CAA: Christian Anime Alliance

does it even exist? if so how much is too much?

I believe it does. The body is a beautiful thing but is corupted because of sin. We cover ourselves to not be a stumbling block to others.

It does. I have always said that there is a distinct difference between pornography and artistic nude.

As for too much, it becomes too much when the emphasis/focus shifts too much on the genatalia of a person or sexual acts. While genatalia is a part of artistic nude, it really can go too far.

I think there is such thing as artistic nudity - take the statue of David for example. Obviously da Vinci wasn't trying to be pornographic, but trying to portray a sense of purity instead. Adam and Eve were naked before they were driven out of the garden - there's nothing wrong with naked in itself. It only becomes problematic when the nudity is used in a provocative way, IMO.

Now I myself don't particularly like nudity, but I'm not going to shriek and run away from a classical Greek statue just because of nudity. If it does cause you to stumble, then stay away from it by all means. But aside from that, I don't think all nudity is particularly "evil", it's just very easy to manipulate for the purpose of sin.

I'm Going to have to side with Kokoro, Although I myself will stay away from all Nudity in any forms, I've struggled with Porn in the past, and I cannot re-kindle the flame.

well of course. Like I said, art. nud. can easily slip over to pr0n. That's why I've told my gf to be very careful when she's giving me an Open Canvas Session (she sometimes does artistic nude for me).

myself being an art major (graphic and interactive communication(basicly graphic design)) i definatly believe that there is artistic nudity, though it can easly go over the line, i myself am required to take a semester of figure drawing, i think that in class is probably the only time i would consider it artistic, (just a model in a pose). lol, i think that all makes sense

Being an artist, I dont' find a problem with artistic nudity, unless it gets into great detail and/or is portrayed in a sexual mannor.

I tend to think that transformation sequences ushc as in Sailor Moon and Rayearth can be pretty, and more displaying the beauty of it (knowing they're shoujo series, it's not as if they were supposed to pose as somethign sexual.)

But this is coming from a girl that even draws girls artisically in such a way (not... really guys though :/) All I know is if the person stuggles with the issue of nudity due to porn and stuff, it's best to just stay away from it.

I think the human body is beautiful. God created us without clothes, and there is nothing inherently wrong with nudity. Satan has twisted it, via pornography and lust, to be something dirty. The purpose of pornography is to incite lust. The purpose of artistic nudity, in my opinion, is to show beauty and purity.

I, too, am an artist, and I have done nude drawings before. I took a figure drawing class in which we drew male and female nude models. I can see how that might be problematic for some people to draw or to look at, and those people should not get involved in it. But it is not a problem for many others.

As for the question "How much is too much" -- I think it crosses the line (on the artist's side) when it is designed to provoke a lustful sexual reaction. It crosses the line on the viewer's side when it does so, regardless of original intent.

The way I deal with this on my gallery web site is this: I don't show the pictures with obvious nudity, unless the viewer first acknowledges that they are an adult and have no problem with artistic nudity. (That feature will be added in the future, but for now, there are no nudes on the site.) That way, someone who struggles with lust will not accidentally stumble across nudes on my site. Beyond that, they make a choice.

EireWolf wrote:The way I deal with this on my gallery web site is this: I don't show the pictures with obvious nudity, unless the viewer first acknowledges that they are an adult and have no problem with artistic nudity. (That feature will be added in the future, but for now, there are no nudes on the site.) That way, someone who struggles with lust will not accidentally stumble across nudes on my site. Beyond that, they make a choice.

that could be problematic however. One who does struggle with lust could say "i can handle it" so they can feed onto their lust... true it is their choice... but I mean... the person ends up lying to get what they crave

that could be problematic however. One who does struggle with lust could say "i can handle it" so they can feed onto their lust... true it is their choice... but I mean... the person ends up lying to get what they crave

That may be so... but at that point, it's not my problem. Sorry if that sounds rude. But there are WAAAAAAAY worse places to go than my art gallery if someone is trying to satisfy their lustful cravings.

EireWolf wrote:That may be so... but at that point, it's not my problem. Sorry if that sounds rude. But there are WAAAAAAAY worse places to go than my art gallery if someone is trying to satisfy their lustful cravings.

yes, good point XD I give you that

Be sure to redeem those points for valuable prizes!

Yes, it exist. There are many beautiful paintings and sculptures in the Renaissance. And anyone who views all nudity as p-rnagraphic...Never mind.

It is all about how the artist feels about it.

No it doesn't I can't believe you'd even imply otherwise how dare you you heathen!


Just playing.

BigZam wrote:does it even exist? if so how much is too much?

Yes it dose exist. for ex. Some of the Greek did some paintings of the body. same with Leo Devinci also did paintings of the body. too much would be anime.

Syaoran wrote:too much would be anime.

Amen to that! Them giant robots are teh nudez0rz! Gundams should be clothed!

Er, I don't really have anything else new to post.

Syaoran wrote:Yes it dose exist. for ex. Some of the Greek did some paintings of the body. same with Leo Devinci also did paintings of the body. too much would be anime.

well i mean Greek art is obvious but its harder to know how much is too much with modern art.

Dunedan wrote:No it doesn't I can't believe you'd even imply otherwise how dare you you heathen!


Just playing.

Please don't do that in these kinds of threads. Volitile threads only take a little bit of misunderstanding to set them off. Humor has it's place; this kind of humor does not belong in this kind of thread.

Thanks.

Mithrandir wrote:Be sure to redeem those points for valuable prizes!

*Was about to get after Mithrandir for spamming a general thread* lol XD Twas pretty funny though.

ANYways, I think mostly everyone agrees on the fact that there is artistic nudity. But artistic can mean anything to anybody. Hentai, for example, is artistic to people who like it and/or draw it because of their lust. They make themselves believe that it *is* only art and nothing more, which of course, isn't the case. Now things like the renaissance (sp?) or the Statue of David or just plain nude portraits are a different thing. It depends on how the subject is desplayed (sexually or professionaly [portraits, etc.]). An artist could be great at figures and good at drawing "tasteful" art, but somebody with a problem might see it and go ga-ga. Which is pretty much what everyone else has said.

As for me, I ahve a friend who's walls in his house are littered with nude paintings, oils and sketches. It doesn't boter him because it's his aunts work, and though I have to aknowledge her ability, it bothers me because I'm just not comfortable with THAT particular style.

Tasteful or dis-tasteful depends on the viewer, whether that person has moral or immoral views.

I think the matter is highly subjective. I think, also, that people who have lust areas with this should stay away from it.

I think it depends on the person who is drawing, and the person viewing the drawing. The whole term "artistic" is also very subjective. What may be beautiful to me, may be trash to another person.

I think that in this day and age... it's best to stay away from, because "artistic" can so easily become porn, or at least seen as such by people looking for it, or who are advocates against it.

I think that in this day and age... it's best to stay away from, because "artistic" can so easily become porn, or at least seen as such by people looking for it, or who are advocates against it.

I somewhat agree with this, at least in the sense of people who aim for "modern" art. Too often these days I've been on sites like DeviantArt and seen nudes praised as "erotic", which definitely strikes a bad chord with me, because "erotic" should never be used in a positive sense, IMO. Nudity should be used to represent eros (nor should anything else for that matter), because it's bound to make too many people stumble, but a sense of holiness or purity or to reflect the classical beauty of the Renaissance.

In any case, I don't hold anything against artists these days who use nudity tastefully, because I know plenty of people who do. but I highly disagree with people who equate eros with art.

I believe that artistic nudity exists. I've done a fair amount of figure drawing in the past and I can see where some of my pictures have crossed the line (and it definitely wasn't deliberate). For the most part though, my figure drawings seem pretty neutral. But I can certainly understand and respect those that chose to avoid the matter all together.

It's a pity that the art world has gotten so warped, placing such an emphasis on shocking and 'challenging' people. But that's a completely different debate/rant...

I don't particularly like nudity in any form, I think human bodies are sacred but that the more and more that they are being shown off nowadays people are forgetting that. I'm not saying that absolutely all of it is bad, most of the classics are absolutely fine IMO. It's just that in this day and age nudity has become so perverse that there aren't enough people out there who would see it as purity and holiness as opposed to lust. Anyways, I don't know a whole lot about the subject but I just know that it's way too easy to pervert things that God intended to be sacred, and I think that we should be really careful what we draw or view. Just my two yen.

I think that some nudity (such as in famous paintings) can be artistic. The ancient Greeks believed that the human body was beautiful as it is, hence, alot of the people in their art are nude (learned that in Latin ). But I do think that if something is poorly drawn and was created for the sole purpose of "getting people off" than it is definatly NOT art. In fact, I think that is little more than a poor excuse for pornagraphy...

I would agree with your last two statements, Android. But I guess I don't see the difference between artistic nudity in the classics (famous paintings or sculptures) and artistic nudity in recently created art. If the intent is not pornography or shock value, then it's art, IMHO. But I still say if you have a problem with it, then stay away from it.

Here is my two cents.
Any nude has the potential be looked at as porn. Why? Because the viewer might think the human body is nasty.
My Mom for one. She had it ingrained in to her, by her parents that the human body is nasty.

Does this make it porn? No.

A sick person could look at a picture of a little girl in a swimming suite, and get off on it.
But that doesn’t make the picture porn. It just means the viewer is sick in the head!

I think it’s all relative.
If you are not making your art to try and turn people on, then it’s not porn, in your eyes.

Even the nudes in the Sistine Chapel that Michelangelo painted, have been complained about.

I draw nudes and I have never wanted anyone to look at them and get off.
I would be very upset if someone tried to tell me my art was porn.
It would make me feel sick at hart.

But I can’t control what people think and do.

Yes we should be careful not to cross that line, but should we feel guilty if someone is offended by our nude art?

Should I feel guilty if someone uses my art as porn, when it wasn’t my intent?

Consider the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games in Greece just awhile back. To the person who created the opening it was artistic and historical. To someone who seen it on TV here it was porn because the actors were viewed has being nude.

I don't think that nude athletics is porn. It makes things a lot easier.

well of course. Like I said, art. nud. can easily slip over to pr0n. That's why I've told my gf to be very careful when she's giving me an Open Canvas Session (she sometimes does artistic nude for me).

Errr... maybe I'm being a bit dull, but do you mean your girlfriend takes her clothes off and poses for you? Anyway, back to topic. Yes, i believe there is artistic nudity. the thing that really makes porn bad is the reaction that we draw from it IMO. I like to draw anime characters, but I never draw them nude. This is mostly because I have some issues from the past. But if someone draws a nude figure just for capturing the human body, and they don't draw a lustful reaction from it, then I don't really believe that it's porn.