Feminist nude painting - what is your favourite portrayal of a woman's body?

[Imperfectionist]

The breast implant issue and re-ignition of the debate about modern ideals of a woman's body, especially a much-quoted survey in which school children shown photos of nude women picked the ones with implants as looking most natural, has made me want to make sure we have plenty of representations of normal (and beautiful) female forms in my house, for my daughter.

I do not read and certainly do not have in the house any magazines or media with images of women looking like they've had extensive surgery. My daughter (only three years old) often sees me (a normal shaped size 12 with post-breastfeeding boobs) naked and has good healthy female role models around her. We have lots of pictures on the wall, framed prints from galleries I've visited over the years, and I would like to choose a beautiful nude painting to join them, showing breasts in all of their natural glory.

I've racked my brains, and googled, and wondered if one of you might recommend your favourite portrayal of a non-surgically-enhanced naked woman in paint. The classical artists are sometimes too idealised; and often had barbie boobs even back in Michaelangelo's day. Some nudes are too sexually suggestive for what I'm looking for. I want a painting of a naked woman who radiates strength and beauty, who is comfortable in her skin, with no hint of voyeurism or titillation by the artist.

So... any recommendations for a feminist-inspiring nude painting? Hopefully one I can buy online from the National Gallery or online!

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

And I am replying, no, thank you, I do not want to think about his argument. For the reasons I have explained.

There is nothing wrong with saying, no, I would rather look at and listen to a woman's perspective. It doesn't mean I reject everything any man has ever said, just that it seemed (and seems) to me that, for the question on this specific thread, it'd be better not to bring in men's views.

I don't see why this is an issue - we disagree. Maybe one of us is wrong, maybe both of us are. It doesn't matter, except insofar as we might help the OP work out what she's asked us to help her think about.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

I don't think I am racist. I hope I am not. As I said, I think Dworkin, or MacKinnon, or another woman supporting the Black Panthers would be different, but I do wonder about him, because he gave them his money at a time when they were giving Elaine Brown and other women members a really hard time. It may be that shouldn't bother me, but it does a bit. I do wonder about a man who doesn't notice, or doesn't care about, sexism in an organisation he supports, and then is recommended as a good analyst of teh male gaze.

[thunderboltsandlightning]

I think that's a very ignorant approach, and one that isn't related to feminism, however much you might want to claim it is.

If a man is saying something that might be useful to women e.g. outlining the ways in which men objectify us, and the meanings they create by those actions, then dismissing it out of hand because it's a man saying it, smacks of I don't know what.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Well, it hangs on that 'if', doesn't it? One might as well say, why bother to read books by women, if Shakespeare did it already?

[thunderboltsandlightning]

Speaking of men's views, mind you - another thing that hasn't been mentioned is a real man's view - the view belonging to Imperfectionist's male partner/husband (if she has one) of the "glorious" breasts on the wall.

If I went into a house that had pictures like that, I'd think it was some kind of sexy couply thing - sort of a "look how free and sexy we are about bodies" statement - definitely not a feminist statement. Men looking at pictures of naked women is politically problematic. You can't get away from that.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Yes, I think you're right, it's hard to know how Mr Imperfectionist is going to avoid confirming to his DC exactly what his wifeis trying to avoid.

I certainly agree that men looking at pictures of naked women is politically problematic. This was my basic point, really.

[thunderboltsandlightning]

Who said anything about not reading books by women? Not me. Read everything by feminists, and if a handful of men have something useful to say read them too. It's never been either/or.

This stuff about the "male gaze" - I haven't mentioned the male gaze although you keep bringing it up in relation to my recommendation of Berger. I said that Berger describes the sexual politics of male sexual objectifcation of naked women.

And I was just about to say, I'm pretty sure that the "male gaze" is some kind of academented term that lib fems came up with so they don't have to talk about the concrete reality of male sexual objectificaiton of women, so I googled it and sure enough, the term was invented by a postmodernist, one of those who thinks that it's a good idea to inegrate Freud and Lacan into feminist theory - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Mulvey

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

No, thunder, I said things about reading books by women. In my posts on this thread.

I also brought up the male gaze, because it seemed relevant to a discussion of men looking at women.

If you don't like the term, that is fair enough. Personally, I think it is useful and interesting. But we can disagree about that too, it is fine.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Btw, some people would realize that if, on a thread not stated by them, I discussed concepts and terminology not mentioned by them, I might not be arguing against them, but rather making my own points. Do you see that?

[thunderboltsandlightning]

You said Berger, and I quote:

"is recommended as a good analyst of teh male gaze"

Well he wasn't by me, so who or what are you talking about there?

Do you see why I read that as a response to what I was talking about, given that it was the subject of our discussion?

[thunderboltsandlightning]

Also you responded to me saying this:

"If a man is saying something that might be useful to women e.g. outlining the ways in which men objectify us, and the meanings they create by those actions, then dismissing it out of hand because it's a man saying it, smacks of I don't know what."

with this

"Well, it hangs on that 'if', doesn't it? One might as well say, why bother to read books by women, if Shakespeare did it already?"

So yes, you are implying that by the logic of what I said we could argue that shouldn't read books by women. Which is a patently ridiculous claim to make.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

We've been through this. I thought you were recommending him, said so, and then understood you were not. When I said this, you denied that too.

I did assume by this point we had moved on a bit, and I have simply been trying to state my opinion.

Understandably, perhaps, I think it's best if I just concentrate on trying to explain what I think rather than trying to follow what you claim, since it seems to change from post to post.

If you had meant to recommend him, but not as an analyst of the male gaze because you reject the terminology, it would have been fine to say so clearly at the time. If that's all we disagree about, that's great, and maybe we can leave it at that?

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

I disagree it was a patently ridiculous claim - it seemed to me simple and obvious. Again, it's ok if we disagree. I don't think my opinion is anything more than an opinion.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

You seem to think it's not on to respond to your posts by bringing in a new opinion, or a new thought - all this 'I have never said x' so how dare you bring it up' kind of talk - what do you expect? I disagree, therefore my posts will tend to contain new points.

[KRITIQ]

This really is looking like a slow motion car crash, and making this board feel "not safe" for me at least.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Kritiq - I'm sorry it feels like that. Obviously, it doesn't feel 'safe' for me either, and hasn't for a while. I can see that it is not nice for others, but I do feel it is not on to expect me to keep putting up with what feels like a very personal and one-sided attack.

I accept it probably doesn't look that way to others, but I can only call it as I see it. I promise I have tried very hard for a long time to avoid getting into public rows and I have been pushed at and pushed at for a response.

I'm going off out now, and hopefully other people will feel able to ignore all of this.

[KRITIQ]

I think it's just that few folks will know any of the back story. I don't myself. In my experience, mostly elsewhere, the subject kind of gets lost in the tooing and froing between the couple or however many folks are involved when something becomes so fraught and personal. I think the hurting is plain to see, but imho, continuing to play it out on a forum like this rarely brings a positive resolution, for anyone. It's hard to watch and I know it's not exactly a picnic for those involved in it.

Just take care.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Kri, I stepped away and got told I was 'ignoring'; I gave a tactful response and was pushed for more.

I see you're upset but what exactly would you like me to do? I don't want to upset you but I don't enjoy being upset myself, either.

[KRITIQ]

LRD, I don't know what the answer is. I think conflicts like this are inherent in the form of communication we're using. Taking something "off board" is sometimes the answer, but not always for a whole swathe of reasons. Agreeing to disagree of course doesn't guarantee that someone won't bring things up again sooner or later.

I'm concerned about both of you as well as how it feels for others reading. I know it's not easy to let something drop as that can still feel very unfinished. I wish I knew some simple answer, but all I can say is that I don't think there will be anything particularly positive for anyone if it continues in the same vein here. Damage done and all that, but if there's a way of it not getting even worse, well, maybe?

[WowOoo]

I like this one by Stanley Spencer. I think it's nice to see someone who is not young. She's still very intriguing.
Sorry it's a male artist, but I love his work. Hope the link works.
www.soho-art.com/shopinfo/uploads/1278371707_large-image_stanleyspencernudeportraitofpatriciapreece1935010oilpaintinglarge.jpg

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Sorry, I don't know what the answer is either. I'm not taking it off board.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

That is interesting wow, I hadn't see any of his work.

[KRITIQ]

Suzanne Valadon did some wonderful pictures, including some nudes. Look here and here. She had quite a remarkable life as well.

[WowOoo]

There's another Stanley Spencer that I can't find. Again an older woman with a lovely wrinkly tummy. Will try to find it again.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

That reminds me of Gwen John - I first read about her in a book by Margaret Forster that is based on John's life, and she did some nude self-portraits that are distinctly un-erotic (IMO). THe first link I found has a really patronizing comment underneath which kind of suggests her way of painting naked women pissed off whoever wrote the blog!

coxsoft.blogspot.com/2008/11/gwen-john.html