It is the viewer reaction that is exploitative. We grow up in a culture that inculcate us with the feelings of guilt about sexual matters. Thus we view images as evil that show such things. In this painting of a revolution for liberty the breast symbolize freedom to enjoy life which is why she is holding the French flag. I have read that the cherubs in the Sistine Chapel were covered up at a point in the past because of changes in how the culture of the Church had changed.
Long time ago I developed a concept that the content of an image is 50% contributed by the artist and 50% of the content is what the viewer brings to it..
Roy
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Davidhazy <andpph@xxxxxxx>
To: photoforum educational network <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sun, Sep 12, 2021 1:45 pm
Subject: Female exploitation?
From: Andrew Davidhazy <andpph@xxxxxxx>
To: photoforum educational network <photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sun, Sep 12, 2021 1:45 pm
Subject: Female exploitation?
I’ve been wondering/pondering about the often natural or implausible and sometimes ridiculous instances where undraped female torsos are included in a photograph (or painting or sculpture). The subject has probably been exhaustively covered in the literature
I am sure. So this is just me thinking about it in isolation. Attached is an example. It is a painting but such examples are all over. Any thoughts on the topic?
Andy
