Is she right or is she wrong

I don’t have a problem with it being displayed.
I don’t understand though why anyone would paint such a thing.
Why would anyone put that on their wall?
It’s got her noticed though.

Actually I have no problem with the subject - just think it is an awful painting!

I don’t understand though why anyone would paint such a thing.

Yes you do, sago. As you said, it has got her noticed, which is why she did it.

Perhaps because she'd never have been noticed as an actual artist otherwise 🧐

What was the purpose? To draw attention to her and her work. IMO, if that’s the best she can do, she certainly needs the publicity.

"It just shows how closed-minded people are, and let's say if I was a famous artist I don't think anyone would say anything."

Oh they would still say something even if she was a famous artist and the work was any improvement on hers. Think of the statue of David where people criticised the anatomical incorrectness of the hand sizes.

It’s not being close minded. That’s a typical attempt at self-justification.
For me it’s also the fact that she reduces the importance of a female to her genitalia- and a very poor representation of them.

Ms Harris said a sign next to the painting urged passers-by to come in and share their views in a visitor book.

Give her due, that’s a better marketing strategy than come and look at my paintings.

Provocative art is a thing. Not sure rightness or wrongness come into it really. Artistic taste might.

Give her due, that’s a better marketing strategy than come and look at my paintings

This. When I friend and I had a look at stuff produced by some of the students at Glasgow School of Art a few years ago, the overall impression we came away with is that what they were being taught is how to sell themselves as artists.

There was some good stuff.

Love it or loathe it, it's done what she clearly intended it to do and got her noticed, so good for her on that score! As for whether it is offensive or not, I wouldn't want it on my wall either, but that's because I also don't think it's a particularly good painting.

My art tutor, who is a well respected artist, paints buses, male and female. I have painted male and female nudes, many artists do. The human body is interesting to paint so I have no issue with a nude painting in an art gallery.

Buses. Flip! Should say nudes!😂

The subject matter itself wouldn't bother me, I might not think it was a great piece of art (or maybe I would) - but I wouldn't be offended.

Doesn't bother me in the slightest. I go to life drawing classes and draw males and females in all sorts of positions, they are all ages too.

So it's ok to put this in a street level window, but not ok to openly sell magazines depicting the same detail?

Other than one being labelled Art and the other being labelled pornography, what's the difference?

ferry23

So it's ok to put this in a street level window, but not ok to openly sell magazines depicting the same detail?

Other than one being labelled Art and the other being labelled pornography, what's the difference?

Agreed!
There's a big difference between displaying this inside a gallery where people choose to view it, and having it "in your face" as you do your shopping and have no choice but to see it.

I used to do life drawing from nudes but I still feel that this picture is tasteless and objectifying. It is also very poorly executed and ugly.

The naked human body is beautiful but this picture is clumsy and inaccurate.

Many of us are trying to tell our granddaughters that they don't have to share photos of their bodies. I can just imagine a lad saying to his girlfriend "it's on display in the High Street, it's fine for you to do the same"

So that’s a picture of a woman in a shop window, in a particular pose meant to shock, not to praise the female form, not of great artistic value IMO.
How will all posters on here feel when a would-be Banksy decides that’s the next great idea for the side of a building.
I’m curious, foxie48
Do they run the life classes outside in public places?
Do all sorts of positions include the display of female genitalia here with or without the fabric covering on this painting?
Would you volunteer to display yourself in that position for a life drawing class?
I did life drawing as part of a Uni course many years ago and my artistic talents are about on a par with that artist, but the nudes, whatever age, were always tasteful.

No problem for me.

I've seen plenty before, and yes, they're intricate works of art, each and every one.

Mollygo

What was the purpose? To draw attention to her and her work. IMO, if that’s the best she can do, she certainly needs the publicity.

"It just shows how closed-minded people are, and let's say if I was a famous artist I don't think anyone would say anything."

Oh they would still say something even if she was a famous artist and the work was any improvement on hers. Think of the statue of David where people criticised the anatomical incorrectness of the hand sizes.

It’s not being close minded. That’s a typical attempt at self-justification.
For me it’s also the fact that she reduces the importance of a female to her genitalia- and a very poor representation of them.

Ms Harris said a sign next to the painting urged passers-by to come in and share their views in a visitor book.

Give her due, that’s a better marketing strategy than come and look at my paintings.

You said it all, so I don’t need to 😃 yeah, just a look at me type thing for attention.

I think I saw this painter and some of her work on TV, a couple of months ago.

She also paints menstruating images, such as a woman with blood running down her legs, and so on, as well as women who have cellulite, blotches, ugly veins,bulbous breaststroke, and all the other things we all have, to some extent.

Breasts! Not breaststroke!!!

How very lovely. 🤮

Would this be allowed as a photograph in a window? (Serious question.)

I don't see the difference between some wannabee artist painting it and some old codger photographing it and sticking it on the internet - but he would probably get a world of trouble for it even if he called it art.

I don't have a problem with pictures of body parts, there are plenty around. Can't really say I want them in my face, male or female, when I'm doing my shopping but I wouldn't complain about it. I certainly wouldn't buy her art though.

Grandmabatty

My art tutor, who is a well respected artist, paints buses, male and female. I have painted male and female nudes, many artists do. The human body is interesting to paint so I have no issue with a nude painting in an art gallery.

Same here Grandmabatty.. My father always had Russell Flint's work in our house, so I grew up with nudes around me, and have since done many life drawings and paintings myself..

This particular work is made by the niece of the Gallery owner who is a much respected curator.. I'm amazed that anyone in Hay has objected...

It's on Instagram in a little video if anyone wants to actually see it.

I don't see what the fuss is about.
Artists have done this for years - L'origine du monde by Courbet, church carvings like the one in Kendal (Sheel -ne gig?).. There was an artist in Sweden who painted/drew (?) God giving Birth.

All sorts.
And certainly let's of textile art too