Human beings are complex creatures

jim10219

Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2017
Messages
1,632
Location
Oklahoma
Format
4x5 Format
I am not the least bit impressed with his photography. Never have been. But there are quite a few artists that I do appreciate who have been known to have questionable morals. It's definitely a difficult circle to square. These days, I tend to avoid learning about the private lives of my heroes. It rarely leads to something other than disappointment.
 

tedr1

Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
940
Location
50 miles from NYC USA
Format
Multi Format
First of all don't believe everything you read in newspapers, journalists are not top of the league when it comes to putting the facts first and a good story second. So things may not be what they seem and it may be worthwhile to find Nixon's side of the story.

I am not shocked or outraged by what goes on in an art class at a college. I think toleration of nudity and emotional honesty may be valuable qualities for an artist to develop.

Second, there is a difference between a penis and a picture of a penis. Some pictures of penises have been acclaimed as high art. Showing one in public may attract the attention of the police.

Sometimes America can seem such a prudish place, grow up.
 

jim10219

Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2017
Messages
1,632
Location
Oklahoma
Format
4x5 Format
I think making it an assignment to photograph each other's penises and vaginas is a bit too far. You shouldn't put students in the position. If you want them to photograph nude people, then they should hire willing models, and not be asked to volunteer themselves into these uncomfortable situations. If they volunteer to model, then that's okay. Also, making the class look at photos of your own penis, if you're the professor, is clearly wrong. They may be artistic in nature, and I have no problem showing them pictures of the penises and vaginas of professional models. But having the class examine the pictures of the professor's penis clearly seems out of bounds. I also think he crossed a line when he propositioned a student for sex (asked her if she's like an "old friend with benefits") and described in detail an erotic dream he had about another student. There were dozens of other complaints about his as well. It wasn't a one time incident that got him in trouble.

I have a fine arts degree and agree that Americans can be pretty prudish in general. But in art school we were never asked to do anything anywhere near that questionable. There were a few awkward moments, as is always the case when new to nude bodies, but it was always handled in a professional manner. This clearly was not.
 

Ian Leake

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 25, 2005
Messages
1,630
Location
Switzerland
Format
Analog
Throughout history artists have made sublime artwork, despite being thoroughly dodgy people (Caravaggio springs to my mind as a good example). Morality is societal norm; highly creative artists, almost by definition, often don’t follow societal norms.

I don’t defend his behaviour as a teacher, but
as far as I’m concerned it has no bearing on the value of the artwork he created.
 

E. von Hoegh

Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
6,197
Location
Adirondacks
Format
Multi Format
jtk said:
Who defines "morals" and how is that non-definition relevant to Nixon's work?
Click to expand...
"Morals" are what you do when (you think) no one's watching. "Ethics" are what you do when someone's watching.
A sleazeball takes a good picture, does that make the sleazeball a respectable person?
 

blockend

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2010
Messages
5,049
Location
northern eng
Format
35mm
E. von Hoegh said:
"Morals" are what you do when (you think) no one's watching. "Ethics" are what you do when someone's watching.
Click to expand...
Best definition I heard.

Art requires space and time to assess. Enough that a person's humanity for better or worse does not influence the quality of the work. The fact the guy wants people to look at his dick suggests he's bored with the job or with photography and needs to get out more. His work looks sentimental to me. Experience suggests bleeding hearts are often a front for cold calculation, or ethically motivated as you would have it.
 

guangong

Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2009
Messages
3,589
Format
Medium Format
Considering the general atmosphere of the contemporary academic world no one should be surprised at this behavior or even if a cascade of similar behavior isn’t reported. Nowadays there is tremendous competition for institutions of higher education and faculty to outdo one another in bazaar behavior. Witness the courses and workshops being offered by once respected university on how to do anal sex, oral sex, etc. We were able to learn all this during our middle schoo years from the gutter.
I attended many classes with nude models from a wide variety of teachers for several decades years ago and models were always treated with utmost respect. There were procedures of etiquette. For example, models always disrobed behind a screen, never in front of the class. A couple of years ago I registered for a drawing class at a local community college and I was taken aback when the model undressed in front of the class. Furthermore, exaggerated dramatic posses were requested by the teacher. Worse, the teacher herself did not know how to draw so young folks finished course just as they began, learning absolutely nothing. Should add that this was in New Jersey, where political patronage is all important.
Oh! By the way, years ago dressed models were traditionally paid more than nude models.
 

warden

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Messages
3,099
Location
Philadelphia
Format
Medium Format
Unfortunately Nixon's show is now over, closed early at the artist's request. I've had it on my art calendar for a while but I've missed my chance to see it.

Chuck Close's show just closed in Philly and he's also had a #MeToo moment, but in his case the show was not removed. Instead, the museum hung a show by the entrance to Close's, that spoke to the controversy and the culture. It was great all around, and I'm happy I could see the exquisite giant Polaroids one last time.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/12/...n-closes-nicholas-nixon-photography-show.html
 
OP
OP

Mainecoonmaniac

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2009
Messages
6,297
Format
Multi Format
jnanian said:
he's a dog like a lot of people ..
ohwell ..
Click to expand...

I think to call a lech a dog is doing canines a disfavor. I think why some people like animals so much is they are honest about what they want. Humans use authority and deception for their gain. I try to have faith in humanity. I start off in a relationship with trust until the person me a reason not to. Always trust your gut instincts and question authority.
 

guangong

Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2009
Messages
3,589
Format
Medium Format
paulbarden said:
I'm reminded that we live in an era when even "a dog" with a reputation for overstepping boundaries with women can become president.
Click to expand...

Earlier we lived in an era where a man could commit rape (and even covered by his wife who intimidated victims ) who was even re-elected as president!
 

TheRook

Member
Joined
May 18, 2016
Messages
413
Location
Philadelphia
Format
35mm
To be honest, the personal lives of artists do not really interest me; I judge an artwork solely by the work itself - its expressive power, as well as the imagination and skill that went into it.
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,480
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz ...
 

NJH

Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2013
Messages
702
Location
Dorset
Format
Multi Format
Serious question: Has there ever been a great artist in any field who lived their life smack bang in the middle of what one could call the moral sensibilities of their time?

Not condoning Nixon in the slightest by the way just trying to understand why we have this phenomenon, and I don't mean sleazy artists but this bizarre trait of projecting our own morality on to other people whom have created things we like. This is where human beings are complex.
 

rpavich

Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2015
Messages
1,520
Location
West virginia, USA
Format
35mm
jtk said:
Who defines "morals" and how is that non-definition relevant to Nixon's work?
Click to expand...
That's actually a very astute question considering the subject of this thread.

Philosophically speaking, morals, a moral code that means anything must not be arbitrary, it can't be "made up" and change with the times or at the whim of whoever is in charge. That's a philosophical fail.
There must be a moral lawgiver who has the authority to give a non-arbitrary, universally binding moral code to humans.

That lawgiver is God. He's written that moral code on everyone's hearts, thus we all know (deep down) right from wrong. We can justify certain behavior and certainly we've all done that in our own way but that doesn't change what's right and wrong.

If there is no God...then there is no universal, transcendent, universally binding moral code to point to to call a person's behavior "good" or "bad".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…