OUIL501
Amber Kaplan
How have representations of women in classical European nude paintings informed modern beauty standards? It is theorised that humans have a scopophilic instinct – meaning they derive pleasure from looking. (Mulvey: 1975) Although scopophilia can lead to extremes such as voyeurism, all people derive some kind of pleasure from looking. Art is made to satisfy this part of human nature, and as also people “want to see other people naked” (Berger: 1972, Page 58) European nude paintings aim to please a viewer. “Classical works of art have traditionally served as paradigms if western European Values” (Koloski-Ostrow, A. Lyons, C: 1997. P.2), they encapsulated the standard of beauty of the time, as it will have been a “dominant communication form of the time” (Wykes, M. Gunter, B: 2005, p.154) much like modern advertising communicates the standard of beauty nowadays. Often classical nudes are regarded as portraying a more realistic standard of beauty as they often show a more full figured body but it could be asked, “Do these images celebrate as we are usually told the women in them or the male voyeur?”(Berger: 1972) as the bodies are still heavily distorted and have been “romanticised as unattainable” (Wykes , M. Gunter, B: 2005. 154) though beauty standards are different how there are similarities that can be seen between these paintings and the modern ideal for women. Ideals for women come mainly from the male gaze; “The feminine character, and the ideal of femininity on which it is modelled are products of masculine society” (Warner. M: 1985. P. 325) they are based on what men find desirable. In most art forms that show a female character, including painting, sculpture, cinema, and advertising the viewer is expected to take the view of the intended audience. If the content were created for a heterosexual male audience, then even females would have to put themselves in the place of this demographic. “In this culture the look is largely controlled by men” (Coward. R: 2000. P.33) As men control a majority of media they are able to imbue it with their views and desires of women, including what they think women should look and act like. This often involves turning the woman into an object of desire for a male audience, in which case “women are denied a viewpoint of their own and instead participate in the pleasure of men looking at women.” (Gauntlett, D: 2008. P. 41) Women will see what men find desirable about the woman in the media, and strive to imitate this as “it is likely that women identify with the subject rather than desire them” (Coward. R: 2000. P.37) John Berger’s Ways of Seeing (1972) offers an analysis of classical European nude oil paintings concerned with the male gaze, and how they communicate ideal beauty. It states that in the world women are taught that all their value is based on their looks, how others perceive them, and particularly the validation of their beauty by men. Men however are judged by their power or their perceived power, they do not have to be good looking or actually have any real power as long as they act as if they do. This was and still is ‘deeply embedded in our culture’ causing women to ‘survey their own femininity’ as a male does (Berger, J. 1972. P.63). Naomi Wolf supports this stating, “The quality called “beauty” objectively and universally exists. Women must want to embody it and men must want to possess women who embody it. This embodiment is an imperative for women and not to men” (The Beauty Myth: 1991: P.12) European nudes reflect this social construct, which appears to be European as other cultures have been shown to present a more of a loving interaction between man and woman in any nude imagery. Women in European nude paintings are depicted as if they are aware of somebody watching, their nudity is a display to the spectator and the intended spectator is “presumed to be male”(Berger, J: 1972. P54). They are usually depicted looking passively out of the painting to show her “submission to the owners feelings of demands” (Berger, J: 1972. P52). Whitney Chadwick says “their demeanour one of virtue, piety and submission to the authority of the husband, the church, and state, these female figures do not look; they are turned away and presented as surfaces to be gazed upon” (1990. P76) supporting this fact and suggesting that since ‘these females do not look’, men control the look. Women in classical paintings are offered up as objects to the male spectator, their bodies are positioned and changed to make them more
OUIL501
Amber Kaplan
appealing him, “it is not the original person but an artists account of the of that person according to the gaze, craft and imagination of the painter.’ (Wykes, M. Gunter, B: 2005. P38) The spectator is offered an ideal woman, not a real woman. In the 1400’s “Raphaels paintings epitomize the idealisation of female beauty of this period but, by his own admission they were rarely based on real models” and renaissance artists tended to “avoid realistic interpretation, emphasising instead the positive attributes of their subjects both physical and political” – (Haughton, N: 2004. P229). More often than not the woman presented is actually an amalgamation of other women. “Dürer believed that the ideal nude ought to be constructed by taking the face of one body, the breasts of another, the legs of a third, the shoulders of a fourth, the hands of a fifth – and so on” (Berger, J: 1972. P62). There is a “belief that although no individual body is satisfactory as a whole, the artist can choose the perfect parts from a number of figures and then combine them as a whole” (Clark, K: 1956 P10). We believe that photography and film of the modern age should be more realistic than artists impressions of people, as it can capture the person perfectly as they are however the methods of the past translated into the modern day with digital techniques of retouching and editing so that “the female body is most carefully scripted with the prevailing ideals” (Coward, R: 2000. P39). So neither the classical European nude nor modern photography used for advertising tends to depict a realistic body or person but rather a “catalog of features” (Wolf. N: 1991. P59).
[Figure 1] Titians ‘Venus of Urbino’ 1538 [Fig. 1] was intended as an erotic piece so there is already a sexual context to the image. In the modern day these classical paintings seem to not be viewed as sexual, perhaps because they appear more tame or tasteful compared to what can be viewed for erotic stimulation, however it has been said “no nude, however abstract, should fail to arouse in the spectator some vestige of erotic feeling” (Clark. K: 1956. P6), so clearly there are still some sexual connotations to do with a male spectator. To make the body more pleasing to the male viewer the
OUIL501
Amber Kaplan
body is distorted, though this may not be noticeable at a first glance, with further inspection it can be seen that the proportions are not correct, “in almost every detail the body is not the shape which art had led us to believe that it would be.” – (Clark, K: 1956. P4) The head is very petite and attached to a much longer torso than is natural. Of course some may say that as these are paintings there is some artistic licence and things aren’t meant to be precise. However since parts of the body have been elongated, such as the arms, and torso, to make the female body more pleasing to the male viewer it still is communicating a standard of beauty that is not realistic because real women would still identify with the female figure, and see that men find her beautiful. As afore mentioned, it is likely that the woman is created from a few different references, taking their most pleasing points and combining them which may be why the proportions do not fit together. Kenneth Clark says about this practice “we often cannot recombine them. [Body parts] They are right in their setting, organically, and to abstract them is to deprive them of that rhythmic vitality on which their beauty depends” (1956. P10) “No contemporary woman would have had such perfect alabaster skin, or such symmetrical features as was shown here. This idealisation gives us some idea of what fifteenth century Italian artists and their patrons considered beautiful: note the high forehead, the sharply defined chin, pale skin, strawberry blonde hair, high delicate eyebrows, strong nose, narrow mouth and full lips. She has a confident but delicate manner, typified by the positioning of her fingers. Her body is clothed but the diaphanous and sumptuous gown covers a full figure, with an ample bosom rounded abdomen and wide hips. She is a chimera taking the best bits from many sources” (Haughton, N: 2004. P230). This is in reference to Venus and Mars by Boticelli [Fig.2] and again shows the fact that imagery of women is created from several different models, as well as highlighting the beauty standards of the time. It states the fact that no woman of the time would have actually looked like the woman in the painting, highlighting the fact that the representation is an idealised form and not an attainable standard of beauty. Though the quote is in reference to a different image, it can easily be applied to Venus of Urbino [Fig.1], which suggests that the practice of the cut and pasted woman is widely used. Also the aesthetics of the two women are very similar, showing that the elements considered beautiful were reproduced to the point that women look the same. It could be said that both the images are a presentation of Venus, but as Venus is depicted as a beautiful woman she could be moulded to fit the beauty standards of any time.
[Fig.2]
OUIL501
Amber Kaplan
The subject of the image [Fig. 1] is depicted without any body hair, as most images depicting nude women particularly goddesses and nymphs are. Goya’s “The Nude Maja” includes a small amount of pubic hair, which was shocking at the time, as it was one of the first paintings to depict pubic hair. “Hair is associated with sexual power and passion” (Berger. J: 1972. P55) so removing the hair that grows naturally on women suggests that they are being stripped of sexual power, or dominance and transformed into a submissive, sexual object. Hairlessness is still a beauty standard for women, natural leg or pubic hair being considered disgusting or unsightly on women despite the fact that it is perfectly normal. Images of women throughout the ages keep perpetuating the thought of beauty linked to the hairless woman. Although it is probably not a conscious thought of the modern man, the fact that hair has been seen as equal sexual dominance could still be associated with hairlessness being the standard for women. Males are demanding sexually submissive females and on some level hairlessness is still an indicator of this.
Another indicator of submission is that the woman looks out of the painting at the viewer, passively. A lot of nude paintings were done of mistresses of kings, lords, etc. so they look at the viewer to show their submission to their owner (Berger. J: 1972). Even when there are other people present in the painting, the woman usually still looks out to the viewer, as if she is his and not belonging to anyone else. The expressions and positioning of the faces have been compared to models in pornographic magazines, backing up the point that these paintings are primarily made for the male spectator.
[Fig.3] This advert [Fig.3] is tailored towards men, selling a male body spray. It shows a partially clothed woman cooking, a traditionally female gendered role. Rather than showing an ideal of what men could be by using this product for example, an attractive or muscular man, a woman is shown as a prize or a challenge for the man. It is still intended to show what a man can attain by using the product, but as men are not taught that their value lies in their looks it is more effective to use a desirable woman to sell the product. The idea is that of “buy the product: get the girl”, which also
OUIL501
Amber Kaplan
became the message with classical paintings, “buy the image: get the girl” (Wykes, M. Gunter, B: 2005. P41). This series of adverts was actually banned due to it’s objectification of women. Similarly to the subjects of classical paintings, she is made to be an ideal woman for the male spectator. Her body has been enhanced and distorted into unrealistic proportions, thus displaying the most desirable parts of her in this case it being her buttocks, but also showing a good section of her breast as well. The woman faces the viewer, a characteristic prominent in classical painting as it turns the woman into a submissive object and desirable to the male spectator. Another similarity between the two images is the lack of body hair, although in this modern age it is heavily ingrained into the female psyche to be hairless, this could still be read as an indicator of male dominance and female submission particularly in the context of this advert. “These are male models of the female form which deny and disguise woman’s active, adult passion by removing her active, adult sexuality and the hirsuteness which symbolizes it” (Wykes. M. Gunter, B: 2005. P39). Both making the figure hairless, and passive in the image takes away any kind of active sexuality that a real woman may have, again keeping the male viewer dominant and perpetuating the ideal of a sexually passive woman who would live up to the needs of her man, without desires of her own. In regards to the concept that “men look at women. Women watch themselves being looked at” (Berger, J: 1972. P47) it can be applied this advert as a man would view it and see a beautiful woman as an object to be won. Whereas a woman viewing this advert would see how a man would enjoy the sight of this woman, this relates back to the idea that a woman doesn’t desire the subject as a man does, but identifies with her (Coward, R: 2000) The identification of a female viewer with the subject, whether it is in a painting or an advert, sets this presentation as a standard of beauty for women. If this were an advert aimed at women a female viewer would still see the beautiful woman from a mans perspective and thus the message being “buy the product to be like the girl to get your man” (Wykes, M. Gunter, B: 2005. P41) She is presented “as an ideal subject” (Berger 1972) rather than a real woman, separately each part of her is perfect; her face is beautiful, her skin is flawless, her body has fat distributed in all the desirable places, while still being thin. Much like the paintings, she is not real. Her body has been manipulated into this shape, giving an illusion that it flows seamlessly “disguising the fact that such images have almost invariably been artificially manipulated and developed. Computer technology has provided the capability of enhancing specific attributes and characteristics of models and actors to create an almost perfect, unblemished form, that nevertheless appears natural.” (Wykes, M. Gunter, B.: 2005. P154) Parts of this body definitely don’t read well under further inspection. The arms have been made slimmer in proportion to the body, skin blemishes will have been removed and it seems as if her behind and legs don’t quite connect to the rest of her the way they should. This is not a real achievable body; it is a representation of a woman made to cater to a male audience. A quote from Neil Haughton aforementioned applies to this image too, combining different parts takes away the natural flow of the body and thus at a first glance it may look fine but as a whole it’s an unsettling and unnatural representation of a woman. In both examples “The determining male gaze projects its phantasy onto the female figure, which is styled accordingly. In their traditional exhibitionist role women are simultaneously looked at and displayed, with their appearance coded for strong visual and erotic impact so that they can be said to connote to-be-looked-at-ness” – (Mulvey 1975: P10). The beauty of the women does not rest entirely on their looks but the fact that they have been made objects to satisfy the male audience. The composition of both images suggests the male spectator has walked in on the women doing something they shouldn’t have, arousing the viewer’s imagination, as they don’t appear to be explicitly erotic images. Of course there are images that break the mould of beauty standards. A notable classical painting is Manet’s Olympia [Fig. 4], which is considered a direct
OUIL501
Amber Kaplan
response to Titians Venus of Urbino. It pictures a nude prostitute in a more realistic way with, as an aggressive sexual subject rather than the neatly arranged, aesthetically pleasing object. The proportions are much closer to that of a real woman rather than having been elongated like most classical painting. In the modern age actresses such as Kate Winslet have spoken out against having their images digitally altered, she says “I think they [young women] do look to women who have been successful in their chosen careers and they want people to look up to, and I would always want to be telling the truth about who I am to that generation because they’ve got to have strong leaders. We’re all responsible for raising strong young women, so these are things that are important to me.” (Kate Winslet: 2015. Pink News) Perpetuation of unrealistic standards for so many years has caused detrimental effects on women, as the more these standards are shown the more women feel the need to self modify through diet, dress, makeup etc. In extreme cases this can lead to eating disorders, and even death. (Susan Bordo: 1997)
[Fig 4] From the theories of Berger (1972) and Mulvey (1975) it can be concluded that the representations of women in classical European nude paintings have informed modern beauty standards by existing as a recording of the beauty standards of the time, allowing the trends and ideals to be replicated in the future. Though there are a number of things that have changed, mainly the body shape as voluptuous women were considered beautiful in paintings whereas modern society favours a skinnier model. Both body types have been deemed unattainable and are unrealistic, having been stretched and edited into more desirable ratios. Marketing either as an achievable beauty standard teaches women that they are not good enough naturally. As we still live in a patriarchal society ideals for women continue to be based off the male gaze, and male dominance. Maggie Wykes and Barrie Gunter noted that though the nude went out of fashion in around the eighteenth century “the representation of women remain within a particular paradigm of ‘object of male gaze” (2005: page 40) Meaning characteristics and ideals of beauty that communicate being a submissive female are considered attractive, as it keeps men and masculinity dominant. A major point is the removal of hair from representations of females in both classical painting and modern advertising as it strips the female figure of her sexual dominance, handing it to the male viewer. Hairlessness is a predominant standard for beauty nowadays and it seems like this has become so engrained into modern culture that it is not
OUIL501
Amber Kaplan
consciously thought about as a marker of submission. Though it could be noted that there does seem to be a fear of body hair on women – perhaps as a marker of active sexuality rather than presenting as submissive, “it could well be maintained that it is womans sexuality, that which renders them desirable – but also threatening” (Neale, 1980, 61 as cited in The Monstrous Feminine. Creed. B: 1993. P5) Bibliography Berger, J. (1972). Ways of seeing. Clark, K. (1956). The nude. Great Britain: Penguin. Bordo, S. (1997) Body and the Reproduction of Femininity In Conboy, K., Medina, N. and Stanbury, S. (1997). Writing on the body. New York: Columbia University Press. Coward, R. (2001). The Look. In: Reading Images, Great Britain: Palgrave Publishing, pp.33 - 39. Creed, B. (1993). The monstrous-feminine. London: Routledge. Gauntlett, D. (2008). Media, gender, and identity. 2nd ed. London: Routledge. Haughton, N. (2004). (Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology) Perceptions of Beauty in Renaissance Art. 1st ed. [ebook] London: Blackwell Publishing, pp.229 - 233. Available at: http://sirl.stanford.edu/~bob/teaching/pdf/arth202/Haughton_Renaissance_beauty_JCosmeticD ermatology04.pdf [Accessed 23 Apr. 2016]. Joseph Patrick McCormick, P. (2015). Kate Winslet’s rejection of airbrushing sends the perfect message. [online] PinkNews. Available at: http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/10/23/katewinslets-rejection-of-photoshop-sends-the-perfect-message/ [Accessed 23 Apr. 2016]. Koloski-Ostrow, A. and Lyons, C. (1997). Naked truths: Women, Sexuality and Gender in Classical Art and Archaeology. London: Routledge Mulvey, L. (1975). Visual pleasure and narrative cinema. Park, K. (2006). Secrets of women. New York: Zone Books. Warner, M. (1985). Monuments & maidens. New York: Atheneum. Wolf, N. (1991). The beauty myth. New York: W. Morrow. Wykes, M. and Gunter, B. (2005). The media and body image. London: SAGE. Images Fig.1 – Vecelli, T. / Titian (1538). Venus of Urbino. [Oil on Canvas] Florence: Uffizi. Fig.2 – Botticelli, S. (circa. 1483). Venus and Mars. [Tempera on Panel] London: National Gallery. Fig.3 – Lynx advertisement (2011) [Online],Image available here http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2064946/Degrading-Lynx-adverts-featuring-LucyPinder-banned-watchdog.html [accessed 27/04/2016] Fig.4 – Manet, É. (1863). Olympia. [Oil On Canvas] Paris: Musée D'Orsay.