生活內底揣趣味(生活中找樂趣) says
4 years ago @Edit 4 years ago
曼徹斯特藝術畫廊將裸體寧芙作畫給移除 以"促進對話" - 衛報藝術與設計版(本日點閱率第五名)
Gallery removes naked nymphs painting to 'promp...畫廊的現代美術部長說重點在於要激發辯論,而非審查。這幅畫放在<追求美感>區,而裡面又有許多19世紀的女體繪。她說這名稱不好,因為都是男性藝術家追尋女體的創作,且多為女性做為順從/被動的裝飾藝術或妖豔美人。Time's Up與#MeeToo也促使了移除本幅畫之決議。

【曼徹斯特藝術畫廊】呈現女體:對維多利亞時期幻想提出一個挑戰
Presenting the female body: Challenging a Victorian ...
幹嘛移除?所以下一個是畢卡索嗎? - 衛報評論
Why have mildly erotic nymphs been removed from a Ma...#藝術與裸露 #色情判定 #英國保守風氣 #假道學衛道人士 #水精 #性成分 #物化
latest #56
It is a painting that shows pubescent, naked nymphs tempting a handsome young man to his doom, but is it an erotic Victorian fantasy too far, and one which, in the current climate, is unsuitable and offensive to modern audiences?
生活內底揣趣味(生活中找樂趣) says
4 years ago @Edit 4 years ago
Manchester Art Gallery has asked the question after removing John William Waterhouse’s Hylas and the Nymphs, one of the most recognisable of the pre-Raphaelite paintings, from its walls. Postcards of the painting will be removed from sale in the shop.
The painting was taken down on Friday and replaced with a notice explaining that a temporary space had been left “to prompt conversations about how we display and interpret artworks in Manchester’s public collection”. Members of the public have stuck Post-it notes around the notice giving their reaction.
Clare Gannaway, the gallery’s curator of contemporary art, said the aim of the removal was to provoke debate, not to censor. “It wasn’t about denying the existence of particular artworks.”
The work usually hangs in a room titled In Pursuit of Beauty, which contains late 19th century paintings showing lots of female flesh.
Gannaway said the title was a bad one, as it was male artists pursuing women’s bodies, and paintings that presented the female body as a passive decorative art form or a femme fatale.
“For me personally, there is a sense of embarrassment that we haven’t dealt with it sooner. Our attention has been elsewhere ... we’ve collectively forgotten to look at this space and think about it properly. We want to do something about it now because we have forgotten about it for so long.”
Gannaway said the debates around Time’s Up and #MeToo had fed into the decision.
The removal itself is an artistic act and will feature in a solo show by the artist Sonia Boyce which opens in March. People can tweet their opinion using #MAGSoniaBoyce.
The response so far has been mixed. Some have said it sets a dangerous precedent, while others have called it “po-faced” and “politically correct”.
生活內底揣趣味(生活中找樂趣) says
4 years ago @Edit 4 years ago
#PC政治正確 #政治不正確
The artist Michael Browne who attended the event where the painting was taken down said he was worried the past was being erased.
“++I don’t like the replacement and removal of art and being told ‘that’s wrong and this is right’.__ They are using their power to veto art in a public collection. We don’t know how long the painting will be off the wall – it could be days, weeks, months. Unless there are protests it might never come back.”
Browne said he feared historical paintings were being jettisoned in favour of contemporary ones.
“I know there are other works in the basement that are probably going to be deemed offensive for the same reasons and they are not going to see the light of day.”
Gannaway said the removal was not about censorship.
“We think it probably will return, yes, but hopefully contextualised quite differently. It is not just about that one painting, it is the whole context of the gallery.”
Waterhouse is one of the best-known pre-Raphaelites, whose Lady of Shalott is one of Tate Britain’s bestselling postcards, but some of his paintings leave people uncomfortable and he has been accused of being one step away from a pornographer.
Reviewing the 2009 Royal Academy of Arts show devoted to Waterhouse, the critic Waldemar Januszczak wrote of a painting showing the death of St Eulalia, a 12-year-old girl: “I did not know whether to laugh, cry or call the police.”
=引用結束=
生活內底揣趣味(生活中找樂趣) says
4 years ago @Edit 4 years ago
Manchester Art Gallery says it has removed JW Waterhouse’s 1896 painting Hylas and the Nymphs from its displays “to prompt conversation”. Yet the conversation can only really be about one thing: should museums censor works of art on political grounds?
There can only be one answer if you believe in human progress.
To remove this work art from view is not an interesting critique but a crass gesture that will end up on the wrong side of history. This censorship belongs in the bin along with Section 28’s war on gay culture and the prosecution of Penguin Books for publishing Lady Chatterley’s Lover in 1960.
My, what a utopia these new puritans have in mind – a world that backtracks 60 years or more into an era of repression and hypocrisy. The great freedoms of modernity include, like it or not, freedom of sexual expression. Even a kinky old Victorian perv has his right to paint soft-porn nymphs.
"不論你喜歡與否,偉大的現代自由包括了性表現的自由。 就連維多利亞時期的變態都有權畫個邱柔的色情水精。"
Hylas and the Nymphs is no masterpiece. Its mildly erotic vision of a Greek myth is very silly, if you ask me, and if we were in front of it now I’d be poking fun. Yet we’d be looking, talking, perhaps arguing. Remove it and the conversation is killed stone dead. Culture falls silent as the grave.
This painting is pretty mild stuff compared with some truly great art that, by the same logic, should immediately be removed from Britain’s galleries.
The Rokeby Venus by Velázquez clearly needs to return to the National Gallery stores, where this silken nude can lie on her sensual sheets without causing offence.
生活內底揣趣味(生活中找樂趣) says
4 years ago @Edit 4 years ago
Titian’s Diana and Actaeon also has to go – its display of female flesh is truly gratuitous.
And there is just enough time for Tate Modern to cancel its forthcoming Picasso show, which is guaranteed to contain a jaw-dropping quantity of salivating sexist visions.
Creativity has never been morally pure.
"創意從未是[道德純淨]之事。"
Not so long ago, __in the 90s, art was deliberately shocking and some were duly shocked to visit galleries and be shown Myra Hindley, unmade beds and toy Nazis.
Now the tables have turned, and it’s cool to be appalled by – in this case – art made over a century ago. I can’t pretend to respect such authoritarianism. It is the just the spectre of an oppressive past wearing new clothes – and if we fall for the disguise we sign away every liberal value.
=引用結束=
afsj
4 years ago
藝術自由這時候就不見了,不會在旁邊放幅滿是男體的畫來平衡一下喔
大概找不到吧,又或是人家不想出借,or其他。
afsj
4 years ago
要找的話,裸男塑像超多的。不過我想用裸男像包圍畫作會被說男性凝視
說不定這家美術館真的會說是男性凝視
afsj
4 years ago
滿滿的大肌肌不好嗎, 服務女性跟彩虹族群
男體超棒的 (正色
back to top