Nude Studies by Maureen Gallagher

Nude Studies by Maureen Gallagher

From Nude Studies by Maureen Gallagher
From LensWork #13
© 1996 Maureen Gallagher. All rights reserved.
Reproduced with the permission of the photographer.

Commentary
Yes, this photograph is by that Maureen Gallagher — whom I delightfully can refer to as my co-editor here at LensWork and more importantly as my partner in life. We were married in 1992 and, quite literally, nine months later published the first issue of LensWork, which explains quite a bit, I suppose.

Maureen was, for number of years in her youth, a bodybuilder. Through this discipline, she developed an understanding of the human body that is slightly different than someone not similarly experienced. She has a sensitivity to the human form and the creative process of posing that is, quite naturally, the result of an extraordinary discipline and uncommon experience. It can be seen so clearly in this nude — one of the most popular LensWork Special Editions images we've ever produced.

There is so much to talk about in this image – the mysterious and invisible support that holds her suspended in mid-darkness; the gesture of each hand, each amazingly sensual in their own and completely different ways; the ballet-like pointing of her toes and the marvelous sheen and that lower toenail; the line of mountainous ribs just in front of the fecund shape of her feminine breast — all of which combines to make an incredibly sensual moment.

What is of particular importance in this image is how all of this combines to create such a sensual image without being overtly sexual. This is the problem with nudes in photography. Far too many photographers mistake sexuality with sensuality, hence the ubiquitous cheesecake nude. We always cringe when we see a portfolio of nudes that leans heavily across the line of soft porn — the come-hither look, the "here's my rear" over the shoulder glance, the sexually charged hair and makeup, the unnaturally arched back. It's a formula that's been "perfected" to maximize sexual arousal. It obviously works with a legion of teenage boys who far too often grow up to become teenage photographers in their fifties. It's also a gender thing — men photographing nude women is an entirely different genre of photography than women photographing nude women.

Clearly I don't speak for the world at large, but sexually charged photography always strikes me as the photographic equivalent of dewy spider webs, or scenic mountain lake reflections, or backlit seagulls on an old piling — the incredibly trite cliché that says far more about the photographer's lack of imagination than anything else.

I'm not a prude, but I do clearly differentiate between the worlds of sexual photography and sensual photography. The former always seems to me to appeal to the base instincts and present an adolescent view of life. In contrast, sensual photography seems to delight in the human form in ways that seem far more mature and sensitive. Perhaps this explains why there are so few nude portfolios published in LensWork — we simply do not see many submissions of nudes where sensuality is the focus rather than sexuality.

The portfolio can be seen in its entirety in our back issues — print (while still available) and our PDFs for computer, iPad, Android, and other devices. Plus, bonus audio commentary about this image is available to full-access members of LensWork Online.

Discussion
Add your comments and observations to the discussion by using the "Comments" link at the bottom of this post.

Comments

[Jim Bullard]

Just a day or so ago a friend on Google+ referred me to a site with some nudes. They were mostly B&W, technically well executed and not 'sexual' in the poses but frankly most of them didn't appeal to me because so many of the poses were so contorted that they weren't sensual either. I've experienced the same thing in life drawing classes where the model assumes some position that you can't imagine anyone actually arranging their body like that for any reason except to "pose".

[Leigh Youdale, Sydney.]

I agree with the comments on sexual vs sensual, and also about contorted poses.
Some time ago I wanted to try some nude photography. Not having any experience or knowledge on how to go about it I signed up for some "glamour" workshops. They were all pretty much the same artificial poses and and an approach that wasn't what I had in kind at all.
I attended three and then gave up the idea. Apart from the poor models trying to respond to six or eight photographers each calling out for "look here" or "do this or do that" it became apparent that it was the same bunch of photographers each time, they all had "Pro" DSLR's with huge zoom telephotos and their approach was to hold down the shutter button on rapid fire at every opportunity. Most of them were going home with about 300-400 images. I use film and went home with six!
Just didn't work for me.

[Gerry Coe]

I loved that series of nudes and I bought that print. It hangs with pride on my wall of B&W
photographs. It never loses its appeal. Nice to see it again.

[Grant]

As Ansel Adams pointed out, photographing nudes is not an easy task. There have been many attempts by many photographers, with a full range of results. Not many attempts would hold up to this nude. In my view this photograph will endure as long as any Weston print. It is extraordinary and spectacularly beautiful. Maureen deserves lots of kudos for this one.

[christian]

Hi Leigh, I 'do nudes' every now and then and can't imagine anything more horrible than a 'nude workshop' or for that matter a 'portrait workshop.' I think when working with individual people it needs to be as much on a one-to-one basis as possible. If the photographer can't establish some kind of rapport, understanding, or caring interaction, the photos very probably won't be any good. Now, if you are really an outstanding photographer you can probably get away with things like yanking the cigar out of Churchill's mouth or telling the Duke and Duchess of Windsor that you are late because your taxi hit a dog, and still come away with a fantastic photo, but.....

[Neeley Jr v FCC, et al]

.Ms Gallagher,

This is a well done "figurenude" image and is in keeping with not glamorizing or identifying the person and not stimulating the viewer sexually by design.

Presenting the natural shape of the human figure is a trap for outstanding visual artists like yourself. AA did not publish nudes. RB did, but also did still-life photographs. Regardless of how the figure is presented naked; Presenting the naked figure is wrong on its face. Presentation of a naked figure and is not proper to display to minors. The beauty of the naked figure is, without any question, overriding and creates a lifelong responsibility for the artist.