There’s been quite a bit of nude performance art around lately. Milo Moire has made an art form out of it (pardon the pun), with performances such as walking to Art Basel naked (see HERE), plopping an egg out of her vagina at Art Cologne (see HERE), and walking around an art exhibition naked while holding a baby (see HERE).
Luxembourg artist Deborah de Robertis also created quite a stir when she re-enacted Gustav Courbet’s painting “The Origin of the World” by revealing her vulva while sitting next to thos painting at Paris’ Musee d’Orsay (see HERE).
Photographer Erica Simone also decided to through her hat into the ring, stripping down to her birthday suit and strutting around New York sans clothes in her latest work Nue York.
According to Erica, this was was to convey the connection between humans and their clothes, and to break down taboos behind nudity:
“The way we dress tells a lot about us: who we want to be in society, who we want to assimilate with, how we want to be perceived, or simply is a way to be creative” Simone explains. “The thought of what life would be like if we didn’t have fashion to express ourselves or to interact with each other was an interesting concept that I felt an urge to convey photographically. I wanted to do it in a humorous and upbeat way and remove the traditional stigma of nudity being erotic.”
A portion of the sales from Nue York and print sales through the gallery will be donated to the charity organisation Beauty For Freedom, to combat human trafficking. Head here to purchase the book or a print.
650 dollars for the book !!!! Damn it’s good to be naked !!!!
People see a naked body and go nuts, lol, american puritanism is still well alive…
“Walk”? Riiiiight. More like a bunch of staged shots. Not well staged or well executed either. Sad.
The photography is amateurish at best. But I suppose the point of the project is the connection betwen people and clothes and the taboo of public nudity and not the photos themselves as art. I would be more impressed if the subject was an overweight person that did not fit “society’s” version of beauty, with scars and greasy hair or dirty feet and acne.
Crafting a frame is hard. Stretching canvas over that hand-wrought frame is harder. Coating it with Gesso is even harder. Then, thinking of something to paint on that canvas is REALLY hard. Oh and then, lone needs to develop the brush technique to actually paint it… oh, we give up, and get naked.
Nice try.
Madonna did it first in 1992 with her Sex book. She went all around Miami doing things like pumping gas and hitchhiking while nude. Original this is not.
As they say where I come from: Cualquier vaina.
The photo that she is shoveling snow, we can see that her butt is zero. The rest it is ok.
Oh, please do not come here to tell me that this is not relevant, or not nice!
Oh please, it yes, so why the hell was she is naked and exposed the photos to the public? For people can give an opinion about her body, opinion good ou not, otherwise, she would not expose it to the public.
Would sure love to snag that empty seat next to her on the flight!
No, it’s not art. It’s attention seeking at best. Another example of Woman looking for any excuse to bare all.
is it art? sure is. is it appropriate? not to the general masses. but then again controversial art (you know the stuff people remember long after it’s out of style/fashion/trend) rarely is appropriate for the masses.
I could have understood it if you were not an artist only photographer, but the photography is also not good girl! Too painful, but someday maybe it can work.
Yes really!!! ? Without the tattoo it could be good but this destroys the whole point. Just too symbolic (not just because of the tattoo).
Definitely not art, pornography only
I’d say somewhere in between. Nudity, as art has demonstrated numerous times, does not necessarily equal pornography, and as she is not performing any sexual acts, I think it fails on that alone. However, I am struggling to see the art in this. It looks like something that anyone could do, with a willing accomplice. It purports to be spontaneous too, whereas much of it clearly staged. It all feels a little gratuitous and pointless to me.
And pornography is art too …. It’s not because you don’t like something that it’s not art, you can just say I don’t like it.
Hey girl, here’s an idea for you, take pictures with your pussy. I recommend a Polaroid Cube! It’s good marketing.
awesome XD
I wonder how much she gets harassed and if she has security with her?
I think he really nailed it. I see the equiment as important attribute for the picture, but some ideas we don t need much focus to get to the point.
Pffff
Dude, your avatar just totally changed the meaning of your comment! :-D
art? not really. just the next body with an ass tattoo.
Art is subjective. You should realize, of course, that some of the “art” from the past wasn’t considered “art” at all by the people of the time, but simply the products of craftsmen. It is only later that people considered it “art.”
i recognize your point well. but there is a huge difference in the subject of art as expression of one’s perception with the appropriate amount of mental and physical effort invested, and a public act of nudity. in the last case ‘the art’ is God’s, or if you will ‘Nature’s’ gift. the mere demonstration of this necessity hardly makes it an ‘art’.
Agree 100% with your point.
I can’t help but wonder if artfido would have shared this if the subject was a hairy, naked man instead of a good looking chick with perky tits…?
doing stuff naked is not taboo anymore, they just act like it is
Is it just me, or are these photos not very good? Most of the photos suffer from lots of blur, flat colour and iso noise. I get that the photographer may be aiming for a raw, unedited look but in some of these the subject (naked girl) is not even in focus. Does having a trendy mission statement with (a little) shock value somehow override the idea that a photographer should have decent camera equipment and the knowledge of how to properly use it?
It’s just an another performer who seeks for a little bit of attention.
Well known photographers with decent works don’t have to walk around naked to get it :-)
haha, true! I wonder if artfido would have shared this if it was a hairy naked man instead of a good looking chick with perky tits…?
yup they would have
You really dont even need a decent camera, just make something interesting and the tech issues won’t be so obvious.
content + quality = 100%
Content = 99%
Quality = 100 – Content.
Yo.. young flat missie.. yo’ boobs can only take you so far..
I wonder.. all young girls think all male/boys are drooling when they see a pair of boobs?
Is there anything wrong in their family?
Are them having dady issues?
TF girls?
With slightly better composition the subway one could be great. The emotions on some of the passengers faces would have made this excellent, but all the interesting ones are blocked, blurred or half out of frame.
They’re actually good photos but the wrong cameras/ settings
She said it herself.. aiming to show a world without fashion.. she never once said anything about a world where every photo taken would need to be taken in high resolution. =P