The Male Body: All Over in the Altogether
openup2...@aol.com
Our primary sources for nudity in public art have been Greco-Roman
mythology and Judeo-Christian traditions. A few buxom furies and
graceful muses notwithstanding, the former is teeming with unclad male
deities and heroes. In like fashion, a man 'stripped of his garments'
is the central emblem of Christianity. Down the ages, the Church
supplied lots of other male exemplars of 'holy nakedness.'
Many in the West seem oblivious to the continuous and unsurpassed
admiration and authority enjoyed by these two fountainheads of Western
iconography. The imagery of antiquity has left an indelible imprint on
the great bulk of Western art. Most notably, it lay at the heart of the
florescence of painting and sculpture which burst into bloom during the
southern European Renaissance and the Neo-classical movement centered
in France. Uncovered male flesh was visible everywhere in the art of
these epochs. In addition to these deliberate revivals, reflections of
Greco-Roman archetypes are also easily observable in the male nudes of
15th century Germany, the Mannerists, the Baroque period, Rubens,
Caravaggio and other 17th century Realists, even some of the Romantics
(William Blake and Gericault, for instance). Lord Frederick Leighton's
bronzes of male nudes represent recreations of the Greek hero. Van
Heemskerck's "Triumph of the Bibulous Silenus" and Caracci's
"Procession of Bacchantes, Satyrs and Cupids" present a virtual
catalogue of male nude types bequeathed to the West from the classical
Golden Age. (It might be said that Philip Evergood's etching "Centaurs
and Men" did much the same in our day.)
Artists who deviated from the representational practices of antiquity,
would still frequently draw inspiration from its mythology. Edward
Burne-Jones, for instance, brought together designs reminiscent of
Medieval church windows with pre-Christian legends starring many
deities and adventurers unencumbered by clothing. The excess of lithe
and sinewy buddies found in Jean Delville's "The School of Plato"
probably epitomizes such an assimilative and adaptive strategy. One
could hardly imagine a more fantastically inventive mix of the
classical and the Christian. Nor a more nakedly male one. More
recently, not a few of the creations of Oskar Kokoschka, Giorgio de
Chirico, Picasso, and Dali have taken up and recast antique male nude
idols. The countless paintings and drawings of naked men by Paul Cadmus
and Duncan Grant could fairly be viewed as variations on an Adonisian
theme. The same might be said of Leon Bakst's watercolors of Nijinsky
as Serge Diaghilev's Faun, and the many studies of the male nude by
John Singer Sargent. On the other hand, Reginald Marsh and Thomas Hart
Benton appear to have been more partial to Apollonian themes when
serving up men's bodies.
The blessings of the Greek gods were often invoked in the picturesque
compositions of early Romantic photographers, such as those of Wilhelm
von Gloeden or Fred Holland Day. The Thomas Eakins Circle also seems to
have been enchanted by visions of Arcadia. Uninhibited versions of
Narcissus, Bacchus or Dionysus traipse or cavort through the idyllic
pictures produced by these Pennsylvania Academy separatists. Modernist
photographers, such as Minor White, Imogen Cunningham, and George Platt
Lynes, likewise were quickened by visions of Greek gynmists and Roman
soldiers stripped of all but their glory. And Delmas Howe, a
contemporary painter of middle-aged steer wranglers and youthful
broncobusters, renders his figures as nude demigods with names plucked
from Greek epics and Roman lore.
There are echoes of the ancients in the paintings of other artists
working today as well, including Luis Caballero, Roberto Marquez, and
Michael Leonard. The same could be said of contemporary photographers
such as Duane Michals, Roberto Rincon, and Tony Butcher. A good deal of
the photography and films connected with the naturist and healthful
living campaigns of Germany during the first half of the last century,
as well as the boardwalk muscular-physique cult and the Hollywood
"male-action" spectacle in the US during the last half, owe much to
Greco-Roman imagery. Obviously nudism, cinematic "hunks", and
bodybuilding continue as cultural forces to this day. And all these
influences, plus others besides, insinuate their way into advertising.
If Madison Avenue were to be believed, one would have to conclude that
the primary consumers of men's underwear and toiletries are naked
Olympians.
If one may judge from their output, most artists in the West were eager
to believe that superhuman beings prefer to go about without clothing.
At least the male ones do. The anthropomorphized gods and apothesized
heroes of the classical and neo-classical periods, as well as the
divinized Jesus and canonized saints of church-endorsed art, are time
and again presented naked. Their disregard for covering up seems
especially conspicuous when rescuing, redeeming, interceding or
otherwise acting on behalf of us mere mortals. Paintings and sculpture
from ancient, medieval and modern times are remarkably alike in this
regard. Perhaps one major exception ought to be noted. Depictions of
the male nudity essential to the central image of Christianity, the
Crucifixion, are hardly ever reminiscent of either the iconography or
the mythology of ancient Greece and Rome. Even so, to my knowledge, the
many similarities otherwise between the male nude imagery of these two
wellsprings of Western art have been largely passed over.
For this reason, I offer the following list of possible parallels. The
list might serve as a starting-point for additional comparisons and
further consideration. The affinity between Greco-Roman antiquity
(together with its modern heirs) and Christian traditions (including
those appropriated from Judaism) may be recognizable in purely visual
terms. Such would pertain, for instance, if the body of an ecstatic St.
Sebastian were represented as exhibiting qualities comparable to those
of, say, an inebriated Bacchus. Moreover, the similarity may be
indicative, involving some agreement as to meanings, themes or
narratives. One might argue, for example, that the pictorial nakedness
of a Hercules and a Samson symbolizes a roughly equivalent fortitude of
spirit or commitment to higher purposes.
Adonis-Pre-lapsarian Adam, usually at the point of creation or just
prior to the Fall.
Antinous exalted by Hadrian-St. John the Baptist, especially when
communing with God in the desert, or as initiator of Jesus' "public
ministry";
Apollo-pre-crowned David, as shepherd summoned by Saul, preparing to
confront/victorious over Goliath, or as royal intimate of Jonathan;
also, the resurrected Christ, standing before the open tomb or
manifesting to his disciples;
Bacchus or Dionysus--St. Sebastian, just before or during martyrdom;
Eros/Cupid--Cherub[um], both as bearers of innocent playfulness and
tender passion;
Hercules-Samson, especially when pulling down the columns to which he's
bound;
Laocoon-Christ being scourged, and the facial similarities with "Ecce
Homo" or Man of Sorrows;
Mars or Heroic Warrior--Michael the Archangel, particularly when
battling the forces of Lucifer;
Marsyas--St. Batholomew, in agony while being killed
Mercury--the Angel Gabriel, both as fleet-footed messengers from the
beyond;
Prometheus--Martyr (think, for example, of Pontormo's tableau showing
tiers of tethered saints);
Sage, Seer, Wise One--Evangelist or Disciple (Correggio's fresco of the
Apostles Thomas and James, for instance) in whom nakedness seems to
signal a depth of awareness;
Silenus--St. Peter, the revered but worn-out elder;
Winged Spirits of Hellenic Rome-Seraphum, both as acolytes in the abode
of the blessed,
Zeus or Jupiter-Yahweh, God the Creator, Heavenly Father, First Person
of the Holy Trinity
Correlations might also be made between Greek satyrs and Christian
devils, as well as between the grotesques of antique art (dwarfs, the
diseased and the deformed) and the damned on the Day of Judgment, or
Death personified in ecclesiastical art. Along similar lines, the
Vanquished (Dying Gaul, Fallen Celt, Cowering Persian, etc) may
correspond to Abel slain by his brother, or the Man on the Road to
Jericho, either just after being robbed and beaten, or while being
aided by the Good Samaritan. No doubt, other correspondences might be
noticeable over and above those listed here.
The enormous impact of the Christian religion on Western societies
cannot be overstated. It has been far-reaching and remains ongoing. Yet
KR simply ignores Church-sponsored art when referring to the nude.
It's easy to see why. The female nude is all but absent from the
religious art of the West. Such an absence would be impossible to
square with her/his claim that the male nude has been comparatively
unimportant to our civilization. In Gospel terms, a man "stripped of
his garments" is the primary emblem of Christianity. Male nude
iconography is more important to the faith founded on Jesus than to any
other world religion. Conceivably, it is more important to the Church
than to any other institution. Along with representations of a
fully-clothed Mary (the mother of Jesus) portrayals of naked men
dominate Christian art.
At the risk of stating the obvious, let's begin by addressing the
question "Whose naked body?" First and foremost there are, of course,
the countless objects depicting Jesus himself--as the carpenter's son
from Nazareth and/or as the salvific Son of God. Understandably, among
these are a multitude of crosses bearing the purported likeness of his
disrobed body. However, even more than the crucifixion itself, events
leading up to and immediately following his execution have figured as
favorite scenes and motifs within Christian art. These include a
[near-]naked Jesus being beaten on orders from Pilate and then
presented to "the mob" (frequently entitled Scourging at the Pillar or
Ecce Homo); his being undressed by Roman soldiers upon reaching
Golgotha (Divestment); the hoisting of the cross bearing his body
(Elevation); the removal of his corpse from the cross (Descent,
Deposition); grieving over his corpse by disciples (Lamentation), or by
his mother (Pieta), or by angels (Attended/Ministered to by...); his
burial (Entombment); his resurrection (Victory over Death); and his
exaltation with "the Father" (Throne of Grace). Aside from his infancy
and death, apparently the only other time Christian artists imagined
Jesus without clothing was during his initiation into "public ministry"
at the hand of John the Baptist.
>From stories contained in what Christians call "the Old Testament,"
artists focused on the bared bodies of Adam, Abel (and sometimes Cain),
Isaac when about to be sacrificed, Samson, and David-- especially in
relation to his defeat of Goliath and his affair with Bathsheba. It is
perhaps odd that ostensibly incorporeal angels also often appear in
Christian art with considerable flesh exposed. This seems especially
true of the infantalized, heralding, sword-bearing, and"fallen"
varieties. From specifically Christian scriptures and traditions, we
are presented with the unclothed bodies of martyrs (like St.
Bartholomew) and ascetics (like St. Jerome), the wilderness-dwelling
John the Baptist, and the damned (and occasionally the blessed) on the
Day of Judgment. Intriguingly, Christian artists have also lavished
attention on the obscure St. Sebastian.
Before proceeding, a word of clarification may be in order. By
"Christian art" I mostly have in mind paintings and statues produced
during the Middle Ages and the Reformation/Counter-Reformation, and
their successors down through the centuries to our own time. For the
most part, these objects have been created under the auspices of
ecclesiastical authorities and used for devotional purposes both
private and public. Art arising out of the "baptizing" of paganism
which occurred during the Renaissance (especially in Mediterranean
lands), under the influence of Neo-Platonic humanism, strikes me as
having much more in common with the creations of antiquity than with
other church-endorsed pieces. As such, the artistic output of this
period incorporates much of the classism and sexism inherent to
Greco-Roman traditions. Even so, to the extent that the works of even
such champions of male physicality as Michelangelo and Signorelli were
affected by Christian doctrine and practice, they heeded the call of
patriarchy hardly at all.
Patriarchy and "phallus" (as the supreme symbol of hegemonic
masculinity) are all about power. They signify and enact that species
of power which pretends to superiority in relation to others, mastery
in every pursuit, triumph over every adversity and every adversary.
"Naturally" accompanying such supremacy are all the prerogatives and
prestige of "being a man." Rooted in its fundamental teachings and
observances, "the male body" as seen by Christian image-makers
luxuriates in powerlessness. It does so preeminently when naked.
Christian art paradoxically glorifies the body brought low. Many times
it goes so far as to revel in the "vileness" of human material
constitution.
In his famous study of the nude in art, Kenneth Clark categorizes most
Christian imagery under the rubric "Pathos." Otherwise, he relegates it
to the "Alternative Convention"-as an alternative, that is, to
classical and classically inspired representations of nudity. Margaret
Walters agrees, bluntly putting it this way: "In Christian art, the
naked body is a symbol not of pride but of pathos. To be naked is to be
vulnerable, sexually self-conscious and guilty. Images of suffering,
humiliation and death...are central in Christianity." These are
qualities and conditions that do not square well with the assumption or
exercise of control over others. It is for this reason, that whenever
heeding hegemonic masculinity and male supremacy--as they often
do--Christian artists have positively heaped men's bodies with
clothing. One will find more voluminous garments, royal raiment,
priestly vestments, uniforms, costumes, rags and finery of all sorts in
churchly-motivated art than probably in any other arena of
representation.
The obverse of these observations may be equally surprising. It could
help explain how it is that, when men do show up naked in Christian
imagery, they have been known to facilitate spiritual and ethical ends.
There can be little doubt that there have been countless excesses of
Christian piety which frequently assume masochistic form. This fact is
abundantly reflected in Christian art. But it cannot be denied that
down through the ages, the oppressed, the tyrannized, the unjustly
treated have time and again identified with, and found strength to
endure/resist, in portrayals of that naked god-man on the cross. While
there are no all-or-nothing inferences that legitimately can be drawn,
much the same applies to all those naked saints and Hebrew heroes.
Divested of their regalia, men's bodies in Christian art cannot avoid
calling into question patriarchy as the sole standard for/of power. It
may also help to explain why-repeatedly and, to this "nonbeliever."
amazingly--"the naked Christian" can be emotionally moving, sensually
stimulating, and, for some at least, erotically arousing. (Should it be
noted that I make these observations as a religious freethinker who
most Christians wouldn't count as a fellow believer?)
Artists dealing with worldly matters, working independent of
ecclesiastical patronage, have at intervals been guided by certain
Christian-inspired strategies for unpacking male flesh. Such influence
is evident, for instance, in the many confessional self-portraits of
Egon Schiele, as well as in Daumier's weary wrestlers, Cezanne's
metaphysical bathers, and the bony bodies of young men exposed by
Wilhelm Lehmbruck's in his statuary. Even some of the sculpture of
Rodin bear the marks of a Christian sensibility-his "Three Shades,"
for instance. With hang-dog expressions and defenseless bodies, a
number of famous and infamous men sat for Alice Neel. Her nude
portraits of them are recollective of the Church's portrayal of some
of its persecuted and (therefore?) canonized charter members.
Yesterday
When it is said that the people of Western societies as a whole were
accustomed to seeing the male nude, just how "public" are we
talking here? To give some sense of the answer to that question,
suffice it to cite a small sampling of countless possible instances.
Let's begin with the august and holy Hildegard of Bingen. She
illustrated her writings on medicine, religion, and stagecraft with a
frontpiece featuring a shamelessly naked man as the Micro-Cosmos. The
manuscripts were displayed during her day at the Benedictine nunnery
for which she served as Mother Superior. The Bingen abbey was a
favorite destination for Medieval pilgrims. Less than a century later,
Nicola Pisano would be paid handsomely to carve a fully-frontal and
quite well-endowed "Fortitude" into the pulpit of the Pisa
Baptistry.
Then there's the case of an anonymous German sculptor of the early
16th century who designed a crucifix with articulated limbs. Thus was
the denuded Christ able to enter into liturgical dramas in the form of
a giant marionette . In Spain from the 14th through the 17th centuries,
polychromed wood carvings of the executed or exalted Christ were common
in its many places of worship. Shaped and colored to incarnate a fleshy
naturalness, these figures usually were rendered in a state of undress.
In that way, sanctuary attendants could change Jesus' lavish loin
cloths to fit the seasons of the Church calendar. This one skimpy but
richly embroidered article of clothing was all the Savior required.
Perhaps more than in any other part of Christendom, the nakedness of
Jesus was presented in Spain as evidence of his dual human-divine
nature.
One would have to be blind to miss all the disrobing of Biblical
champions, male mystics, and pagan idols which went on during the
Renaissance. What could be more indicative of the spirit of that age
than the rivalry between Prince and Church over who would get credit
for setting before the citizens of Florence Michelangelo's supremely
nude "David"? During the latter part of this period, imagery which
glorified the Flagellation of Christ and the Casting Down of the Damned
on Judgment Day emerged as all the rage. One or the other theme showed
up on church doors, in frescoes, and/or as devotional or sacramental
objects. Probably the allure of decoratively twisting and exaggerating
the proportions of the male body helps explain the fashionableness for
these motifs at the time. Men's bodies were so elaborately and
gracefully contorted that it's easy to forget the extreme violence
being pictured.
Cathedrals, oratories, basilicas, shrines, theological schools, and
monasteries of the Baroque era were likewise crammed with the immodest
hosts of heaven. Male martyrs and seraphim stood casually naked along
side fully dressed female saints (the one possible exception being Mary
Magdalene, whose presumed nakedness could be covered by her own long
tresses). Incidentally,
it may be noteworthy that Manet would achieve great success (read
"hoped-for scandal") with his "Le Dejeuner sur L'herbe" by
reversing this centuries-old artistic convention of intermingling
clothed women with classically-coded nude men. Dr. Ruth Westheimer, the
noted psychosexual authority, in commenting on Manet's 1863 female
nude entitled "Olympia," echoes the same point being insisted upon
here. She says "[His] celebrated painting is different from all its
nude forebears in that it was painted to make a sensation at the Paris
Salon rather than for the personal delectation of a private patron"
(emphasis added).
Coming at the question "how public?" from another angle, it may be
useful to recall the casting of George Washington in the role of Zeus
by Horatio Greenough for his American History Museum monument. The
first U.S. President takes on the attitude and pose of an Olympian,
naked but for a draping suggestive of Pheidias's sculpture in ancient
Greece. Around the same time, Francois Rude uncovered not only the
dignity and valor, but also the bodies, of Parisian heroes by chiseling
them into the Arc de Triomphe. In the meantime, minor league sculptors
had been planting landmarks
which incorporated male nudes here, there, and everyone. The more
dubious the distinction of the big-shot to whom the shrine was
dedicated, the more majestic the unveiling of male flesh was likely to
be. One thinks, for example, of Westmacott's imperiously naked
"Achilles," set up as a monument to the Duke of Wellington "for
the ladies of England."
To this day pedestrians and motorists in London's Piccadily Circus
can be shot with "missiles of kindness," thanks to Alfred
Gilbert's "Memorial to the Seventh Earl of Shaftesbury." This
consists of a life-size winged nude archer, said to symbolize Christian
charity or agape. The nude "Genius of Liberty" by A. A. Dumont
flutters on top of the column of the Place de la Bastille. An
unappareled Beethoven provided the focal point for Max Klinger's
"Gesamtkunstwerk" at the much-attended 14th Exhibition of the
Vienna Secession. (Recall that Bronzio, centuries before, had been
commissioned to paint at least two portraits of noblemen in the nude.
In one the Grand Duke Francesco doffs all his clothes to declare a
supposedly Orphic nature. In another an aging Andrea Doria coyly drops
the drapery to just below the pubes in impersonation of an emphatically
phallic Neptune. Giovanni Lanfranco's famous rendering of a nakedly
blue-blood "Man with a Cat" also comes to mind.) For economy's
sake, let's assign Pierre-Paul Prud'hon's "Justice and Divine
Vengeance Pursuing Crime" the task of standing for the overabundance
of artworks, by lesser artists than he, in which male nudes are
allegorically marshaled, ostensibly to teach civic lessons?
In their efforts to rally the masses, the secular religions of the
modern world-be it Nationalism or Capitalism, Fascism or
Communism--have deployed the male nude no less than Kings and Popes of
bygone days. In the post-war 1920s, for instance, directors of the
Napolas (State-run schools dedicated to training fighting elites)
contracted with many an artist to decorate the grounds and interiors
with male nude figures. These portrayed dreamy romantic outlooks in
determinedly vigorous bodies. A memorial to the war dead of the Machine
Gun Corps at Hyde Park Corner perhaps epitomizes the sentimental style
much favored at the time. This style often played up the voluptuous
vulnerability of naked adolescent corporeality. The Third Reich
enlisted sculptors such as Arno Becker, and painters such as Walther
Hoeck, to encase Nazi dogmas in a virile mascularity without a stitch
on. Joseph Thorak made a career of crafting Gargantuan and square-jawed
nudes willing to suffer for the Fatherland, such as his "Monument to
the Freedom of Danzing."
To commemorate the 10th anniversary of the March on Rome, Mussolini
ordered the construction of a grandiose complex of sports stadiums.
Colossal statues of naked athletes encircle these arenas. Where the art
of German and Italian Fascism made bold in its presentation of the
penis, the Stalinist regime preferred circumspection. Gaudily tinted
and ubiquitously displayed posters lauding The Party often starred
stripped-down versions of "The Working Man," but invariably with
inconspicuous genitalia. The sacred cows of the private enterprise
system are invoked and adored via the near-hysterical exertion and
exorbitant brawn of the nude "Atlas" outside Rockefeller Center.
Andy Warhol, among others, would often comment ironically in his work
on consumer society's infatuation with gym-built male physiques.
And let's remember that the Neoclassical Movement eventuated in the
government buildings and royal residences of Russia being decked out
with of limp and ethereal males, nearly all of whom were elegantly
undressed. Similar striplings were to expose themselves by means of
another medium during the early years of the last century. Southern
Italy was at that time often visited by sightseers from the bourgeoisie
of European nations and their protectorates. As reminders of their
holidays there, photographs by Baron von Gloeden, Guglielmo Pluschow,
Vincenzo Galdi and others were brought back. These pictures mostly
celebrated the tawny and youthful flesh of "exotic" fig-leafless
fellows indigenous to the area. Typically, they'd be posed in outdoor
or pseudo-antique settings and bedecked with leaves or flowers.
Today
Undoubtedly, there are folk truly incurious about male nude imagery. It
evokes in them no strong feelings one way or another. Hence, they pay
it little heed. And that's to be expected. The same could be said, of
course, for countless other subjects of visual representation, in all
its various forms. Even so, it's increasingly improbable that anybody
these days would be simply blind to displays of the male body.
Likewise, it's doubtful that someone generally informed about
"current events" would be unaware of debates surrounding such
imagery. After all, men's bodies are routinely stripped before the
public eye by today's mass media. This is particularly the case with
respect to advertising, television and motion pictures (theatrical
releases as well as their DVD/video offspring).
Probably more than any other medium, advertising bridges traditional
and contemporary male nude imagery due to its habit of "quoting" from
art history. This it does by inserting the likeness of unclad men from
well-known paintings/sculpture of the past, or designing layouts
unmistakably resembling the compositions of famous male nude artworks,
into commercials, magazine spreads, billboards, and suchlike. And
that's to say nothing of all those fine art photographers specializing
in the "classic" male nude look who hawk their wares to Madison Avenue.
In the field of journalism, an ever-widening seepage between the
tabloid and the mainstream has arisen. One of the more familiar
expressions of this trend is found in the purportedly candid shots of
naked male celebrities (leading actors, sports personalities, royal
personages, etc.) which turn up in supermarket rags and upscale
periodicals alike. A steady build-up of interest in the representation
of the male body is also occurring within the citadels of higher
education. Counted among the disciplines currently engaging the subject
would be literary criticism, the human sciences, aesthetics, axiology,
ethics, epistemology, semiotics, political philosophy, filmology,
cultural history, gender/men's/women's/gay/queer studies, and, of
course, art history.
Not infrequently, afternoon TV "talk shows" bring together trendy
academicians with "lifestyle" know-it-alls for the purpose of
spotlighting the male body. Questions fielded by the "experts" range
from how to hire male strippers for bachelorette parties to where one
might find bared 'n' bulging "action figures" auctioned off on the
internet. In narrative programming, the exposed backsides of tough cops
and hard-boiled investigators have become something of a staple. Even
in situation-comedies of the past decade or so, male protagonists
appear on the set with more flesh uncovered than ever
before-loin-clothed in towels while coming from the shower, costumed
only in their birthday suits during bed scenes, cavorting about in the
briefest of telltale swim trunks or sportswear, etc. Ironically, the
convergence of feminist and "family values" activism has resulted in
far more scantly clad men than women on the boob tube.
Be it the current California Governor's time travel in the buff
during his Terminator days, or the violence visited upon the
stripped-down titans played by Sylvester Stallone, or the edgy
full-frontal informality of Kevin Bacon's characters, or the au naturel
New Man bodies layed out before us by the likes of Ewan McGreggor,
Robin Williams or Leonardo DiCaprio, the silver screen in our time is
awash in male nakedness. Perhaps second only to fine art photography,
no other medium goes after male flesh with the persistence and
resourcefulness of the movies. Within the boundaries of mass culture,
it is unrivaled. To a great degree, the naked men of today's cinema
serve social purposes similar to those of the painted and sculpted
versions of the past. Often they are turned to in the interest of
embodying civic imperatives such as gallantry and loyalty, In addition,
they may be introduced as personifications of personal ideals such as
integrity and self-reliance.
INCONCLUSIVE CONCLUSIONS
It mustn't be supposed that I'm in any way declaring the same, or
even similar, signification for all these instances of naked men in
Western art. Quite the contrary. Their meanings, aims, applications and
consequences have been, and continue to be, extraordinarily diverse.
And a great deal more study is required to interpret the vastly varied
social principals, goals and standards they embody. With considerable
justification, one might assert that a greater diversity of female
body-types, compared to those of men, has been delivered in the visual
culture of the West. Be that as it may, the female nude still waits in
the wings--all but been incarcerated within a cramped area of artistic
indication. Its significance has been resolutely limited by the range
of signification allowed them. In contrast, the Herculean body-type for
men has been authorized to express everything from the horrendous to
the magnificent. Just so, at different times the Narcissusesque nude
has communicated grace or disfigurement, earnestness or folly, energy
or impotence, prestige or stigma, altruism or malevolence, holiness or
decadence, affluence or destitution, and so on and so forth.
My own interest in the visual representation of male bodies primarily
has to do with its power to shape the subjectivities of flesh 'n'
blood men. As a critical framework, art history by itself is lacking in
its capacity to describe, disentangle, interpret and account for the
many layers of meaning which attach to varying occurrences of the male
nude. This is so because traditionally it relies overmuch on simple
iconographic observation and stylistic study. Though these are
necessary, I am not so much concerned with aesthetic determinations of
quality, inventiveness, and/or development, as I am with the complex
relations between cultural artifacts and the political construction,
cultural standardization, economic organization, psychosocial
formations, and ideological rationalizations of masculinity.
But as a rule art history pays scant attention to, for instance, the
shift from aristocratic models of manhood substantiated in the artwork
of pre-Victorian times to the modern bourgeois ones evident thereafter.
Likewise, it pretty much ignores the ways in which depictions of male
nakedness reflect and multiply oppositional hierarchies within the
lived experience of actual human beings. Standard art history thereby
can contribute to the "naturalization" of patterns of
dominance-subordination. For example, it might serve to reinforce
pecking orders which secure the positions of adults over youngsters,
younger adults over older ones, men over women, white collar workers
over blue collar, Caucasians over people of color, heterosexuals over
homosexuals, the fully able-bodied over the physically-restricted, the
fashionably attractive over those unconventional in appearance, etc.,
etc. Since a self-absorbed and disengaged approach to visual
representation cannot get at such issues, I unapologeticly prefer a
more comprehensive and synchronic approach.
copyright 2002, Daniel C. Doran, Ph.D.