UK channel to show full frontal nudes in afternoon slot

[the_ultimate_evil]

Channel 4 nudes: Life drawing series will show full frontal nudity before 6pm

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 1:18 AM on 13th April 2009

* Comments (53)
* Add to My Stories


Channel 4 is to broadcast life drawing classes featuring nude models on afternoon television.

The station says it wants to revive interest in more traditional forms of art however the move will cause controversy as the programme will show full-frontal male and female nudity before the 9pm watershed.

Viewers of Life Class: Today’s Nude will be able to sketch models from home, while an expert will give pointers throughout the programme.
Woman Drawing Nude

The five-part Channel 4 series aims to reawaken an interest in more traditional forms of art

The five-part series, called Life Class: Today’s Nude, will air in July, before 6pm.

The idea for the show came from artist Alan Kane who said Channel 4 had no concerns at all 'because it's educational and nonsexualised nudity,' he said.

Kane is a conceptual artist but was inspired by life drawing and said the art form has diminished so much that it has even come off the agenda at some art schools.

Tracey Emin, the artist shortlisted for the Turner prize for showing her unmade bed, attended life drawing classes for seven years and was also a nude model.

John Beyer, of viewing standards group Mediawatch-UK, claimed Channel 4 had 'an obsession with sex and nudity'.

But John Whittingdale, the Tory chairman of the Commons culture select committee, said that, in principle, he would not object to nude life drawing classes before 9pm if they were in an 'educational context' and avoided 'gratuitous titillation'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-Life-drawing-series-frontal-nudity-6pm.html

i don't know it could be interesting for anyone who is into art, but the moral brigade is going to explode

 

[Drizzle]

Out of all the people who are going to watch that show, probably only 2% will actually watch it to draw the models.

 

[Lord Valumart]

i honestly see no problem with this...

it's art, nothing is really being sexualised so why should we be bothered by it

 

[the_ultimate_evil]

i honestly see no problem with this...

it's art, nothing is really being sexualised so why should we be bothered by it

i agree but these are the same people that ***** and moan about every little thing they can

 

[Lord Valumart]

i agree but these are the same people that ***** and moan about every little thing they can

those people are called christians

 

[Doctor Jones]

It will probably have fat or old chicks. Don't hold your breath.

 

[terry78]

i honestly see no problem with this...

it's art, nothing is really being sexualised so why should we be bothered by it

Gay.



Ain't that always the default response to something like that though?

 

[Cunning Stunts]

i honestly see no problem with this...

it's art, nothing is really being sexualised so why should we be bothered by it

I wouldn't have a problem with it at all, but the problem isn't the TV show putting a sexual spin on it, it's the people tuning in.

 

[Kane52630]

those people are called christians

*Rimshot*

 

[Addendum]

i don't know it could be interesting for anyone who is into art, but the moral brigade is going to explode

And so will mom and dad when all the kleenex is used up

 

[SuperFerret]

I understand it's for art and not intended to be sexualized. I also understand that people are (in general) fascinated with sex and will sexualize it.

Therefore, I ask, why must the models be nude?

 

[Cunning Stunts]

It makes it much easier to draw. It's much easier for artists to add form on top of form than it is to try to place form under other forms. Especially if you're using the model as a base for something like comics, where it's highly likely that what the model is wearing is not going to be what you draw.

 

[SuperFerret]

So why not something skin tight that'll cover the "naughty bits"? Or just draw what you know is under the clothes and draw the clothes on top of it?

 

[Matt.S99]

Because they arent immature and nudity doesnt bother them. And they want to draw the natural human body, not pretend.
I myself, as an artist and art lover see no problem with this at all.

 

[terry78]

Because they arent immature and nudity doesnt bother them. And they want to draw the natural human body, not pretend.
I myself, as an artist and art lover see no problem with this at all.

Shut up, hippie. What you need is a good hitch in Iraq for a couple years, straighten out that nudie streak.

 

[SuperFerret]

Because they arent immature and nudity doesnt bother them. And they want to draw the natural human body, not pretend.
I myself, as an artist and art lover see no problem with this at all.

Yet art is all about the imagination, isn't it? The issue isn't about the intended audience being immature, it's the unintended audience. Preteen boys, for instance, don't need any sexualization in the nude form to be driven to *********ion. For example, medical textbooks and encyclopedias are the usual pre-porn fap fodder for preteens.

 

[Drizzle]

Actual photo of the models:

 

[Johann Krauss]

lol

 

[Matt.S99]

Shut up, hippie. What you need is a good hitch in Iraq for a couple years, straighten out that nudie streak.

Lol, yeahno.

Yet art is all about the imagination, isn't it? The issue isn't about the intended audience being immature, it's the unintended audience. Preteen boys, for instance, don't need any sexualization in the nude form to be driven to *********ion. For example, medical textbooks and encyclopedias are the usual pre-porn fap fodder for preteens.

Lol, well either way, I dont see anything wrong with it.

 

[Cunning Stunts]

So why not something skin tight that'll cover the "naughty bits"? Or just draw what you know is under the clothes and draw the clothes on top of it?

Because I just said in the post before yours, it's a lot harder to add form under the form you're replicating on paper, as opposed to being able to mimic the form in its purest. On top of that, the form won't come out nearly as accurate as it would if you were actually looking at it.

Skin-tight is usually the best option for those who are either too immature or too uncomfortable with seeing a nude body, but to be honest, I'd rather see nothing covering what I'm aiming to draw, and have complete freedom to add stuff on top of the body instead of having to use guesswork to guess what certain body parts appear like in a given position, etc.

If you can get the model into the exact (or near exact) articles of clothing you wish to put on your subject on your paper/your canvas/whatever you're using, that's obviously the best option. If you only have one model or a series of models, and don't have the money and/or means to acquire said costumes, props, etc., having a nude model is by far the most efficient way to start.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Out of all the people who are going to watch that show, probably only 2% will actually watch it to draw the models.

until they realize it will be boring as hell, and you might as well go watch porn.... has anyone actually taken a life drawing class? majority of the models are not lookers, they might have beautifully shaped bodies, but ugh... there far from centerfolds.

i honestly would fine it pathetic for anyone over the age of 15 to be "enjoying" this.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

So why not something skin tight that'll cover the "naughty bits"? Or just draw what you know is under the clothes and draw the clothes on top of it?

skin tight, means just that.. TIGHT, it miss-shapens the body.

 

[Two-Face]

Well done CH4

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Yet art is all about the imagination, isn't it? The issue isn't about the intended audience being immature, it's the unintended audience. Preteen boys, for instance, don't need any sexualization in the nude form to be driven to *********ion. For example, medical textbooks and encyclopedias are the usual pre-porn fap fodder for preteens.

if pre-teen boys are going to see it, there going to see it.. i dont see why pre 9pm makes much of a difference then post 9pm, the teen or tween is going to watch it or porn any way they can.

please i remember as a kid getting turned on by the simplest things.. hell the sex scene in titanic got me going.

 

[Cunning Stunts]

until they realize it will be boring as hell, and you might as well go watch porn.... has anyone actually taken a life drawing class? majority of the models are not lookers, they might have beautifully shaped bodies, but ugh... there far from centerfolds.

i honestly would fine it pathetic for anyone over the age of 15 to be "enjoying" this.

Hell, even models in the reference books at art book stores aren't too pretty. I usually use DeviantArt for modeling purposes, to be honest.