Not a hoax! Not A trick title! A real, serious issue. Read on . . .
I had an in-depth exposé of the commercial Web design industry planned for this week's essay. However, I've put that on hold in order to tell you about something much more important that just happened to me.
I saw a naked lady!
Okay, yes, I've seen them before. I've seen lots. But this particular one was noteworthy. This one was at the bus stop.
There I was, arms full of shopping, waiting for the bus. And there she was, broad daylight, naked as the day she was born. I was shocked.
Everybody could see her. She was sixteen feet wide. She was on an advertising billboard. She was advertising perfume (but I'm not going to say which brand—not unless they pay me!).
Now, let me set a couple of points straight. First, I'm a normal (?), heterosexual male and as a general rule I find women quite pleasant to look at. Second, I don't think I'm excessively prudish. I have no objection to the concept of naked women. Some of my best friends are naked women.
But this one was at the bus stop. Naked. In broad daylight. Selling perfume.
Is it just me, or does anybody else find this wrong?
I first caught a glimpse of her a few nights ago when it was dark. I passed her quickly in the car and I thought the nudity was an optical illusion (or wishful thinking?). So this morning I took a good, long look. (Purely for scientific purposes.) If she's wearing a body stocking, it's very subtle. You can clearly see her right . . . um . . . well the Themestream censor won't let me name it, but you could see her right . . . well . . . it was erect and very prominent in profile, ok? You couldn't see her left . . . you know . . . because she was cupping her left . . . darn it, this is awkward . . .
She's reclining, side on to the camera, knees raised and spread, neck arched, fondling her chest, lips parted, eyes hooded . . . well, I'm sure you get the idea. It's a blatant sexual pose. Oh, wait. She's not completely naked. I forgot to mention her shoes. She's wearing high-heeled sandals. Think about a naked woman wearing high heels. (No, you men, don't think like that!) It's a ludicrous situation. Who wears nothing but high heels? Obviously, we've just caught the poor girl in the act of dressing. She's put her shoes on and before she can reach for her underwear and dress, the photographer has surprised her and . . . Not!
The pose is not coy or subtle. It's pornographic. It's saying to men, "buy this perfume for your partner this Christmas and turn her into a sex object".
Is it wrong to photograph naked women? Well, we have centuries of art heritage that says it's fine to paint naked women. Some of the world's greatest paintings are nudes. They hang in public galleries all over the world. The Vatican has an extensive art collection which includes nudes. If the Pope says it's ok, it must be ok, right?
Is a photograph any different? Many people have trouble looking at a photograph as a work of art. Perhaps because it's too real, too immediate. But photographs can be works of art, too. Many professional photographers are considered artists and exhibit their work in galleries just as a painter does. And, yes, they exhibit nudes too.
Is this particular photograph a work of art? Let's look at it objectively. Oh, you can't see it. Well I'll describe it. Use your imaginations. (Stop grinning there at the back.) The pose is skilfully conceived and executed. Thought has gone into the details. The shoes, for example, are included to enhance the fantasy effect. She's reclining on a dark, velvet-like cloth which itself looks very sensual. The lighting is very striking. She has very pale skin which contrasts nicely against the dark background. She is attractive. She has flowing red-gold hair that also contrasts very well against both her pale skin and the dark background. Her make up has been carefully selected and applied to enhance the visual appeal. If it was a painting, we would praise the artist for his choice of tones.
I think a lot of time, effort, and skill has gone into the production of this photograph. It's visually striking. It's nice to look at. Yes, I would call this a work of art.
So what's my problem with this picture?
Well. It's sixteen feet wide. At the bus stop. In broad daylight.
It's in the wrong place and it's there for the wrong reason.
Moral standards are falling. Respect and decency take a back seat to the almighty dollar. It's the beginning of the end of civilisation. How did we let the world get this way? Have standards slowly eroded because we don't care? Because we're lazy? Or because it's someone else's problem? Ask yourself if you care. And if you find that you do care, ask yourself what you can do about it. And do it. Nobody else will.
Thanks for listening.
I wonder if I can get her e-mail address?
© 2000 by David Meadows. All rights reserved. 2 December 2000