In the fifth chapter of Cynthia Freeland's work, But is it art?, the world of feminist art is briefly explored, with particular attention to the 'Guerilla Girls ', a group of female artists who came together in 1985 to protest sexism in the art world. In a 1989 advertisement titled 'How Women Get Maximum Exposure,' the Guerilla Girls depict a naked woman wearing a gorilla mask, writing next to her that "Less than 3% of the artists in the Modern Art sections are women, but l '83% of them." the nudes are feminine.” Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay How have men historically chosen to depict female nudes and why? What social meaning do these works carry? When is a female model portrayed respectfully and when is she objectified? How have contemporary artists responded to historical representations of the female nude? Are these artists simply trying to reinvent the wheel, or are they establishing an important milestone in the canon of the female nude? In this article I will briefly discuss historical male representations of the female nude and analyze the social implications of those works; then, I will examine the feminist claim of the female nude as presented by contemporary artists. First, we must look at the Western artistic tradition of the female nude painted by men. This trend can be traced back to 350 BC, when the Greek sculptor Praxiteles of Athens created the original Aphrodite of Knidus, which became the first cult statue of a completely nude goddess. Unfortunately the original has not survived, but numerous copies were created in Greek and Roman times, such as The Capitoline Venus, from the 2nd or 3rd century. BC and the Venus de' Medici, from the 1st century. BC All these statues depict the Greek goddess of love called Aphrodite in Greek and Venus in Latin. In them, Venus exudes vulnerability, sexuality and modesty at the same time. She covers her breasts and pubis with little success, the rest of her naked body is brazenly displayed. This paradoxical depiction reflects a number of Greek and Roman sexist ideals, as male sculptors created a woman who can be fetishized, but does not own her display; who exemplifies the beauty standards of her time, but still hides modestly; who looks blankly into space; who bears no distinguishing marks of who she is, other than a beautiful woman. This pose became so common in ancient Greece and Rome that it earned its own name: the Venus pudica pose, in which an idealized woman is shown covering her pubis and sometimes her breasts with one or two hands. This model of a vulnerable woman, as depicted by exclusively male artists, will evolve and develop a certain personality over time, but her ancient feelings of misogyny and objectification remain. The Renaissance era offers perhaps the most traditional use of the Venus pudica pose in the form of Sandro Botticelli's Birth of Venus. Although this work offers some slight variations on the pre-feminist female nude, as Venus stares boldly at the viewer, key elements of the historical female nude persist: hand covering pubis, hand covering breast, vulnerability, modesty, hint of sexuality. Other artists of the 16th century CE offer similar variations of the venus pudica, as in Giorgione's Sleeping Venus and Titian's Venus of Urbino. These and other works inaugurated the trend of the 'reclining Venus', which maintains almost all the characteristics of the Venus pudica while portraying the reclining woman. The 'reclining Venus' persists throughout the Renaissance and in 19th century art,in which works such as Manet's Olympia and Cabanel's The Birth of Venus are added to the canon of the female nude. Here the woman is a little more subjectivized and a little less modest, as in Olimpia's delicate accessories and in The Birth of Venus. A completely uncovered form. However, the women are still objective, idealized and clearly displayed to the viewer, with little attention given by the artist to the female figure's personality or sense of self. Jumping forward to the 20th century, works such as Matisse's Blue Nude and Klimt's Reclining Nude Lying on His Stomach and Facing Right show some variations, but still adhere to the requirements of the objectified female nude. However, one cannot forget that these are still works of art created by male artists, during a time when female artists and women in general faced tremendous misogyny in society. Furthermore, are the social ideas represented by these works radically different from those presented by Botticelli or Giorgione's Venus? The answer is no, as the works prioritize the objective, idealized female form rather than a subjective, humanized woman. As I proceed, I will briefly depart from my art historical summary to touch on philosopher Shaun Gallagher's Theory of the Body. Since I talk about objectification and subjective bodies, it is essential to have an idea of ​​what it means to be a person who owns a body; Diana Meyers presents Gallagher's ideas in her introduction to her "Feminist Reflections on the State of the Art." Gallagher proposes that the body consists of both the body image, which is the visual appearance and unique perception of it, and the body schema, which is “a system of sensorimotor abilities that function without awareness or the need for perpetual monitoring. "Body schema is an umbrella term for all cognition, virtue, versatility, and memory that a person possesses and acts with. Body theory applies to the nude in art since male artists are prone to stripping the female models of their body image and body schema. Venus looks at nothing because she has no schema that requires focused viewing, she appears beautiful but shows no indication of being aware of her body image, she poses naked but covers herself because she is vulnerable. with her lack of self-ownership. Furthermore, the Venus has no scars, imperfections or other distinguishing marks on her body that make her a subjective person or show evidence that she has lived objectified when it is clear that she does not own herself, but is possessed by the male gaze of the artist and her viewers. How have contemporary female artists of the 1990s and 2000s responded to this? to the art world, but these works differ markedly from their predecessors. Diana Tietjens Meyers presents Jenny Saville's nudes as the antithesis of the historical female nude, with good reason; Saville's nudes of obese, deformed, and otherwise exaggerated women stand in stark opposition to the restraint of the Venus pudica models. For example, Saville's Edge depicts an overweight naked woman from a low perspective looking down at her. The figure has patchy pubic hair, rolls of belly fat, and an unpleasant expression; however, the dynamic figure commands attention and appears to be completely in control, showing off his body without any idea of ​​covering it up. The figure is surprisingly subjective, with numerous imperfections and asymmetries throughout the body. This does not mean that the figure is not beautiful, but that the figure is not subject to an idealized standard of beauty. In a quote transcribed by Meyers, Saville says: “Beauty is always associated with the male fantasy of what the body is.