The human form is the center of art in the West. There are philosophical, even religious reasons for this. The irony is that the human form in art in North America has become compromised with a low view of the body and the more undesirable aspects of pornography. This is more than unfortunate, because the human form is, if I read my near eastern ancient literature correctly, the highest form produced by the Creator. Should it not, therefore, be held in high esteem in the arts?
I have had many discussions about this subject with students, parents, pastors, teachers, and arm-chair philosophers of all kinds. There are so many misconceptions about the use of the human form in the arts. People want simple answers, and either fortunately or unfortunately(depending on how one sees it), there are no simple answers about this subject. This does not mean, however, that there are no simple principles to bring to bear on this subject; there are.
One of my areas of special studies has been the Renaissance, and Michelangelo in particular. I like what Michelangelo had to say about the use of the human figure in his art. One should read it. In short, he said that the human figure was divine, and if people saw twisted, pornographic images in his work, it was because that was what was in their own minds, not what was in his.
Art is very often a mirror, that reflects the ideas, values and sentiments of its viewers, not its makers. It is a dubious task indeed to imply that a particular artist's work shows that the artist is "this thing" or "that thing." Usually, the viewer sees them self in the work of art, not what the artist intended, and if the artist does not tell us what she intends by her work, we cannot know. We are relegated to only what we see and the constructs of our own thoughts.
So, the next time you look at a work of art, particularly if it contains human figures, and even more particularly when it contains undraped figures (commonly called "nudes"), check your own presuppositions. Not all depictions of nudes is pornography, and not all nudes in art are innocent. Each depiction of the human form must be judged on its own merits, and the intent of the artist is what determines the matter, not what the viewer thinks of it.
That said, in my opinion, we should see more, not less, undraped figures in the arts - but not pornography. We REALLY need to learn that there is a wholesome and holy way of depicting the most glorious creation on the planet, and not to be afraid of viewing it through the eyes of the holy Being who designed it.
Let us not forget that God put clothes on humans because WE called ourselves naked, not him. A sense of our "nakedness" was a result of the fall - meaning, it was a misperception, not a true perception. Clothed or unclothed, we appear the same to God. It is our own limitations that hinder us, but such limitations can be overcome, just as like any other twisted tendency in us. It is my firm belief that great art that uses the human form can be redemptive, if done well. Let us not discard our bodies as something dirty or pornographic, rather let us show the human form in ways that would honor the one who, in his great wisdom and creative genius, formed them with his own hands from the clay of our own good earth.
