Watch Classic Paintings Come To Life

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Zenephobe wrote:

Before I view your video and answer your questions, I must ask, what are the reasons humans of any sex do anything? Is it not true that males strive to be successful in order to mate? Is it not true that females strive to be attractive to attract a mate? There are exceptions, of course, but if you recognize human nature for what it is, what can be the explanation for depicting nude children as art?

---

Although I've no kids, I am familiar with the special relationship between mothers and their children. I was a child. I have a mother. Images (such as that shown in Dr. Brown's TED talk) depict such relationships, and evoke nurturing feelings in me (against my will, dammit! ;-). I'd consider a well done example of that as art. There are countless iconic images of fathers holding their naked newborn children aloft. It's a declaration of victory over the odds and a celebration of life, as both maternal and infant mortality rates were (and in some places still are) tragically high.

Equatorial peoples have no need for the clothing we wear in harsher climates. Until the arrival of puritan missionaries, they were content to live their lives in the buff. Any art produced by such cultures would necessarily be filled with images of naked people of all ages engaging in everyday life, and evocative of the wide range of emotions and experiences that mark human existence.

I think you are too narrowly focused on sexual reproduction. Once the kids are born, propagation of the species is best served by getting them into adulthood to carry on themselves. If you've ever raised a kid, you'll know that you have to strive for a hell of a lot more than a mate to make that happen. That was the easy part, even I could do it. People do things for as many reasons as there are people.

If you're going to make the argument that naked = sexual, you're on the wrong side of history.

[Pamela Galli]

I watched the TED talk, very interesting. As long as we are veering  off topic anyway -- it has a great deal of relevance to what makes SL so appealing to so many of us. (As a former teacher it also has a great deal of relevance to education, but I will save that for another thread.)

Within a few days of first exploring SL, I realized I felt like I was playing just as I had as a child. That feeling intensified when I began making furnishings, because much of my creative play as a child was making doll furnishings out of cardboard. It felt exactly the same. I felt like I was eight years old. And it was addictive. I kept trying to explain the powerfulness of this experience to my family, who just thought I had "become addicted to a video game". (When I announced I had decided to end my teaching career to make things in SL full time, they thought I had gone comepletely round the bend.)

As the video makes clear, there is a strong connection between play and learning. Not to over generalize, but people who get SL, and find it enduringly fascinating, are ones who have retained the ability to play and an appetite for learning. 

 

Just a really fascinating subject.

 

[Kenbro Utu]

---

A3123 wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

A3123 wrote:

That an artist could paint a nude child from their imagination is just as disturbing as the rest of this thread.

---

And again, you still have not answered the question, "Why is it wrong, or as you stated in this post, "disturbing?"

 

---

It saddens me, although it does not surprise me, that an answer has to be stated to the question, "Why is it wrong or disturbing to view or depict naked children." (Other than as medical aids or fields of that nature). 

 

---

Just to clarify, I stated that for medical aids is one reason, I did not say it was the only reason.  I grew up in a time when culture dictated that the picture of a naked child in a family photo album was appreciated for the innocence depicted by a child unashamed of their natural state.  They were born that way after all.  When I first saw your post about "child porn," in response to the classic beauty I took in, my first thought was "what kind of depraved mind would see any of that content as sexual?"  It never occurred to me to see it that way.  Perhaps this says more about you than you care to admit.  

[Dillon Levenque]

"If you've ever raised a kid, you'll know that you have to strive for a hell of a lot more than a mate to make that happen. That was the easy part."

Good line. :-)

The nice thing about all that is that doing so is its own reward.

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

I watched the TED talk, very interesting. As long as we are veering  off topic anyway -- it has a great deal of relevance to what makes SL so appealing to so many of us. (As a former teacher it also has a great deal of relevance to education, but I will save that for another thread.)

Within a few days of first exploring SL, I realized I felt like I was playing just as I had as a child. That feeling intensified when I began making furnishings, because much of my creative play as a child was making doll furnishings out of cardboard. It felt exactly the same. I felt like I was eight years old. And it was addictive. I kept trying to explain the powerfulness of this experience to my family, who just thought I had "become addicted to a video game". (When I announced I had decided to end my teaching career to make things in SL full time, they thought I had gone comepletely round the bend.)

As the video makes clear, there is a strong connection between play and learning. Not to over generalize, but people who get SL, and find it enduringly fascinating, are ones who have retained the ability to play and an appetite for learning. 

 

Just a really fascinating subject.

 

---

I come from a playful family. Mom and Dad made a puppet theater for me, and participated in endless puppet dramas (SL's got nothing on my puppet's romances). We made snowmen, carved pumpkins, built sandcastles, danced in summer rains and all slept in my treehouse. I should have measured Dad before setting the dimensions, he slept with his feet out the door and never let me forget it.

The distinction between adult and child was particularly fuzzy in our family. I think it still is, even though I'm 43 and Mom is 85. We built our last snowman... about three weeks ago. The neighbor kids have yet to come outdoors.

Throughout my career, I've advocated the value of play, though not with the authority of Stuart Brown. There's a book in my personal technical library called "Serious Play: How the World's Best Companies Simulate to Innovate".

Pamela, SL is most certainly a wondrous playground for people like you and me. I'm glad you found this place and made a go of it and are once again playing as you did when a child. If and when SL fades away, remember the joy of creation and of sharing your vision with others.

When I was in college, I saw an episode of the Twilight Zone that steeled my resolve to surround myself with playful people...

When I take the cardboard out to the curb for recycling tomorrow (brrr, it'll be -10F) I'll wonder what things we could have crafted for our Barbie dolls, and whether mine would have thumbed her nose at my barn to move into your beautifully furnished house.

;-)

[Dillon Levenque]

I was still hanging around the Forum and saw this post. I hadn't actually watched the TED clip because I had a pretty good idea what it was about; your comments confirm that. If Stuart's preaching play he won't need to convert me: I"m over here in the choir, as you well know.

SL has not opened up more play opportunities for me: I find ways to play all the time. Always have, always will. What it has done is introduce me to an entire world full of other people who enjoy it as much as I do.

 

[A3123]

Interesting, I wonder how many of you posters have actually watched the video link, and if so, how could you have gotten past the two minute mark and not seen it as an overtly sexual erotic depiction of nude children?

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

A3123 wrote:

Interesting, I wonder how many of you posters have actually watched the video link, and if so, how could you have gotten past the two minute mark and not seen it as an overtly sexual erotic depiction of nude children?

---

I did say I thought the video was a sophomoric misinterpretation of the originals, and that the animator was perhaps both ignorant and  a little immature. I don't see malice. Rather it seems like a young man intent on showing his prowess with Photoshop and After Effects.

I think this is yet another demonstration of Hanlon's Razor. I'm just thankful I wasn't the one giving the demonstration this time.

[Dresden Ceriano]

For the sake of argument, I'm going to assume that God does indeed exist.  As such, I would find it extremely difficult to believe that said God would consider the image of a naked child to be in any way, shape or form disturbing.  Simply because, as far as I know, they are not born wearing leotards.

...Dres

[KarenMichelle Lane]

I've been following this thread for a bit now and after all the declarations, debates &  arguments I find one thing present in this work of art:

An interpretive work of digital art built on the classic art of the masters.

The video site's commentary regarding the creator [The earth-based one, not the universe one] says it all.

"Old paintings are often admired, but sometimes the viewer wants more. Sure, you can tell a story through stills and photos that don’t move, but what if you had the ability to make them move even after they've been completed hundreds of years ago?

Rino Stefano Tagliafierro, a skilled Italian animator and artist, took it upon himself to recreate some of our most favorite works of art in a recent short film called “Beauty.”

The visual captures the essence of an old painting with the shine and swiftness of a quality HD film made today. Check out the stunning visual below."

 

It's my belief that Rino represents a view, held by many, that there is a new generation of people who are needy of an enhanced view of the world. Why? Because they have grown up with this visual HD technology all their lives. With proper education and training, they too can expand their view of the world and its artistic creations from the POV of the artist and his audience.

Now this said, I enjoyed his efforts. Maybe not as much as the joy experienced seeing the originals in person or in a well crafted Art Book but joy nonetheless.  Now if this allows another generation of art appreciators to be spawned, then this is wonderful. Hopefully the desire to understand the masters methods, inspirations and motivations will follow as well.

As for the side track thread that this interpretive assembly represents some form of child abuse or sexual deviance, posh. There is a saying that covers this - "Testis in uno falsus, in nullo fidem meretur or Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus"

Carry on all.