Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Any Jewelry, post: 9594841, member: 2844&quot;]Most of these &quot;Venus&quot; figurines were discovered at a time when people still thought of such items in Graeco-Roman terms. The one in Dolní Věstonice was discovered and named in the 1920s if I remember correctly.</p><p>The Graeco-Roman interpretation has long since been abandoned, and rightly so.</p><p><br /></p><p>The fact is, scholars don&#039;t know the cultures these figurines were made in or what they meant, and most scholars nowadays accept that. Consequently their &#039;purpose&#039; is as yet unknown. All we know is that there must have been reasons to make them. Those reasons may differ from one culture to another.</p><p><br /></p><p>No one was &quot;not talking about sex&quot;. Seeing nudity in a non-sexual way was only mentioned as one of several examples of how different people or cultures look at nudity.</p><p>Just one example of many I could name: Western artists flocked to Bali in part because of the upper body nudity of Balinese women. To many of them that was tantalising, but to the Balinese such upper body nudity was normal, the best way to dress in the tropics. See, different perspectives, a sexual and a non-sexual one.</p><p>Not that the Balinese are prudish about sex in the way I interpret it, on the contrary.</p><p>The Balinese neutral view on nudity (or that of some other non-Western peoples) may seem prudish or old fashioned to your art world, but I don&#039;t see the need to judge them.</p><p><br /></p><p>What surprised me in this thread was that it was talked about in such a &quot;giggling&quot; way, as if to say &quot;ooh naughty&quot;.</p><p>I haven&#039;t seen that type of reaction overhere since the 60s, but I realise this is an international forum. Still, it is an antiques forum, and since many antiques are nudes or decorated with nudes, I thought Jaime&#039;s post normal.</p><p><br /></p><p>In the art world you know, considering nudity as normal may be regarded as &quot;prudish and old fashioned&quot;, but the art world I was always part of, that giggly reaction is considered &quot;prudish and old fashioned&quot;.</p><p>But again, a different culture.</p><p>Maybe I should explain, I live in the Netherlands, a country that is considered far more free when it comes to nudity than the country you are from. Some of the galleries I worked for overhere exhibited art that was far more explicit than this little beauty.</p><p><br /></p><p>Some foreigners who come here regard the Dutch freedom as sexual, and think they can just grab girls. They don&#039;t understand it and can&#039;t appreciate the beauty of Dutch freedom. Their inability to appreciate the beauty of it in a more neutral way is very different from the way that you don&#039;t understand our way of regarding nudity as natural. I would much rather have your way than theirs, obviously.</p><p><br /></p><p>Having said that about the different views in our art world and yours, when I helped set up an art gallery in NY in 1982, I didn&#039;t meet any artists that were &quot;prudish&quot; (in the Dutch definition) about nudity.</p><p>But times change, and I accept that. Or maybe you are from a different part of the country.</p><p><br /></p><p>Absolutely. Jaime is happy to have such a lovely sculpture, I am happy to enjoy its beauty without any socio-cultural restrictions, and you are happy to giggle about it. All of us happy, what more can you want.<img src="styles/default/xenforo/smilies/smile.png" class="mceSmilie" alt=":)" unselectable="on" />[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in