Nowadays, when you talk about nudity in imagery, the most embarrassing topic is a precise distinction between fine arts, eroticism, and pornography. In effect, all over the largest part of the world, almost no one considers scandalous the mere vision of a nude body, male or female. The cited distinction is made difficult by a series of prejudices, that are usually masked below “noble” curtains, such as feminism, sexism, religion, moral philosophies, and so on. From a series of web pages, I have reconstructed the common notion of pornography as follows: explicit nudity exposed for sexual arousal, when bodies result as objects of consumerism, and human dignity is intentionally neglected. Honestly, I haven’t found satisfactory definitions of eroticism, and a clear notion of sexism. For what I’ve understood, eroticism doesn’t necessarily require nudity, and wants to provoke a minor level of sexual excitement, by avoiding excessive explicitness of images. In the matter of sexism, I have had the impression that it is intended as malicious exploitation of female body, for denying to females the social role that they deserve. Before proposing my observations, I summarize the common concept of artistic nudity: a valorization of the beauty of human shapes, for elevating spirit and mind of the observer, through a conceptualization of the essence of humanism.
Well, intellectuals profess that the classification of a nude image depends on intent, composition, and purpose. Some authors affirm that nudity is not artistic when sinful, wrong, and dangerous. At this point, I can explain the reasons why the common definitions of the above have left me in doubt, and don’t seem enough for precise distinctions. First of all, I have seen that nudity is not a normal behavior for social relationships, such as walking on the streets. When someone shows its nude body in inappropriate contexts, the immediate purpose is catching the attention of a number of persons. Bound to that, there might be a series of indirect purposes. For instance, some scenes of a movie show the body of a beautiful actress. The scenes might belong to great cinema, and so to fine arts, but eroticism and pornography might not be excluded. With other words, fine arts can be pornographic. More, porn movies might exceptionally belong to great cinema, so that pornography can be artistic, although rarely. More, sexually explicit nudity might not arouse sexual desires, when porn actors fail in avoiding repetitive banality, and in communicating some true excitement. Finally, sometimes the beautiful feet of a woman, who wears a fashionable pair of shoes, might excite me much more than the complete nudity of another woman.
As usual, the conclusion is equal to the title of the page. It means that sexual behaviors are partially independent from nudity. However, you should remember that a mental dress is normally invisible, and that telepathy, if exists, is not very frequent. Well, you should find a way to communicate your intention, and hope for not being misunderstood. Coming to music, obviously the short mix of the page is entirely dedicated to nudity.
File name is “Max Look’s mini-mix, expressive nudity (Aug 2026)”, about 22’ of pop, rock, and soul songs dedicated to nudity.
Sometimes you might find yourself like it’s said in the playlist:
Jaffa – be nude baby
Anggun – undress me
Michael Franks – wrestle a live nude girl
Etta James – you can leave your hat on
Joe Cocker – you can leave your hat on
Depeche Mode – stripped
Tya – naked
Pat Appleton – nudity
Family – burlesque
R.H.C.P. – naked in the rain
Frank Zappa & the Mothers of Invention – take off your clothes when you dance
Club Squisito feat. Zhana – naked
Rhythim is Rhythim – nude photo
Chemical Brothers – nude night
Easy Going – I strip you
