Poetry Discussion Group: Ovid's Metamorposes

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

11-29-2011, 06:21 AM
cacian

Quote:

Originally Posted by YesNo

I suspect much of the nudity is for the erotic appeal of the art object.

Regarding Jesus, however, that he is portrayed with a loin cloth is likely done out of respect. I suspect he was crucified nude. This would increase the humiliation not only in having the genitals of the condemned on display but in the public display of defecation and urination: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion

Thanks YesNo. That does make sense.
It never crossed my mind that the idea behind nudity is to make us attracted to them. That is something it never crossed my mind.
I personally do not find nudity attractive in any way.
I much prefer to look at people with their clothes on hence fashions and colours.
This kind of 'eroticism and appeal'' makes me wonder wether then thess gods and godesses could also be refered to as relics because on one's attachements to them.
Just an idea.
Thanks for reading.:smile5:
11-29-2011, 10:11 PM
stlukesguild

YesNo-I suspect much of the nudity is for the erotic appeal of the art object.

Cacian- Thanks YesNo. That does make sense.
It never crossed my mind that the idea behind nudity is to make us attracted to them. That is something it never crossed my mind.
I personally do not find nudity attractive in any way.
I much prefer to look at people with their clothes on hence fashions and colours.

There is a somewhat in-depth look at the evolution of the "Nude" in Western art to be found here:

http://www.online-literature.com/for...ad.php?t=64250
11-29-2011, 10:49 PM
YesNo

I must have missed the art thread. Thanks for the link, stlukesguild!
11-29-2011, 11:25 PM
JuniperWoolf

Quote:

Originally Posted by cacian

Just about yes.
why do you ask?

Well because the nudity of Adam and Eve is the fulcrum of the entire story. Their sudden shame of their nakedness is how God knew that they had eaten from the tree of knowledge, after which he ejected them from the garden, so in art depictions of them in the garden they would have to still be nude. It wouldn't make sense if they were clothed.
11-30-2011, 08:40 AM
cacian

Quote:

Originally Posted by JuniperWoolf

Well because the nudity of Adam and Eve is the fulcrum of the entire story.Their sudden shame of their nakedness is how God knew that they had eaten from the tree of knowledge , after which he ejected them from the garden, so in art depictions of them in the garden they would have to still be nude. It wouldn't make sense if they were clothed.

Thank you for drawing my attention to this I obviousy was not aware of it.
I have dubeously missed it.
They were already naked before they sinned how could they suddenly become aware of their nakedeness?
supposidely if one was, as it were already without clothes, then isn't it logical that one would be used to it?
It does not make sense that GOD, a powerful being needs them to be naked in order read body language which will confimr to him that they have sinned.

In my world, my logical thinking tells me that GOD sees everything and knows everything . God does not, according to what I have been told, needs no proofs to find out those two had sinned.
so this bit here:

Quote:

Their sudden shame of their nakedness is how God knew that they had eaten from the tree of knowledge

does not quite enter my equation.:wink5:
11-30-2011, 08:52 AM
JuniperWoolf

Quote:

Originally Posted by cacian

They were already naked before they sinned how could they suddenly become aware of their nakedeness?
supposidely if one was, as it were already without clothes, then isn't it logical that one would be used to it?

Well, the way the story goes, they ate from the tree and gained the knowledge that they were naked and that they should be ashamed of it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cacian

God does not, according to what I have been told, needs no proofs to find out those two had sinned.

Yeah, it's an inconsistancy. Anyway, that's why they're always portrayed as nude.
12-01-2011, 04:47 PM
JBI

Quote:

Originally Posted by cacian

Thank you for drawing my attention to this I obviousy was not aware of it.
I have dubeously missed it.
They were already naked before they sinned how could they suddenly become aware of their nakedeness?
supposidely if one was, as it were already without clothes, then isn't it logical that one would be used to it?
It does not make sense that GOD, a powerful being needs them to be naked in order read body language which will confimr to him that they have sinned.

In my world, my logical thinking tells me that GOD sees everything and knows everything . God does not, according to what I have been told, needs no proofs to find out those two had sinned.
so this bit here:

does not quite enter my equation.:wink5:

The whole idea is they develop a sense of shame. The book isn't meant to be logical.
12-02-2011, 04:37 AM
cacian

Quote:

Originally Posted by JuniperWoolf

Well, the way the story goes, they ate from the tree and gained the knowledge that they were naked and that they should be ashamed of it.

Yeah, it's an inconsistancy. Anyway, that's why they're always portrayed as nude.

I get it now.
So you mean to say they were not aware of their nudity being an issue till they ate from the tree of knowledge!!
Now. This. Makes. Sense.
Thank you for clearing that up for me JuniperWoolf.
12-02-2011, 04:41 AM
cacian

Quote:

Originally Posted by JBI

The whole idea is they develop a sense of shame. The book isn't meant to be logical.

I see exactly what you mean.
well to be fair it really naive to assume that one needs knowledge to realise nudity is not such a good idea especially if it is out in a garden.
Human instincts obliges that one is better off with some clothes on because of being outdoors and the cold it generates on ones body.
I fail to see how such a story in a bible warns me of nudity being shameful.
I think the element of weather conditions over nudity takes over any sense of shame or knowledge for that matter.
That is my view on this.:wink5:
12-02-2011, 06:03 AM
ftil

Quote:

Originally Posted by cacian

I get it now.
So you mean to say they were not aware of their nudity being an issue till they ate from the tree of knowledge!!
Now. This. Makes. Sense.
Thank you for clearing that up for me JuniperWoolf.

So, gods of ancient Greece and Rome are still not aware of their nudity and blind as many of them have been depicted naked. Goddesses in Archaic, Classical, and Hellenistic period were fully dressed.
They lost clothing in Imperial Rome period. I guess...... to be blind like gods. :banana:

I am wondering if Ovid arrived to the same conclusion. :smilewinkgrin:
12-02-2011, 09:55 AM
YesNo

Quote:

Originally Posted by cacian

I fail to see how such a story in a bible warns me of nudity being shameful.

I don't know whether nudity should be considered shameful or not. The fact that the story, present in J's original contribution according to Bloom and Rosenberg The Book of J, mentions shame around nudity makes me think that the culture around Jerusalem prior to 900 BCE did consider it shameful.
12-02-2011, 10:23 AM
cacian

Quote:

Originally Posted by YesNo

I don't know whether nudity should be considered shameful or not. The fact that the story, present in J's original contribution according to Bloom and Rosenberg The Book of J, mentions shame around nudity makes me think that the culture around Jerusalem prior to 900 BCE did consider it shameful.

About nudity I think there is the element of decency.
I for example do not feel comfortable in nude and consider offensive if someone say went in the nude in front of me without asking if it was Ok to do so.
I am not including communal single sex saunas/turkish baths where it is Okish, half nude is better for me, because the environmnent requires that you go in the nude to bathe.
Other then that I would not conisder it the norme for me.
Obviousy everyone is different.
I would not call it shamefull as such but more of uncomfortable for me.

I am not aware of the Book of J.
I have to look it up.
12-02-2011, 02:58 PM
ftil

Hm……I am curious what is so important about nudity. We had a tread about public nudity with strong proponents for it. Here we go again. :biggrinjester:

I haven’t finish Ovid but I haven’t found Ovid talking about nudity. He was more busy to report abductions, rape, or murders. Don’t you think that it is more interesting to discuss how and why religions were modified? It involves changing the concept of nudity too. Or, why many myths were in contradiction.
Or even discuss gods affairs........some of them were quite busy.:ihih:
12-02-2011, 04:23 PM
YesNo

There was one story of Diana whom Acteon accidentally found bathing naked and for that offense turned him into a stag who was hunted by his own dogs.
12-02-2011, 05:03 PM
cacian

Quote:

Originally Posted by YesNo

There was one story of Diana whom Acteon accidentally found bathing naked and for that offense turned him into a stag who was hunted by his own dogs.

one is supposed to bathe without clothes, nudity does not enter into it.
bathing is private and one can do what they please in one's private environment.
Is one expected to bathe and shower with clothe on?!!
That would be very silly indeed.:leaving:

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page