Naked Art Class?

[Rageaholic]

Either way, the headline of the article should have read 'Crazy helicopter parent tries to interfere with a college course'

lol, that's probably more accurate of a headline.

[AccountingDrone]

<evil grin> I am 5'5" tall, currently weight 275 [down from 315 last June, WOOT!] am 53 years old and thanks to *years* of hospital time have absolutely NO body modesty. I bet he made the policy to see all the naked cute co-eds. Welcome to his worst nightmare. Pity I have absolutely no interest in the class. I could stand there [subjectively speaking, it would be in a wheelchair] and tell them in very deep detail how I was raped and beaten severely leaving me in intensive care for a week. You want to discuss naked and emotionally bare? That class would run screaming from his classroom. I even have visual aids [photographs and exrays of the damage that got used in court, I had 3 people on the jury vomit.]

Lets see how long that little policy would last after that.

[Tama]

A very good point.

I would transfer out of that class so fast. I neither want to bare my spirit nor my 200 lb naked body for all to see.

The problem would be is if it was the only art credit/whatever you could get at that school. But I doubt that is the case.

[Andara Bledin]

A very good point.

I would transfer out of that class so fast. I neither want to bare my spirit nor my 200 lb naked body for all to see.

The problem would be is if it was the only art credit/whatever you could get at that school. But I doubt that is the case.

Not even close, considering that there's a prerequisite of at least two out of four other potential classes before you can even take it, so you only end up there if art is one of your things.

And, again, the class is titled "Performing the Self." If you didn't want to expose yourself to some degree, the title alone should warn you off.

You know, if you have the reasoning capabilities of a small child and aren't only picking classes based on when they happen... >_>

[Hyena Dandy]

I bet he made the policy to see all the naked cute co-eds.

Yes, he made a policy in a class about our relationships to oursaelves, to say you must either be naked, or do a separate project, just to get his rocks off. That, or, possibly, there actually IS reason to do that from an academic perspective. >_>

[the_std]

I bet he made the policy to see all the naked cute co-eds. Welcome to his worst nightmare.

Pardon my french, but that's a fucking sexist thing to say. If it was a woman teacher, would you be saying the same thing?

I went to art school, four long years of eccentric artist teachers and classes that would be deemed "weird" by the regular school-going population. After a while, especially in high-level classes, nudity just ceases to have any stigma left. Male models, female models, fat models, skinny models... You generally stop seeing any sexuality in them, and pay attention to the things that art classes are there to teach you - form, line, shading, contouring, expression, the list goes on. You stop caring about butts and boobs and vaginas and penises. So I agree with NecCat's assessment that this is a case of helicopter parenting, and not of a lecherous teacher.

The fact that you could even say that based on the class description and this one person's complaint makes me so angry. This is the type of pervasive underlying sexism that keeps society ashamed of their bodies and promotes the "legislating morality" mindset.

[Shangri-laschild]

I would be willing to bet a lot of people knew what this class entailed before they signed up for it. I have a hard time believing that word of a class like this hadn't gotten around. I've been in a couple of psychology/sociology classes before where I didn't feel like I could manage one of the big projects because of what all it required me to do. Especially stuff that required me coming out of my shell. No, I didn't have to be naked for any of it but to some extent it would have been along the lines of baring my soul or being emotionally naked. For me personally, the comparison doesn't feel all that different. Was I aware of the projects before day 1? No. And I have no problem with that. I managed to do some of the projects despite myself, at least one of them I decided was too much for me. They weren't classes where I expected to run into this kind of thing but I did. And I don't see anything wrong with an art project or class that is encouraging more than just drawing something in front of you and making you create something that is a part of you and important to you. I support the idea quite a bit actually. If actual physical nakedness was required, I would probably support the idea of something in the catalog description about it but since it's not required and there are other options, I don't see the issue. There are always going to be classes where the final project is a problem for someone. Not only that but I'm pretty sure you can request to look at past syllabus material for classes before signing up for them or at least you could where I attended so it's not like it's hidden.

[AccountingDrone]

Pardon my french, but that's a fucking sexist thing to say. If it was a woman teacher, would you be saying the same thing?

I went to art school, four long years of eccentric artist teachers and classes that would be deemed "weird" by the regular school-going population. After a while, especially in high-level classes, nudity just ceases to have any stigma left. Male models, female models, fat models, skinny models... You generally stop seeing any sexuality in them, and pay attention to the things that art classes are there to teach you - form, line, shading, contouring, expression, the list goes on. You stop caring about butts and boobs and vaginas and penises. So I agree with NecCat's assessment that this is a case of helicopter parenting, and not of a lecherous teacher.

The fact that you could even say that based on the class description and this one person's complaint makes me so angry. This is the type of pervasive underlying sexism that keeps society ashamed of their bodies and promotes the "legislating morality" mindset.

If there is no particular reason to see naked bodies, *she* might be doing it to ogle naked men, or she could be lesbian/bi and wanting to see either/both.

Look - art does not need to be naked to be exposed. It doesn't need to expose you physically or emotionally. It does need to be what *you* consider art [hey, piles of garbage, shit smears, crucifix and christ in urine, van gogh - all can be artif the artist considers it art. I just wouldn't pay to get garbage, shit or urine in my house thanks.]

Fuck on a stick, to enter something I could cast my hoohaa and declare it represents my being raped and fill the teachers qualifications on both aspects. I personally would consider a crotch casting in bad taste, and not artistic, or expressive of my angst at being raped, but as long as I told that asshole it represented my angst at being raped and beaten, and painted it neon blue and black with red spatters, and he would have to take my word at it.

[Hyena Dandy]

Look - art does not need to be naked to be exposed. It doesn't need to expose you physically or emotionally.

No, it doesn't. And if you don't want it to, you probably shouldn't take a class called "Performing the Self."

Fuck on a stick, to enter something I could cast my hoohaa and declare it represents my being raped and fill the teachers qualifications on both aspects. I personally would consider a crotch casting in bad taste, and not artistic, or expressive of my angst at being raped, but as long as I told that asshole it represented my angst at being raped and beaten, and painted it neon blue and black with red spatters, and he would have to take my word at it.

Yes, yes he would. You COULD lie about whether you did your coursework. And doing so makes THEM the asshole?

[Andara Bledin]

Look - art does not need to be naked to be exposed. It doesn't need to expose you physically or emotionally.

For the third time: The class is titled "Performing the Self."

The entire thing is one long course on exhibitionism.

Why is it any great surprise that the grade is thus dependent on exposing yourself in some manner?

[Anthony K. S.]

Most colleges have the ability to drop for at least a few days after the first class. I suspect this one would too.

Most likely.

The colleges I attended allowed students to drop a course with no penalty for at least a week or so after the first day of classes.

So when the professor outlined the course requirements on the first day of the class, any students who wanted to back out probably could have done so.

I would be willing to bet a lot of people knew what this class entailed before they signed up for it. I have a hard time believing that word of a class like this hadn't gotten around.

I was thinking the same thing.

From what I've read, it looks like this is an advanced elective course with two prerequisites. Meaning that a student wouldn't even be eligible to take it until after attending the school for a semester or more.

Furthermore, this professor has been teaching this class for eleven years, so it's not anything remotely new.

I feel safe in saying that there is NO WAY that a student can be a part of this college's Art Department for a full semester or more without hearing at some point about this class from fellow students or faculty, in light of what it involves.

Something like that does not remain unspoken of. Ever.

I bet he made the policy to see all the naked cute co-eds.

I wonder how much he'd be able to see in a darkened room lit only by candles. Depends on how many candles there are, I suppose.

Honestly, I don't know where this assumption is coming from. The nude human form has been a theme in art for a very long time. Why should we assume that this professor must have an ulterior motive in making it a part of this class?

As far as I've been able to see, there is no real evidence to support that conclusion.

[Greenday]

Look - art does not need to be naked to be exposed. It doesn't need to expose you physically or emotionally. It does need to be what *you* consider art [hey, piles of garbage, shit smears, crucifix and christ in urine, van gogh - all can be artif the artist considers it art. I just wouldn't pay to get garbage, shit or urine in my house thanks.]

You're absolutely right. Are does not need to be naked to be exposed. You're post here is totally correct.

Except it CAN be if you want it to. Which is probably why the class isn't a requirement for any major and is just an elective.

[AmbrosiaWriter]

Fuck on a stick, to enter something I could cast my hoohaa and declare it represents my being raped and fill the teachers qualifications on both aspects. I personally would consider a crotch casting in bad taste, and not artistic, or expressive of my angst at being raped, but as long as I told that asshole it represented my angst at being raped and beaten, and painted it neon blue and black with red spatters, and he would have to take my word at it.

And it's this "view" on art that really pisses me off in more ways than one.

Also, he's the asshole because you're lying about what your crotch casting (I'm not going to call it art because you already admitted to doing it for the jollies with no real representation of emotion or provocation of thought)? You have never met the professor. You're casting judgement on this person based on... a snap judgement that they must be a pervert if they want to see naked bodies (never mind the fact that there is actually no requirement to be physically naked.)

Based on your logic, everyone and anyone who takes a figure drawing class must be a pervert who just wants to see naked people posing for them. And anyone who poses for a figure drawing class must be some kind of sexual exhibitionist who gets their jollies off having people staring at them for chunks of 45-minutes at a time.

Because one can't be naked without it being completely and utterly sexually charged <-- a view that is why we have such a war on mother's who want to breast feed in public because OMG BOOBS ARE 100% SEXUAL.

[AccountingDrone]

Based on your logic, everyone and anyone who takes a figure drawing class must be a pervert who just wants to see naked people posing for them. And anyone who poses for a figure drawing class must be some kind of sexual exhibitionist who gets their jollies off having people staring at them for chunks of 45-minutes at a time.

Because one can't be naked without it being completely and utterly sexually charged <-- a view that is why we have such a war on mother's who want to breast feed in public because OMG BOOBS ARE 100% SEXUAL.

No, I have both taken figure drawing and been a paid model for them. And I have been both naked and assisted to toilet on a bedpan, and other various ways of dealing with bodily wastes that I could probably take a crap in a bucket in the main quad if I felt like it [and it weren't illegal.] I simply do not see why being naked to do an art demo is needed. Hell, as far as I am concerned, he could broadcast it on the local cable outlet channel if the FCC wouldn't have a cow - I simply do not see why it is needful.

[Hyena Dandy]

No, I have both taken figure drawing and been a paid model for them. And I have been both naked and assisted to toilet on a bedpan, and other various ways of dealing with bodily wastes that I could probably take a crap in a bucket in the main quad if I felt like it [and it weren't illegal.] I simply do not see why being naked to do an art demo is needed. Hell, as far as I am concerned, he could broadcast it on the local cable outlet channel if the FCC wouldn't have a cow - I simply do not see why it is needful.

Then you don't see the purpose of the class. Which is "Performing the Self."

There's an idea that we are all, in a way, performing. To various degrees, but we are all constructing an identity at least slightly different from the truer, inner self. At times, we should learn to be aware of what that inner self is. The class description is

"Using autobiography, dream, confession, fantasy or other means to invent one’s self in a new way, or to evoke the variety of selves in our imagination, the course experiments with and explores the rich possibilities available to the contemporary artist in his or her own persona."

To do so, one also needs to be aware of what you are WITHOUT a persona. Your clothes are part of a persona. Even if you simply buy what's comfortable, you are still making a decision about what you're buying, if you see two equally cheap and comfortable items. What you do with your hair. What you do with your shirt.

You chose a teddy bear holding a heart for your avatar here. I chose a feminine anthropomorphosized airplane. You chose the name AccountingDrone. I chose the name Hyena Dandy. These are part of our personas, regardless of why we chose them. Even if it was a random pair of words you got generated online once and kept. "AccountingDrone" and "Hyena Dandy" are personas. A class like that includes being aware of your persona-less self. And thus asks you to do something either physically, or emotionally 'Baring.'

It is not a class that everyone in an art major needs to take. It's a class people CAN take, if they're interested in doing so. As far as it being necessary, it quite simply isn't. You're right on that. No-one NEEDS to take it. But if you desire to, you can. And part of learning how to relate your identity to your work, you are asked to either pose nude, or to do something emotionally baring. And yes, you CAN do something to act like you're being emotionally baring. And that would be accepted. But if you do so, you're only cheating yourself.