Friday, 22 August 2008

Headless

What does a man see in an erotic image - is it different to what a woman sees? I think it well may be. This week I took some of my latest erotic drawings to a gallery where I'm hoping to get my pictures hung. This gallery features a lot of good quality artwork but erotic art is new to them. I was happy with the quality and standard of the artwork and would have been delighted if the gallery had accepted them then and there, hung them on their walls and a week later said they'd sold them all and could I produce another 20 images because they were so popular (well, I can dream, can't I!???!). But the gallery owner didn't say that, what he said was that he wasn't happy with the generic faces I put on my drawings. Not even the fact that I might only put in the mouth and an eyebrow, even that was too much. Because it was "somebody" even then. What he wanted was them to be headless, ideally. Just torsos. Ok, I can do that, no problem. But I'm not convinced he's right in his decision. Because, for me, the image is made by the emotion in the picture, and that is depicted usually by the face. To me, to make them headless renders them just as a body - just a pair of tits, or an arse, an item, a characterless, faceless "object". And I think that's the difference between men and women - women want the emotion in the picture, men just want the item. I shall be interested to see how the pictures come out - and if they're accepted at the gallery, how they are welcomed. And if they do sell, who buys them. Just men? And what the feedback is. Because I'm not convinced, not at all!

This weeks image is with head (!) and is another of the white on black drawings with just a hint of red - this time at the mouth, as the woman is putting on her lipstick. She's wearing a black slip, with one of the straps fallen down over her shoulder, one of her legs raised up, the other on the floor. I think the pose makes her look a bit sluttish - isn't it only bad girls who wear scarlet lipstick? Maybe. I like the shapes of her body against the black background and black underwear. Its called "Lip service" and I'm happy with that as a title.
Right, better get my rubber out and remove some heads - decapitations here I come!! :)

16 comments:

Luka said...

I'm with you, Jackie. I find facial expressions to be immeasurably more arousing than just a disembodied torso.

It could well be a male thing. Look at most porn - extreme close-ups of the naughty bits, lots of pistoning action, with the face really only having a role to play at the end, for the obligatory finale.

Trust your instincts, they're usually spot on.

Jackie Adshead said...

Luka - I think it might be a male thing - although I've just been chatting with a male friend about this and he says he much prefers a face rather than a headless torso.

As for my instincts, I'm having to go slightly against them to do these new images, but I'll try them and see how they turn out. I may learn something!

Cormac Mac Art said...

For myself, when it comes to visual erotic art, I prefer it over real hardcore porn. When I masturbate (which I do a lot) I prefer something in the line of Playboy, Helmut whatsisname, and other works in a similar tone.

Disembodied torsos just don't do it for me, no more than anything crassly vulger. I seem to be a lot more sensous than most guys - something many of my girls have told me - without lessening my love of fully-on sexuality.

Women in general turn me on, but if I don't get turned on by a woman's face I won't even bother.

Spiky Zora Jones said...

Hum...I think he has something but at the same time does it fit with where you want your art to advance to.
Do you have a camera...take it wwith youas you go about, take photos of people women men especially of youthink they are sexy...askm them of youhave to...then draw ad expand on it. images after all sometimes are in your mind ready to become light and lines.

I saw a Misha lenn piece called...Nine great jazz classics 2005. take a look at it, if you can find it. Maybe in the ionternet. I like the sytle and with your direction in erotic art...you can take it further with your style...I would love to see you paint a woman in the nude playing a cello...how hot that would be...God I have to get back to my art. I just have these vision in my head...ready to put on canvas or paper. lines, colors with shadows that fade to the background.

I think you will do wonderfully sweets. usually a man is a visual creature. He seems to want the combination of visual that induces the imagination.

I like the painting.

have a fab weekend sweets...

Jackie Adshead said...

Cormac mac art - Yes, and I think you've summed up erotic art in that comment - the senusal eroticness of it is far more of a turn on than full on porn. And I agree with you that the eroticness of the woman is shown in her face and the expression on it and that adds to what her body is doing.

Jackie Adshead said...

Spiky - I'll try the idea to see if it works for me - I'm not fully convinced on it at the moment, but when I work it through as a drawing it may have that *Wow* factor.

Yes I have a camera and often take photos of things that inspire me - erotic and otherwise.

I love the idea of the nude woman playing the cello - those lovely lines echoing each other as she loveingly caresses the beautiful instrument, her legs slightly apart, her head bent low as she concentrates.... MMm.... I can really go with that!!!

Yes you're right abotu men being visual creatures, firing up their imaginations, thanks for that comment, its very useful.

nitebyrd said...

I don't understand the gallery owners opinion. I want a face or hint of a face because it makes the figure more personal. He/she may remind me of someone and it's the features, clear or muted, that will bring that feeling more into perspective.

I love your lady with the scarlet lips!

Jackie Adshead said...

Nitebyrd - Yeh, I like the personal details in the pictures too because it evokes the feeling and emotion easier and clearer than anything else.

And I'm delighted you like the scarlet lipped lady!

hornymaleuk said...

I would like to give a male point of view....
I much prefer to see faces if possible. It makes the person more real. It doesn't matter if it is a "normal" image, an erotic image, or pornography. I like to see the face every time. The face gives an insight into the state of mind of the person.

Jackie Adshead said...

Hornymaleuk - I agree with you - the face says it all. Thankyou for your male point of view, its much appreciated!

Indigo said...

Hmmm...! I much prefer a face with expression than a body with out a head, who is this artist, is this man for real? Would he make love to a headless woman?.. in other words a corpse, 'cus to me that's what it'd be like, a picture of a woman minus its head, no way!!

Jackie Adshead said...

Indigo - Yes, you're right, it is like making love to a corpse - the face gives a body expression and life.

Racy Redhead said...

Hmmm ..... I know that you'd like to get your work displayed in this gallery Jackie, but are you not tempted to go back to them and explain the significance of the facial expressions in your work?

Thinking along these lines, I'm rather into masks at the moment. They can hide features but can still show emotion - an eye half closed in ecstacy or lips parted in anticipation ....

Ooooh, must stop. Getting far too carried away with that.

Love the picture .... x

Jackie Adshead said...

Racy - Yes, I've fast come to the conclusion that for me erotic art is very much an emotional thing depicted by facial expressions, even if its not the full face - just the way a head is held, or way the mouth is opened can depict that emotion. And I don't need to paint the whole facial expression to show that - which is sort of going along with what you mean with your mask comment.

An Artist Exposed said...

The hint of face and personality surly makes the work much more erotic. I have never painted/drawn headless torsos and have never been asked to by a gallery. I think that the gallery owner has the problem. Just cite the nude in western art back to the renaissance. I don't recall our forebears being pressured to keep the body separate from the personality. You have the right idea. If the gallery owner does not like it - he can fuck off, if you will excuse the expression.

Jackie Adshead said...

An artist exposed - I agree about the face and personality making the pose more erotic - even just the hint of it is enough. Thankyou for saying I have the right idea - its certainly something I feel very strongly about - although I hope I can get the gallery owner to see it without having to resort to the "fuck off" comment!!! :)