On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 21:41:32 GMT, Plumdufffffffff
<dorkus@rizenfromthedead.com> wrote:
>Hoodare <Hoodare@helluvino.com> wrote in
>news:3o51o2tho7cjoc0bqdn29vi66is1bdi3db@4ax.com:
>
>> On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 23:37:19 GMT, Plumdufffffffff
>> <dorkus@rizenfromthedead.com> wrote:
>>
>> Very nice collecton. Many of these I have never seen. Thanks. Von
>> Gloeden's work appeared in early National Geographics--right at the
>> turn of the 19th Century. Most of these were portraits of Scilian
>> children, clothed, but there is one of a young nude boy and a dog
>> sitting on a rock. All in all he was very talented.
>>
>> Thanks again for your contribution.
>>
>Hi Hoodare
>There is a certain pure elegance about these pictures that sets them
>appart for sure. thanks for your additions
>Glad you liked them.
>
>plumduffffffffff
It is a curious thing, certainly. When you review portrait
photography of the late Victorian period, particularly the
1880's-1910's, you find quite a bit of nude work, and frontal nude
photography at that, both men and women, boys and girls. These
photographs were taken by well-known photographers and were lauded as
art. That type of portraiture vanished under a wave of moral critcism
during WWI and afterwards, at least in the United States. Suddenly
nudes were unacceptible unless certain body parts were blotted or
airbrushed out. National Geographic magazine, February 1968 is a good
example of that philosophy. Any photographer who takes such photos
now risks being labeled a child pornographer. Is it possible then
that the famed "repressive" Victorian society was less repressive than
our own now? It is hysteria and madness.
|
|
![Favorite](javascript:myfavor('http://www.nzbot.com/article/alt.fan.snuffles/170', 'Re: Wilhelm Von Gloeden Erotic Photographs - File 132 of 198 - yEnc "Gloeden132.JPG" 152908 bytes (1/1)')){kind=link}