Sta.sh
The idea behind nudity is that every man (and secretly 90% of women) get aroused by women nudity. We all like a naked breast or a women's buttocks and there's no secret in that - most of the good art revolves around nudity, illusion of nudity or sex. And, more importantly, behind a nude picture or a nude portrait there's always a young (or old, we don't judge) woman anxious to drop her clothes and gain universal praise. Vive l'art! we undress and die for it! But then again, I would be hypocrite for judging women that give us the possibility to admire their bodies. I have not a problem with them, and I don't judge, only admire
My problem is the nude spectator, the aroused admirer that exclaims: "Wonderful shot!". And because they want to look art-savvy they drop in some lines like: "Great lighting, amazing colors!". It doesn't matter that most of the nudes greeted like that are really poor quality and usually cheap pornography sold as art. No, it doesn't matter, "great lighting" is the compliment paid with one hand, no applause. Hooray, hooray! will shout the spectators when they get a sneak preview to the virginal forms of their artistic friends. When one comments "great lighting" to a nude, he usually means "I want to fuck you". It would be a bit more discouraging for the occasional stripper-for-art if they would see what the sudden surge in page views really means. Maybe the honesty would also mean that less occasional strippers-for-art will make you enjoy the PRIVATE pleasure of their nudity. Which a lot of pseudo-artists don't get, but I won't name them since they wouldn't get it anyway. And they are not alone.
Again, I don't dispute the qualities of the nudists YET, but that of the spectator. Obviously, no guy would ever say to a girl "you look awful naked". Obviously, not pre-ludium. He will say stuff like "great lighting", or "wow, amazing shot" but if you show him a really well lit picture of a flower or of a building, he will not be able to recognize it (I don't dispute dogs and cats, even trashy pictures are beautiful when they show cats and dogs, lighting doesn't matter there). And that comes really from lack of critical spirit (but more on that later).
And now I take on the strippers-for-art. Well, most of them are just fishing for compliments, even if the compliments are 'amazing lighting'. Most of them are skinny - malnourished and abused bodies. It seems for some reason that most of the strippers-for-art are skinny and they don't have breasts - bigger breasts are considered pornography, smaller ones are considered art; plus the uglier the body, the more artistic it is. Gah! Also, there is little place for true criticism in their productions. Sure, they will react to what you say negatively - but after you criticize the third or fourth nude they get all scruffy. I remember this deviant that had a photo shoot in the middle of the winter in the forest (dafuq?) and most of the pictures were really really bad. And the photographer was meant to be a very very good one, but the pictures were bad as hell. When I had the nerve to call some of her pictures badly framed and overexposed it was 'kick/ban' for life. And that's not the only case. Most of the strippers-for-art have the biggest ban lists, but that ban lists contain lots of people criticizing their leg-spreading business, not just your usual 'dA is porn' folk.
Most of these strippers-for-art are either attention-whores, and those who resist (and usually marry a photographer that 'photo-shoots' all her girlfriends just like all his photographer friends 'photo-shoot' her; for the sake of experiment and art, don't forget!) are doing it for money. But again I don't judge, it's a business. I have a problem with lack of true artistic vision and with the attention whoring that makes dA so polluted with nudes.
Enough about this because I get very very bitter and upset about the state of photography. Frankly, I joined dA for the sake of literature, and this is where it gets really really sad. I will talk mostly about Romanian 'writers', since they are the ones that I read more often.
Most of dA writers are authors of infamous small poetry. Most of the time, the poetry doesn't rhyme because there would be too much thought into chasing a certain rhythm or a certain feeling given by the type of rhyme. White verse is the easiest. Allow me to explain with the first paragraph of this post (with small adjustments):
"This post is
a translation of sorts
of the previous post
that I felt I wanted to leave
intact.
It's all about the light, I complained.
It was sort of a status of deviantArt
as a means of communication
between artists
which it isn't
and if it is it's sex driven
and frankly it becomes tiresome
to see the same routine
going on.
Yes, sure,
people might complain that I am hypocrite
for criticizing dA
after my 6 years relationship
that started on dA
and ended late
last year.
Complain,
do move on."
Friggin' morons, THIS is not art. This is random chatter split into convenient lines because you can't fucking focus on a single phrase at a time. Most of the poems are boring self-documenting phrases that are idiotically split and made to 'sound' full of feelings. I get it, you're depressed. You're 14 or 16, you're living the best time of your life and you're depressed. You're crying for lost love just like you're crying for spilled milk. Do you know how boring it is to be in a long relationship? If you don't, look at your parents. Love is not the answer, move on. Seriously. And those that think there's nothing to live for: you morons, look at the world around you. Every fucking thing is magnificent compared to non-existence. If I see any suicidal 14 year old posting his suicidal notes for every other 14 year old to become depressed and suicidal, I'll personally offer a good smacking. For free.
We can leave one or two to slide. Sure, they are young artists, and even Eminescu had his bad poetry in his younger days. Hell, the world is full of bad poetry. What bothers me is really the persistence in writing this kind of bad poetry with no aim. If you're serious about poetry, do keep your poetry and publish it on paper. Post one or two of your poems on dA - but please, don't let us stand in your way towards immortality by forcing us to tell you that your poetry is bad. I learnt that I should stop saying some people's poetry is bad because it makes them cringe. I did that, but I see no improvement.
The second step for any writer is the thoughtful text. It's not a short story, no, they are too good for that. It's a fragment. They give us a fragment. First of all, it's a fragment if there's more where that comes from, but you only want to give us a teaser. It usually isn't. Second, you have texts fully charged of nonsensical 'feelings'. It's not real whatever they write - you feel it because you can recognize the lies 16 year-olds usually tell themselves. It's the usual: my life is the worst, or my love is forever lost (vorbim de cocalarul de la etajul 3 - too delicious not to say it in Romanian), or I'm so high and so edgy that I do shit that every 16 year old does at this age: I get drunk, stoned and write about trips!
This is not literature, kids. Literature is something else. When is the last time you read books full of half-a-page passages so full of bullshit? Close to never? Ok.
The other kind of deviants that really annoy me are those that write for themselves, that write things so cryptic that nobody can understand a thing unless they know all the accidents the writer suffered in his life: you know, he sprained his ankle when he was 6, he cut himself with paper in the fourth grade, he thought 'love' is not a synonym for 'sex' but something pure and true and shit like that. And they produce these long useless introspections into their own screwed up universe that makes no sense for anyone. You ask them what it's about, and they say: "fuck you, you don't get ART!", all acting secretive. And when I tell you your text is shitty, I get a "what do you know about LOVE???". A lot, moron, I'm better than you. At least I write things that most people understand.
Which reminds me that I wanted to tell you about criticism. I rarely do it because unfortunately there's no content that deserves a full critique. I can't comment enough about photography or anything visual (probably because I am visually impaired), but I could do it about text. Unfortunately, most of it is undeserving crap. Most of them they think themselves the new Neil Gaiman, or the new Palahniuk, Pamuk or whatever is trending this month. If you point them the obvious that this is not the case, they just act like whiny kids.
The first filter is always with yourselves, kids. The problem is, you're too involved to recognize crap. So I invite everyone of you to visit my gallery, read my stuff, tell me it's crap and WHY it is crap. That's how I get better at writing. That's how you get better at recognizing shit you produce. Learn to recognize crap and treat it as such. Use harsh words, but be just. You can't be a good writer if you can't take criticism, recognize crap and label it as such and if you can't explain WHY something is crap. And the challenge is for real. Visit my gallery, and I want you to not stand stupidly in front of the text. I personally invite you to tell me that my writing is crappy and WHY, or that my writing is good, and WHY.
That's the point of deviantArt. NOT to create a shitty community of whiners and self gratifying attention whores. The point is to exchange criticism, to take your art forward, to improve your art, to improve your skills. If you don't like this, POST YOUR CRAP ON FACEBOOK, for fuck's sake. What the hell are you doing on devArt anyway? Go on Facebook, you'll get universal appraisal from your 3000 friends.
Anger 
