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]

(Btw, the one in the link isn't a self-portrait).

[JugglingWithSnowballs]

A simple drawing by Picasso ?
( don't know the name of it)
Also marking my place as interesting thread and I'd like to come back and have a read and a look at links later

[thunderboltsandlightning]

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

I am recommending him

Which bit of that do you not understand?

I am not recommending him as someone explaining "the male gaze" (postmodernist BS) or a feminist analysis of art. Those are your own fanciful interpretations which you came up with to base your (wrong) arguments on, not what I said. I'm recommending him as a man providing information on the sexual politics of male objectification of women in art. He's a marxist radical, he understands power relations.

Stop misrepresenting me. Just stop it.

[ElephantsAndMiasmas]

Haven't read the whole thread but I really like Sleeping Venus because she's on her own and just looks really comfortable and relaxed in the land.

[Imperfectionist]

Hi all, what a great thread, I'm really pleased I started it but sorry to have not been as involved in the debate - since I first posted we've had a minor (very) family crisis and I've not been able to get online much. Will catch up though! I'm also happy to see its inspired some strong opinions too...

I've been looking at all the links suggested and want to very quickly give some initial reactions to a quick glance through the links you've all thoughtfully posted (please forgive my descriptions if they are ignorant or insulting or naive - I'm certainly no art critic).

Francesca Woodman was a little bit too 'considered'
Giorgia O'Keefes are beautiful, and although not what I'm looking for here, I would love to have on my wall (especially with added 'double-take' value!). Lucian Freud just too... too... rugged for my walls, although I enjoy looking at his work in galleries.
The Venus of Urbino is beautiful, although I'd prefer something more modern if possible.
Monica Sjoo's God Giving Birth - well, wow, that's strong stuff (and would go with my daughter's picture book 'Big Momma Made the Earth' about the creation myth with God portrayed as a single mum).
Jenny Saville's painting is impressive - are the contours on the body depicting mother earth or the lines drawn by plastic surgeons? But not really showing the female form as beautiful to my mind.
I really like Euan Uglow's style and use of colour - I've never heard of him, but will look into more.
Rineke Dijkstra just too stark, and if I was going to have statement photography like that I'd rather it be of one of our family to make it more personal. Does that make sense?
The Stanley Spencer painting is fabulous - very, very strong, and inspiring to think of what a marvellous woman she appears to be: www.soho-art.com/shopinfo/uploads/1278371707_large-image_stanleyspencernudeportraitofpatriciapreece1935010oilpaintinglarge.jpg
The Klimt ones are beautiful, and I don't have any Klimt - definitely on the shortlist.
I'd love to see an exhibition of francesca woodman's work, but at a glance her photography seems haunted by something. I feel uncomfortable gazing on it.
Michelangelo's David is mostly beautiful, for sure. I love his sculpture, and saw some in person for the first time only recently.
Sleeping Venus is too erotically suggestive (for this instance).

Thanks for the recommendation of Zadie Smith's On Beauty, which has been on my shelf for a while unread, I will put it on top of my bedside pile.

[Imperfectionist]

As to the more philosophical responses about whether my desire to put an artistic portrayal of a naked woman, not surgically enhanced, but beautiful - particularly her breasts - thank you all, and there is some real food for thought. Particularly from LRD, Thunderbolts, WidowWadman and others.

Some background about me - I'm a woman who only 'discovered' feminism literature, theory and conscious thinking in recent years, and am still learning, reading, talking, and following some of the fascinating threads that appear on this board.

I think that my aim here is actually quite feminist. I simply want to counter-balance the masses of visual depictions of the surgically enhanced female form in media, advertising, sometimes even toys, with alternative images in our home. Not even just to subconsciously influence my daughter's opinion of what female beauty is, but to inspire me, a grown and confident woman in my mid 30s, as well. Would you say I am being un-feminist? Or just naive?

This is a private initiative, that will be in our house - the space I'm thinking I'll hang my chosen picture is the upstairs landing, outside our bedrooms and bathrooms. I'm not trying to impress visitors or make a talking point. It's a picture to inspire my family and something I can tell my daughter is a normal woman's body, and beautiful for it.

[JugglingWithSnowballs]

Hi Imperfectionist - I've enjoyed the thread too, especially seeing the pictures everyone has linked to, so thanks for starting it !
However I do wonder if you are a little over conscious of what women look like as opposed to other aspects of the person. When you said your daughter sees you naked you put in brackets that you were "a normal shaped size 12 with post-breast-feeding boobs" Now, this may be of interest to the reader and relevant to the thread, but I wouldn't describe myself in those terms. I'd just say
that my daughter sometimes sees me naked (so she had the opportunity to see the normal female form ?) But I do understand it can be difficult when you're writing about your own body, we are all so sensitive to criticism here, even by ourselves.
Interesting stuff !

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

I do agree it is tricky.

I think the issue is, there's a difference between seeing women's bodies, in all sorts of shapes and sizes, and seeing art of women's bodies.

I agree that it is worrying that girls and women see so many images of women that are all very similar physically, often very unrealistic or unattainable physically, and often naked (and nakedness isn't just associated with sex, it's also associated with being made powerless). I can understand wanting to counter that with seeing lots of women who're happily different shapes and sizes.

I think the issue with art of women naked is that it makes a commodity out of a woman's naked body, even if that commodity is very high-brow and respectable - it's still making a woman's naked body into a thing to be looked at. In that respect it's different from, say, hoping your DC will notice that there are several women on the beach who don't seem bothered their non-model bodies are on show.

I'm not trying to judge as I think this is a very interesting topic.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

I think as well, you're looking to teach your DD to like her body, right? But she might get the message from these images 'your body is beautiful ... and it is for other people to look at'. It's that argument that's put forward for page 3 (she has a lovely body, she should be proud of it and show it off').

OTOH, I have read that many adult women won't actually look at their own bodies, as a whole, in the mirror. They look at bits - is my face ok, are my legs ok, does my tummy stick out? I don't know how you would change this, but it seems clear to me that art presupposes an observer to approve the image, whereas what you seem to be looking for is a way to make your DD happy with her own image of herself?


Sorry, just some rather rambly thoughts.

[JugglingWithSnowballs]

Also are we saying that women's bodies are beautiful within a certain size range ( by only showing those that fall in this range ) What if your or my dd become very large at some time in their lives ? How will they feel ?

I think I'd rather get away a bit from the idea that women's bodies should be beautiful to behold.
Think images like O' Keeffe's flowers are more interesting and empowering !
I think I'm with the Guerilla Girls - there should be more ways for women to get into art galleries than through images of them being hung on the walls.
I'd love to see some of DDs art in a gallery one day ! My mother helped to organise an exhibition for a couple of young people in our family, of both sexes - what a great thing to do !

Very interested to see self-portrait by woman artist from a couple of centuries ago on recent visit to National Portrait Gallery. Sorry I don't remember the name, but I particularly liked that she had included in the background another painting she was working on - of her two sons ( very clever I thought, and brilliantly done. Must have taken some talent to achieve that in the times in which she lived ) Apologies I don't have the name or a link ( Two skills I need to work on ! )

[WidowWadman]

If my daughter became morbidly obese, I'd hope she'd have the sense to see that that's not healthy and do something about it.

I don;t think there's anything wrong with finding male and female bodies beautiful and liking to look at it.

[JugglingWithSnowballs]

But, as women, we are judged so much on our appearance.
It's very limiting isn't it ?

[WidowWadman]

We're talking about art, right? One of which purposes is to be decorative. Is the decorative depiction of a human body really so abhorrent? Does one have to stick to animals, inanimate objects and landscapes?

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

I disagree that one purpose of art is to be decorative. I know artists who'd find that characterization a bit rude, TBH. But that is a side issue.

One issue is, why do we find some bodies more 'decorative' than others? There's a long history of women's bodies being treated as decorative property, decorative objects. Without this history, perhaps it wouldn't matter. I doubt it begins with art and I don't see any evidence that societies that do ban the depiction of humans in artwork have better attitudes towards women's bodies. But that history is there and the same attitude is there in our present day. Given that, it does I think become a tricky issue rather than a simple one.

[WidowWadman]

I said one purpose of art is being decorative, not that the only purpose of art is being decorative. It's all a bit Pater vs Ruskin.

And tastes differ. Some people find one bodyshape more attractive than others. Rejecting the whole idea of finding bodies attractive in my view is disingenuous.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

I know, I just wanted to say there are some people who'd object to the idea that even one purpose of art is to be decorative.

I think, as well, the point is that we're not talking about finding bodies attractive, are we? We're talking about paintings or photos of bodies.

I'm not just quibbling, I think it's a central point. I mean, when you find an actual person attractive, it seems to me that their body isn't something you separate out from the rest of them as a person. And again, finding someone else's body attractive isn't the same as finding your own body attractive, which is I think one thing the OP is getting at.

AF was saying, IIRC, about how so many women in her experience don't even think to find their own bodies attractive. I thought that was really sad. Maybe it's part of the issue here?

[Hullygully]

This thread has been fascinating for all the wrong reasons.

But, as far as the OP goes, I do think that just having pics of female nudes, whatever shapes and sizes, plays into, inevitably, a feeling of women-as-show/object. I'd have both genders in all diff sizes and shapes.

[Hullygully]

I have a very nice drawing of a woman's ordinary breasts that my dd (13) has recently covered in masking tape because they are "rude."

[JugglingWithSnowballs]

Why do you think fascinating for all the wrong reasons hully ?

Care to expand ?

[WidowWadman]

I can't take people who argue that art is never decorative or used for decorative purposes seriously. Not for a second.

And yes, we're talking about depictions of bodies, rather than bodies themselves, but the notion that depicting an attractive body and hanging it on your wall for decorative purposes should be always wrong just doesn't sit easy with me.

Especially in art, which happily always has depicted male and female bodies in the buff (apart from examples such as Luncheon on the Grass www.essentialart.com/sw/Edouard_Manet_Luncheon_on_the_Grass_f.jpg so I really don't think that female nudes in art is really something that political.

Also, as the different examples on this thread have pointed out there's plenty of different shapes and sizes to be found in art - it's not always photoshopped into oblivion polygonic fantasy beauty. Art which depicts non-conventionally beautiful bodies in a decorative way actually can do a whole lot of good to help people who feel not happy with their non-conventionally beautiful body to realise their own beauty.

When I pose for life drawing there's plenty of men and women drawing my body, and of course they're looking at my body, not what I have to say. They looking at lights and shades on my lumpy and bumpy body - and the next week they're looking at lights and shades on someone else's lumpy and bumpy body and learn how to get that onto paper with various tools. Nothing to do with me being powerless or a sex object - the lack of clothes just makes it easier to concentrate on the actual body shape and the result sometimes is realistic, sometimes the opposite, some of them are sensual, others aren't.

As someone who's done and is doing both sides of life drawing I find some of the conclusions re objectification actually quite offensive.

[Hullygully]

Not on your nelly

[Hullygully]

soz - that was to juggling

[JugglingWithSnowballs]

Fair enough, but I'm left not knowing what you were thinking.
Perhaps if I look back more over thread I may get my own ideas.

Good practice here anyway for my assertiveness training !

[Hullygully]

Oh nothing bad, juggling, just goodness me what a carry on type thing.