For this blog I was assigned to argue as to why BYU should have displayed Rodin's The Kiss.
There are several reasons as to why BYU should have included The Kiss in their exhibit of Rodin's work.
First of all, for anyone who has studied the work of Rodin you would know that the artist strived to depict the human body in a realistic manner. This was not to create controversy nor to exploit the human body, but to appreciate it.
Secondly, being as The Kiss was originally a part of Gates of Hell and is considered one of his most famous works it would be a very important piece to include in any collection of Rodin's works. It is a beautiful piece that, compared to other nude sculptures, is not the least bit graphic in it's display. It is tastefully done and shows the passion of the anticipated kiss in the small details, without throwing it in your face. For the casual observer, it would be something that you would hardly notice walking by and easy to bypass if you wished to. The way that the figures are facing each other, it is hardly noticeable that the figures are even unclothed.
Basically, as with any piece of artwork, if you see that there is something that you might find offensive, don't look at it, pass by it and enjoy the other pieces around you. It's only as big of a deal as you make it.
I really liked your arguments! I agree that in the range of nude sculptures, this one is very mild. In my opinion, the piece is more emotionally passionate than pornographic. To compromise, there could even be measures taken to allow for discretion (such as displaying it in a separate room). Overall, I think that the piece holds more artistic and cultural value than is harmful.
ReplyDeleteI like the comment you made that it's only a big deal if you make it one. If the school had just displayed it, even if they had put it in a separate room, there wouldn't have been such a big fuss about it. Because the school censored its viewing, it drew people to wonder what was wrong with the piece, and put a lot more emphasis on it then on the work of Rodin as a whole.
ReplyDeleteFor a different perspective:
ReplyDeleteAs a man (even in my 30s!), I'd just like to say that my instinct would not lend it to be something that I "would hardly notice walking by"; and especially not when I was a teenager (in which I would be gaping at it.)
Visual representation of passionate, emotional, and/or sexual ideas is very powerful to many a male mind - that is why pornography is so addictive among us.
I agree! If we don't like it, pass it by! We all have our agency and if the statue was something that we felt was inappropriate then simply move on and don't look at it. A compromise could have even been made to have it roped off in a separate section so those with families didn't have to bring their children by if they so chose.
ReplyDeleteIt is kind of disappointing to think about a collection being on display with some of it's pieces missing. It makes it so incomplete and seems to take away from the experience as a whole.
ReplyDeleteI like how you said that they should all be displayed together. They were all created by one person and go with one another. As the person above said, it takes away from the experience as a whole.
ReplyDelete