The nude in art has been a recognised subject matter since the 13th century when those two early nudists Adam and Eve were regularly depicted in various stages of undress, often just a fig leaf. It was not until the high renaissance of Victorian painting in Britain that it became a subject matter all of its own. It was not always accepted and even by the 1860’s The Art Journal defined ‘Englishness’ in art as decorous with sobriety and empathy in the subject matter.
Over the channel in France there was an entirely different attitude and The Art Journal commended British artists for their circumspection: “A deeply-rooted sense of propriety has not a little to do with the paucity of naked women on the walls of Exhibitions. The French do not even pretend to delicacy. Our notions, fortunate for the morals of our nation, and certainly for the good manners of society, happen to be different, and so English pictures are for the most part decently draped”.
The ‘English’ nude was first and foremost a pragmatic view of a body fashioned with all the inhibitions of a protestant northern European country. In essence the climate did not lend itself to the subject nor did its religion. The Latin temperament on the other hand had no such inhibitions and the nude triumphed under Catholicism and warmer climates.
In Britain the evangelical movements had no time for the nude and saw it as just another case of moral degradation thereby unifying the prejudice against the subject. Most mainstream religions were more tolerant as long as there was some moral or spiritual reason for portraying a naked body such as our old friends Adam and Eve, medical art and the Private studio.
Step up the moral brigade with their avowed intent to protect the public in general, and the inartistic in particular, from the bourgeois democracy that was overtaking the country. Their stance was that there was no distinction between fine art and what they took to be pornographic representation. There was of course a backlash to this view and the National Association for the Advancement of Art promoted the naked form as a pure ideal thus trying to retrieve the moral high ground from the other side.
With all this bickering going on, most artists just got on with what they did best and that was to paint. If that included naked women, and of course men, then so be it. The men were always portrayed as virile individuals in manly pursuits such as wrestling and boxing with more than a passing resemblance to the statues of the Greeks and Romans. The women on the other hand were broad of hip and rounded in a Rubenesque manner with long flowing hair and discretely covered with a diaphanous drape.
It should be pointed out that one of the great collectors of nude paintings was Queen Victoria who presented Prince Albert with a nude picture on his birthday thereby fostering the subject as high art.
During the later part of the 19th century, bathing became a fashionable pastime and it was duly recorded by the painters of the period who imbued it with a physical and moral presence. The German art historian Richard Muther said: “Among all the things in the world there are few so beautiful as English girls. Those, tall, slender, vigorous figures that one sees up on the beach at Brighton are really like Greek women”. Well, we know where he went for his holidays!
Attitudes were beginning to change, art schools were admitting women students and the study of the life class nude became available to everyone. Religious and moral sensibilities were no longer being offended; well maybe still in private, but there was beginning to be an acceptance of the subject. The ‘Victorian values’ which many saw as social and sexual oppression were breaking down and a more free thinking and permissive society was growing up.
See more: http://www.room4art.com/
|
|
|
|
Contributor's Note
http://www.room4art.com/
|
|
|
|
|
