The Body

Carol S. Vance points out a bias between art forms in Feminist Fundamentalism: Women Against Images. With the University of Michigan and the NEA incidents as examples, she notes “newer art forms, here photography and video, which have shorter histories, less prestige and legitimacy, and less cultural protection than . . . painting or sculpture” seem to be more easily deemed “pornographic” or “obscene art” (135). The “widespread circulation” of these media forms makes them more “vulnerable” to accusations of vulgarity. Moreover, it should be noted that many works from the traditional canon of art history are blatantly pornographic and many others would seem so if not for explanations from the artist -- drawing a distinct line between “traditional forms of art” and pornography is a difficult task.

Two examples of this are the many paintings and sculptures devoted to the myth of “Leda and the Swan” and Hiram Powers’ “Greek Slave.” The former, painted by accepted masters such as Michelangelo and Leonardo da, Vinci, depicts the rape of Leda by the god Zeus in the guise of a swan. Defenders might say that the works participate in a long tradition of mythology and Western history, not to mention the painters’ obvious skills in their field. However, the mere existence of these works suggests that the line between traditional art and pornography lies as much in the interpretation as in the image itself. Hiram Powers’ “Greek Slave” is a good example of how the story behind a piece or its interpretation can “make” a seemingly pornographic image art, even Christian art. The sculpted image is a naked woman, a slave, with her hands bound, leaning on a tree stump. If the image were a photograph or video, it could easily be interpreted as pornography. The actual piece can be interpreted likewise. However, Powers and a Reverend from the era, Orville Dewey, contest that the statue is the opposite of pornography and actually a moral piece. Dewey claims, “every sympathy of the beholder is enlisted for the preservation of her sanctity; every feeling of the beholder is ready to execrate and curse the wretch that could buy such a creature!” It seems that the works removed from the University of Michigan exhibit were never given a chance to be read for an underlying moral story, or satire, or even on formalist grounds concerning cinema and photography.

Vance, Carol S. “Feminist Fundamentalism: Women Against Images.” Theory in Contemporary Art since 1985. Ed. Zoya Kocur and Simon Leung. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. 132 –140.

Dewey, Orville. “Powers’ Statues.” The Union Magazine. October 1847. Uncle Tom’s Cabin and American Culture. Stephen Railton and the University of Virginia. http://utc.iath.virginia.edu/sentimnt/snar23at.html