Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorFerenc, Tomasz
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-17T08:25:31Z
dc.date.available2018-09-17T08:25:31Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.issn-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11089/25646
dc.description.abstractThe article examines the relations between photography, body, nudity, and sexuality. It presents changing relations of photography with a naked or semi-naked body and different forms and recording conventions. From the mid-19th century the naked body became the subject of scientifically grounded photographic explorations, an allegorical motif referring to painting traditions, an object of interest and excitement for the newly-developed “touristic” perspective. These three main ways in which photographs depicting nudity were being taken at that time shaped three visual modes: artistic-documentary, ethnographic-travelling, and scientific-medical. It has deep cultural consequences, including those in the ways of shaping the notions of the corporeal and the sexual. Collaterally, one more, probably prevalent in numbers, kind of photographical images arose: pornographic. In the middle of the 19th century, the repertoire of pornographic pictures was already very wide, and soon it become one of the photographic pillars of visual imagination of the modern society, appealing to private and professional use of photography, popular culture, advertisement, art. The number of erotic and pornographic pictures rose hand over fist with the development of digital photography. Access to pornographic data is easy, fast, and cheap, thanks to the Internet, as it never was before. Photography has fuelled pornography, laying foundations for a massive and lucrative business, employing a huge group of professional sex workers. How all those processes affected our imagination and real practices, what does the staggering number of erotic photography denote? One possible answer comes from Michel Foucault who suggests that our civilization does not have any ars erotica, but only scientia sexualis. Creating sexual discourse became an obsession of our civilization, and its main pleasure is the pleasure of analysis and a constant production of truth about sex. Maybe today the main pleasure is about watching technically registered images, and perhaps that is why we may consider visual redefinition of the body as the main social effect of the invention of the photography.en_GB
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherWydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiegoen_GB
dc.relation.ispartofseriesQualitative Sociology Review;2
dc.subjectBodyen_GB
dc.subjectPhotographyen_GB
dc.subjectNudityen_GB
dc.subjectSexualityen_GB
dc.subjectAmateur and Professional Pornographyen_GB
dc.subjectSex Workersen_GB
dc.subjectArs Eroticaen_GB
dc.subjectScientia Sexualisen_GB
dc.titleNudity, Sexuality, Photography. Visual Redefinition of the Bodyen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.rights.holder©2018 QSRen_GB
dc.page.number96-114
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationUniversity of Lodz, Poland
dc.identifier.eissn1733-8077
dc.referencesBelting, Hans. 2007. Antropologia obrazu. Szkice do nauki o obrazie. Cracow: Universitas.en_GB
dc.referencesBerger, John. 1997. Sposoby widzenia. Poznan: Rebis.en_GB
dc.referencesBrauchitsch, Boris, von. 2004. Mała historia fotografii. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Cyklady.en_GB
dc.referencesDrozdowski, Rafał. 2009. Obraza na obrazy. Strategie społecznego oporu wobec obrazów dominujących. Poznan: Zysk i S-ka.en_GB
dc.referencesEdwards, Steve. 2014. Fotografia. Bardzo krótkie wprowadzenie. Cracow: Nomos.en_GB
dc.referencesEwing, William A. 1998. Ciało. Antologia fotografii ludzkiego ciała. Warsaw: Prima.en_GB
dc.referencesEwing, William A. 1999. Miłość i pożądanie. Antologia fotografii romantycznej i erotycznej. Warsaw: Albatros.en_GB
dc.referencesFoucault, Michel. 1978. The History of Sexuality Volume 1: An Introduction. New York: Vintage Books.en_GB
dc.referencesFrizot, Michel, (ed.). 1998. A New History of Photography. Köln: Könemann.en_GB
dc.referencesGoffman, Erving. 2012. “Ramy fotografii.” Pp. 265-304 in Foto społeczeństwo. Antologia tekstów z socjologii wizualnej, edited by M. Bogunio-Borowska and P. Sztompka. Cracow: Znak.en_GB
dc.referencesGorska, Katarzyna L. 2015. “‘Przeznaczone dla matek, lekarzy i artystów.’ Fotografia w poradnikach popularno naukowych XIX i XX wieku.” Pp. 127-144 in Miejsce fotografii w badaniach humanistycznych, edited by M. Ziętkiewicz and M. Biernacka. Warsaw: Stowarzyszenie Liber pro Arte.en_GB
dc.referencesHannavay, John, (ed.). 2008. Encyclopedia of Nineteenth-Century Photography. New York: Routledge.en_GB
dc.referencesJanczyk, Marek and Iwona Święch. 2006. “Wokół fotografii ciała.” Pp. 3-9 in Sesja. Punkt widzenia. Fotografia ciała, edited by M. Janczyk and I. Święch. Cracow: Museum of Photography History in Cracow.en_GB
dc.referencesMetz, Christian. 2006. “Fotografia i fetysz.” Kwartalnik Filmowy 54-55:246-254.en_GB
dc.referencesMirzoeff, Nicholas. 2016. Jak zobaczyć świat. Warsaw: Museum of Contemporary Art; Cracow: Karakter.en_GB
dc.referencesNead, Lynda. 1998. Akt kobiecy. Sztuka, Obscena i seksualność. Poznan: Rebis.en_GB
dc.referencesOlechnicki, Krzysztof. 2005. “Fotografia dla każdego. Społeczne funkcje fotografii w dobie kultury konsumpcyjnej.” Pp. 37-60 in Przestrzenie fotografii. Antologia tekstów, edited by T. Ferenc, K. Makowski. Lodz: Galeria f5 Księgarnia fotograficzna.en_GB
dc.referencesPilichowski-Ragno, Andrzej. 2006. “Akt jako alienacja. Parę uwag na temat ciała (gdy staje się fotografią).” Pp. 46-48 in Sesja. Punkt widzenia. Fotografia ciała, edited by M. Janczyk and I. Świech. Cracow: Museum of Photography History in Cracow.en_GB
dc.referencesPustoła, Magdalena. 2004. “Życie to pornografia.” Krytyka Polityczna 6:205-206.en_GB
dc.referencesRosenblum, Naomi. 1997. A World History of Photography. New York, London, Paris: Abbeville Press.en_GB
dc.referencesRouillé, André. 2007. Fotografia. Między dokumentem a sztuką współczesną. Cracow: Universitas.en_GB
dc.referencesSchroeder, Jonathan E. and Pierre McDonagh. 2006. “The Logic of Pornography in Digital Camera Promotion.” Pp. 219-242 in Sex in Consumer Culture. The Erotic Content of Media and Marketing, edited by J. Lambiase and T. Reichert. Mahwah, New Jersey, London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.en_GB
dc.referencesSizeranne, Robert, de la. 1983. “Czy fotografia jest sztuką?” Obscura 1983/13/3; 1983/14/4.en_GB
dc.referencesStruk, Janina. 2007. Holokaust w fotografiach. Interpretacje dowodów. Warsaw: Prószyński i S-ka.en_GB
dc.referencesŚnieciński, Marek. 2013. “Spektakl ciała – akt w polskiej fotografii.” DYSKURS: Pismo Naukowo-Artystyczne ASP we Wrocławiu 15:204-224.en_GB
dc.referencesWelsch, Wolfgang. 1999. “Procesy estetyzacji. Zjawiska, rozróżnienia, perspektywy.” Pp. 15-52 in Sztuka i estetyzacja. Studia teoretyczne, edited by K. Zamiara and M. Golka. Poznan: Humaniora.en_GB
dc.contributor.authorEmailtomasz.ferenc@wp.pl
dc.identifier.doi10.18778/1733-8077.14.2.06
dc.relation.volume14en_GB


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record