google for "wheatfield with crows" painting, he painted it a year after he and Guaguin broke up. That painting was so Schizophrenic to me.

Edited by pandorea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It still shocks me that people want to put humans on a higher plane above that of animals.... !

I guess cos I feel humans being with higher intelligence have the social responsibility to attempt to go beyond animal instincts, although of course, it is up to individual choice whether they want to or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well just look at Beej ... ******* drama queen or what !!!

When Beej spoke on the forum, he's indeed dramatic... but his profile has so little info (why doesn't he want to say more about himself?!) :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When Beej spoke on the forum, he's indeed dramatic... but his profile has so little info (why doesn't he want to say more about himself?!) :(

don't worry ... given the chance beej has plenty to say about himself !!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...