Nudity, Sexuality, Photography. Visual Redefinition of the Body
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.14.2.06Keywords:
Body, Photography, Nudity, Sexuality, Amateur and Professional Pornography, Sex Workers, Ars Erotica, Scientia SexualisAbstract
The article examines the relations between photography, body, nudity, and sexuality. It presents changing relations of photography with a naked or semi-naked body and different forms and recording conventions. From the mid-19th century the naked body became the subject of scientifically grounded photographic explorations, an allegorical motif referring to painting traditions, an object of interest and excitement for the newly-developed “touristic” perspective. These three main ways in which photographs depicting nudity were being taken at that time shaped three visual modes: artistic-documentary, ethnographic-travelling, and scientific-medical. It has deep cultural consequences, including those in the ways of shaping the notions of the corporeal and the sexual. Collaterally, one more, probably prevalent in numbers, kind of photographical images arose: pornographic. In the middle of the 19th century, the repertoire of pornographic pictures was already very wide, and soon it become one of the photographic pillars of visual imagination of the modern society, appealing to private and professional use of photography, popular culture, advertisement, art. The number of erotic and pornographic pictures rose hand over fist with the development of digital photography. Access to pornographic data is easy, fast, and cheap, thanks to the Internet, as it never was before. Photography has fuelled pornography, laying foundations for a massive and lucrative business, employing a huge group of professional sex workers. How all those processes affected our imagination and real practices, what does the staggering number of erotic photography denote? One possible answer comes from Michel Foucault who suggests that our civilization does not have any ars erotica, but only scientia sexualis. Creating sexual discourse became an obsession of our civilization, and its main pleasure is the pleasure of analysis and a constant production of truth about sex. Maybe today the main pleasure is about watching technically registered images, and perhaps that is why we may consider visual redefinition of the body as the main social effect of the invention of the photography.
Downloads
References
Belting, Hans. 2007. Antropologia obrazu. Szkice do nauki o obrazie. Cracow: Universitas.
Google Scholar
Berger, John. 1997. Sposoby widzenia. Poznan: Rebis.
Google Scholar
Brauchitsch, Boris, von. 2004. Mała historia fotografii. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Cyklady.
Google Scholar
Drozdowski, Rafał. 2009. Obraza na obrazy. Strategie społecznego oporu wobec obrazów dominujących. Poznan: Zysk i S-ka.
Google Scholar
Edwards, Steve. 2014. Fotografia. Bardzo krótkie wprowadzenie. Cracow: Nomos.
Google Scholar
Ewing, William A. 1998. Ciało. Antologia fotografii ludzkiego ciała. Warsaw: Prima.
Google Scholar
Ewing, William A. 1999. Miłość i pożądanie. Antologia fotografii romantycznej i erotycznej. Warsaw: Albatros.
Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 1978. The History of Sexuality Volume 1: An Introduction. New York: Vintage Books.
Google Scholar
Frizot, Michel, (ed.). 1998. A New History of Photography. Köln: Könemann.
Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 2012. “Ramy fotografii.” Pp. 265-304 in Foto społeczeństwo. Antologia tekstów z socjologii wizualnej, edited by M. Bogunio-Borowska and P. Sztompka. Cracow: Znak.
Google Scholar
Gorska, Katarzyna L. 2015. “‘Przeznaczone dla matek, lekarzy i artystów.’ Fotografia w poradnikach popularno naukowych XIX i XX wieku.” Pp. 127-144 in Miejsce fotografii w badaniach humanistycznych, edited by M. Ziętkiewicz and M. Biernacka. Warsaw: Stowarzyszenie Liber pro Arte.
Google Scholar
Hannavay, John, (ed.). 2008. Encyclopedia of Nineteenth-Century Photography. New York: Routledge.
Google Scholar
Janczyk, Marek and Iwona Święch. 2006. “Wokół fotografii ciała.” Pp. 3-9 in Sesja. Punkt widzenia. Fotografia ciała, edited by M. Janczyk and I. Święch. Cracow: Museum of Photography History in Cracow.
Google Scholar
Metz, Christian. 2006. “Fotografia i fetysz.” Kwartalnik Filmowy 54-55:246-254.
Google Scholar
Mirzoeff, Nicholas. 2016. Jak zobaczyć świat. Warsaw: Museum of Contemporary Art; Cracow: Karakter.
Google Scholar
Nead, Lynda. 1998. Akt kobiecy. Sztuka, Obscena i seksualność. Poznan: Rebis.
Google Scholar
Olechnicki, Krzysztof. 2005. “Fotografia dla każdego. Społeczne funkcje fotografii w dobie kultury konsumpcyjnej.” Pp. 37-60 in Przestrzenie fotografii. Antologia tekstów, edited by T. Ferenc, K. Makowski. Lodz: Galeria f5 & Księgarnia fotograficzna.
Google Scholar
Pilichowski-Ragno, Andrzej. 2006. “Akt jako alienacja. Parę uwag na temat ciała (gdy staje się fotografią).” Pp. 46-48 in Sesja. Punkt widzenia. Fotografia ciała, edited by M. Janczyk and I. Świech. Cracow: Museum of Photography History in Cracow.
Google Scholar
Pustoła, Magdalena. 2004. “Życie to pornografia.” Krytyka Polityczna 6:205-206.
Google Scholar
Rosenblum, Naomi. 1997. A World History of Photography. New York, London, Paris: Abbeville Press.
Google Scholar
Rouillé, André. 2007. Fotografia. Między dokumentem a sztuką współczesną. Cracow: Universitas.
Google Scholar
Schroeder, Jonathan E. and Pierre McDonagh. 2006. “The Logic of Pornography in Digital Camera Promotion.” Pp. 219-242 in Sex in Consumer Culture. The Erotic Content of Media and Marketing, edited by J. Lambiase and T. Reichert. Mahwah, New Jersey, London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Google Scholar
Sizeranne, Robert, de la. 1983. “Czy fotografia jest sztuką?” Obscura 1983/13/3; 1983/14/4.
Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18356/c9388c4c-es
Struk, Janina. 2007. Holokaust w fotografiach. Interpretacje dowodów. Warsaw: Prószyński i S-ka.
Google Scholar
Śnieciński, Marek. 2013. “Spektakl ciała – akt w polskiej fotografii.” DYSKURS: Pismo Naukowo-Artystyczne ASP we Wrocławiu 15:204-224.
Google Scholar
Welsch, Wolfgang. 1999. “Procesy estetyzacji. Zjawiska, rozróżnienia, perspektywy.” Pp. 15-52 in Sztuka i estetyzacja. Studia teoretyczne, edited by K. Zamiara and M. Golka. Poznan: Humaniora.
Google Scholar