The naked truth is that it’s ‘Naked Vs Nude’ week at the NDD.
When I was in graduate school I read a book called ‘About Looking’ by John Berger. In it he proposes that there is a difference in art between someone who is naked and someone who is nude. Since I have been doing my ‘Artist I Love Winter Weekend’ series I have presented a number of art pieces in the ‘nude’ genre. That got me thinking about this difference between naked and nude that Berger suggests exists. I decided it would be fun to explore the idea with you.
One of the ideas Berger puts forth is that, while nakedness reveals itself, nudity does not. He says, “The nude is condemned to never being naked. Nudity is a form of dress.” So, if nudity is a form of dress, wouldn’t it mean that both women in this drawing have some fashion sense? What do you think?
In particular, within your experience with nudity in art, film, life, do you think there a difference between being naked and being nude? Explain.
haha…By the way, if the clothed woman in this drawing has ‘fashion sense’ maybe being without clothes WOULD be better fashion!
See the complete ‘Naked vs Nude’ series here.
_________________________
Drawing and commentary by Marty Coleman, who admits he has been more than once.
Quote by Peter Kunkel, who I think would admit it too.
There is definitely a difference between “naked” and “nude,” at least in their connotation. “Naked” seems to imply a lacking, vulnerable, uncomfortable state. “Nude” is a term associated with art, nudism, and just voluntarily being without clothing for enjoyment. After all, we say “nude beach” not “naked beach”, for example. If “nude” can be called a form of dress, er..form of undress, no? Maybe that’s because it’s a voluntary state. I actually have little fashion sense and hate the process of choosing clothing to wear, so it’s one of the reasons I prefer being nude! Getting “dressed” doesn’t get any easier than that! 😛 But if only the public could appreciate my choice of dress.
Silence of the Lambs proves w/o a doubt that parts of a naked somebody can indeed be fashion! seriouslyish? hmmm…maybe it’s just that in an artistic context a subject is naked for a purpose/to convey something, while simply being naked is being reduced to the last layer of essence(in this case skin, it’s just a simple truth that can go no further (kinda like zero)…but zero can be paired w/other things in the environment (numerical context comparison 10,123…)to represent something entirely different than zero/nothing. OR maybe I haven’t had enough coffee yet!!