Stark Imagery:

The Male Nude in Art

Nicolas Ochart
University of Connecticut, Class of 2018

ABSTRACT

In 2016 curators at the William Benton Museum of Art in Storrs,

Connecticut exhibited a show they called Stark Imagery: The Male Nude in Art.
The exhibition rested on the notion that for the larger part of art history, images
of the male nude had been left out of the discourse, overshadowed by the
idealized and sexualized female body. While nude male bodies have certainly
been lacking in visual culture, their treatment—particularly within the last
century, but also earlier—has been quite different from depictions of female
nudity. In this essay I discuss the singularity of male nude consumption vis-à-vis
questions of male gaze theory, formal photographic technique, the
industrialization of male anatomies, and the presentation of male bodies through
the lens of scientific research. Ultimately I concede the idea that, while male
nudes are certainly outnumbered by those of females, this does not indicate an
underrepresentation of male bodies, but rather highlights the stark differences
between the ways in which male and female nudes are presented.

From art and education to politics and economics, the male body has been
the site of an almost undisputed power and dominance, calculating based on sex
and gender the roles people must practice in order to fit into society. It was not
until the Twentieth Century and the earliest feminist movements that these
gendered ideas of superiority were challenged on a broad scale. One of the ways

____________________________________________________________
BOWDOIN JOURNAL OF ART, 2017
 2

in which artists of the last century have looked at this issue is through the lens of
the nude body, how it is represented, and how changing perceptions of gender
and authority have manifested themselves though this medium. This is
essentially what the exhibition entitled Stark Imagery: The Male Nude in Art at
the William Benton Museum ponders through its collection of various male nude
images, from early Neoclassical etchings to the most recent examples of male
athletes in advertising and pornography. The show implies through its curatorial
statement and organization that male nudes have largely been left out of
discussions of the history of art, and that for the most part, female nudes have
dominated the Western tradition. While this may be true, the assertion that
men’s bodies have been rejected in art is purely the result of male-dominated
preclusions of what art is, and that male bodies have in fact enjoyed a very visible
spot in art historical scholarship. However, while the male nude study and the
athlete image have been hallmarks of visual imagery for centuries, the sexualized
male body is quite a new phenomenon, as its very existence challenges ideas
about who controls what in a rapidly changing global environment. The ways in
which male bodies (rather than female bodies, which have largely been fetishized
over the centuries) are presented is a complicated matter, and the acceptance of
these images is based on subtle yet significant credentials of acceptability based
on formal decisions the artist or creator of an image makes. I
In order to gauge the appropriateness of a male nude, it is important first
to understand how gender plays a part in the way people look at these images and
how voyeurism and the act of watching has played a significant role in how both
men and women examine same sex and opposite sex bodies. In Laura Mulvey’s
groundbreaking essay “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema,” she lays the
foundation of the male gaze theory, or the idea that performance and
spectatorship are segregated based on gendered lines. According to Mulvey, who
looks to Freudian psychoanalytic theory, people “take in other people as objects,
subjecting them to a controlling and curious gaze” (Mulvey 59). “In a world
____________________________________________________________
BOWDOIN JOURNAL OF ART, 2017

 3

ordered by sexual imbalance, pleasure in looking has been split between

active/male and passive/female. The determining male gaze projects its phantasy
on to the female figure which is styled accordingly” (Mulvey 62).
Because of this male/female dynamic of holding desire and being desired,
it becomes inherently radical for the very existence of sexualized male bodies,
particularly for male spectators, whose socialized notions of masculinity
discourage and vehemently reject deviant sexual behavior, including
homosexuality. In Beth A. Eck’s experiments with men looking at male bodies,
she found that “heterosexual men respond to male nudes in two ways—with overt
rejection and with stated disinterest” (Eck 700). How can one react in one of two
ways based on extreme and opposing ideas? Essentially, it is the formal elements
that comprise an image that decide how a work will be received. Classical male
nudes have encompassed quite a significant number of the canonical works of
Western art, from the earliest ancient Greek kouroi to Antonio Pollaiuolo’s
Renaissance studies of nudes in battle. What separates these images from the
radical bodies of the contemporary scene has as much to do with historical
context as it does formal presentation. “Viewing male nudes in classical Western
art allows for a separation, a physical distancing between the viewer and the
viewed. Thus, when asked to comment on a fifth-century B.C. sculpture of a
sleeping satyr, respondents have little to say past ‘it’s art.’ It does not seem
imposing, threatening, or particularly relevant” (Eck 698).
Acceptability and nudity are not mutually exclusive in the works of
Eadweard Muybridge, whose studies of both male and female bodies (as well as
animals) in motion are famous for their role in early cinematic history. While the
photographs—presented as an almost sedentary filmic moment—were not
intended to be viewed as high art, it is precisely their scientific nature that set
them apart from the other nudes on display at Stark Imagery. At the end of the
Nineteenth Century, the only real nudes showcased were ones of passive female
bodies, continuing a long tradition of male spectatorship. While Muybridge’s
____________________________________________________________
BOWDOIN JOURNAL OF ART, 2017

 4

locomotive men left little to the imagination, the ways in which they were
displayed and disseminated made them into scientific specimens rather than
erotic figures. “This ability to remain between disciplines helped [Muybridge] to
promote his research across a broad spectrum of society without arousing the
censoring forces of a conservative American public…fostering work that
otherwise would have been deemed scandalous” (Mileaf 31).
To understand why certain representations of male nudity are not
permissible requires an understanding of why others are. Firstly, preoccupations
with athleticism and form are elements derived from disciplines not necessarily
related solely to aesthetics and art, and are thus positives. In fact, the reason
Muybridge and other members of the academy were allowed to present naked
bodies was by shrouding them in scholarship. After all, images like Animal
Locomotion, Vol. 1: Plate 62 (Figure 1) are included in a volume that also features
horses and other animals moving and interacting with their natural
environments. By presenting the human form as bestial and animalistic, all
questions of decency evaporate. Also interesting to note is the gray scale of the
image, as presenting images in black and white is a distancing technique which
makes it easier to digest information that might be difficult for viewers.
What also sets Muybridge’s photographs apart is the vigorous athleticism
of the pictures. Because “athletic male models demonstrated their strength,” their
bodies could be on display without controversy. Muybridge’s models ran, fought,
climbed, and performed other physically strenuous activities, presenting
themselves on vignettes centered on the wonders of the male physique rather
than their beauty or aesthetic excellence. Coupled with the other formal elements
of these images, “a proper legitimizing frame allowed Victorian society to justify
intensive examination of the body stripped bare” (Mileaf 32).
The focus on physique and strength when depicting the male body was a
choice made by many queer and nonconforming artists of the last century who
wished to depict male bodies in action without inspiring controversy and perhaps
____________________________________________________________
BOWDOIN JOURNAL OF ART, 2017

 5

even censorship. Roger L. Crossgrove, a former University of Connecticut

professor and mentor of the late Robert Mapplethorpe (also responsible for a
large number of the works displayed at the Stark Imagery exhibition), was well-
known for his photographs of male bodies in all kinds of positions, from
eroticized nudes writhing in sexual pleasure and frustration to working men
laboring with large arms and powerful legs. In works like Male Nude with
Wooden Wheel (1988) (Figure 2), Crossgrove converses with both his
contemporaries and predecessors to present the viewer with a male nude that
both breaks and adheres to conventional practice.
What is perhaps most striking about this image of the nude from behind is
the large wooden wheel he hoists above his body, which lies on the flat of his back
and symbolizes an unwavering kind of strength and determination. Crossgrove
presents the body as some kind of machine, enhancing the natural power of the
male body by mechanizing it and giving it a well-earned spot in labor practice.
However, despite the centrality focused upon the wheel, it is the rivets and dips of
the model’s toned body, which stand as the primary feature of the composition,
as the viewer is left to gawk in amazement at the utter perfection of the naked
back. While the man’s buttock is on full display, there is nothing sexual or
arousing about it, and it is treated as just another part of the anatomical figure.
Again, the black and white of the photograph has a distancing effect, as well as
the face, which cannot be viewed by the audience. This image is not about
pleasure or desire, but is rather a quite scientific figuration of body and strength.
Despite this hesitation to depict men in the ways women have traditionally been
treated, many artists of this period experimented more with the ideas set forth by
Mulvey and other feminist scholars regarding performance and consumption of
visual imagery.
About a century after the first Muybridge images were released, questions
of bodies and decency still dominated the art scene. This time, however, artists

____________________________________________________________
BOWDOIN JOURNAL OF ART, 2017

 6

drew from the rebellious spirit of the times to revolt against the rigid structures of
morality set in
place by generations of heterosexual male-dominated institutions. The 1970s and
1980s saw a rapidly expanding Gay Rights Movement, and queer people from
different walks of life gathered together to challenge injustices in various social
arenas. One of the proponents of this new art movement was Pop Artist Andy
Warhol, whose images of Campbell’s soup cans and Brillo containers commented
on the repetitive monotony of American capitalist culture. However, it is the
hundreds of Polaroid images Warhol amassed over the years that stand as
representative of the ways in which ideas of bodies and nudity changed over a
short span of time. His infamous Sex Parts collection includes dozens of explicit
and full-frontal views of the naked male anatomy, boasting everything from
close-up shots of genitalia to buttocks posed in a variety of positions. The
collection blurs the lines between pornography and art, with everything from its
subject matter to medium defying expectations of the nature of high art. Even the
inspiration exudes a sense of la vie bohème. According to the Warhol Museum,
“The seed of the…Sex Parts series sprouted after a man approached Warhol
boasting of his large penis. Warhol agreed to photograph the man’s genitalia and
the photographs were placed in a box casually labeled ‘Sex Parts.’ Later, Warhol
noticed the wording of the box’s label and conceived the idea for a series of works
based on the initial photographs.” In the tradition of Warholian practice, he
commissioned everyone from gay bathhouse regulars to pornography actors to
pose, eventually creating a visual scrapbook for the underground lives of New
York’s gay scene.
Forget for a moment the narrative of the Polaroids, and consider purely the
formal and aesthetic features at work in a piece like Nude Male Model (c. 1977)
(Figure 3). With its unabashed and confrontational manner, Warhol presents to
the viewer two images side-by-side of a reposed male buttock. Despite its
simplicity in composition, the inherent intimacy of the medium is striking to the
____________________________________________________________
BOWDOIN JOURNAL OF ART, 2017

 7

viewer, who is used to looking at nudes (if at all) in predefined ways, set in place
by the kinds of academic and controlled criteria mentioned above. The Polaroid,
at its peak, was the medium by which people at the time shared personal
accounts and experiences with one another, be it sexual or otherwise. It is
interesting to think of these naked images as similar to the kinds of erotic content
shared on platforms like Snapchat today, which have revolutionized the ways in
which we exchange the most private of moments between lovers and friends. To
look at the images in Sex Parts is to completely redefine the notion of sexuality
and pleasure in connection to the male body. The viewer takes on the role of
Mulvey’s gazer, regardless of sex, and the male body suddenly becomes the site in
which eroticism and desire play out. It is an intrinsically homoerotic image
because of this, as the male gaze is a phenomenon that exists regardless of the
voyeur’s gender. Man is object in the way women have been for centuries, their
bodies fetishized and objectified for perhaps the first time in art.
The dimensions of a work like Nude Male Model also calls to mind ideas of
sizing and spectacle, and how the frame of this work and its intrinsic intimacy
seem to be violated in a way when exhibited in a gallery setting. Polaroids, like
most pictures at this time, were intended to be exchanged with peers, and thus
they retain a certain level of privacy. Smallness of scale forces the viewer to get up
close and personal with the most cloistered areas of the human body, and the
photograph almost begins to transcend its medium, becoming something fleshy
and real. The spectator really has to examine these Polaroids to consume them,
and thus become intimate with the figures they represent.
Works like Nude Male Model also harken back to some early feminist
pieces, like Joan Jonas’ seminal Vertical Roll (1972) (Figure 4), in which the
artist used the technique in video production to control the ways in which the
audience consumes her body. While nude during the performance, the formal
editing of the work forces the virtual manipulation of her body. This process of
detaching different sections of flesh is a decision based in autonomy and
____________________________________________________________
BOWDOIN JOURNAL OF ART, 2017

 8

reclamation. Jonas is deciding how and when her body can be evaluated by the
audience, and in a way, the Polaroids of Warhol also reflect this notion. By
presenting the audience with a buttock or penis and nothing else, the model in
the image controls how his body is considered. Warhol’s Polaroids harken back to
the idea of nudity as power, and that naked bodies are the sites of strength and
control rather than shame.
Bodies have always been the medium by which narratives of history are
told. How bodies are treated, represented, traded, valued, etc. depends wholly on
the context by which these bodies adhere to, and indeed, it is because of this that
they are also the sites of great knowledge and insight into contemporary thought
and culture. The academic nudes of Muybridge highlight the ways American
society had yet to advance in terms of gender equity at the end of the Nineteenth
Century, taking it over a hundred years for images like that of Warhol’s, with
their brashness and confrontational manner, to be accepted and exhibited in
popular museum spaces. Through looking at nude figures one thing becomes
clear: art is the medium by which society’s progression is proven, and with a
Millennial generation so radically different from any other time of human
history, it will be fascinating to see the ways in which bodies are represented and
exchanged on the Internet and social media platforms in the future.

____________________________________________________________
BOWDOIN JOURNAL OF ART, 2017

 9

Appendix

Figure 1

Eadweard Muybridge, Animal Locomotion, Vol. 1: Plate 62.“Running at full

speed.” 1887. Collotype. Photographic History Collection, National Museum of
American History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C.

____________________________________________________________
BOWDOIN JOURNAL OF ART, 2017

 10

Figure 2

Roger L. Crossgrove. Male Nude with Wooden Wheel, 1988. Gelatin Silver Print.
William Benton Museum of Art, Storrs, Connecticut.

____________________________________________________________
BOWDOIN JOURNAL OF ART, 2017

 11

Figure 3

Andy Warhol. Nude Male Model. c. 1977. Polaroid print. The Andy Warhol
Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc.

____________________________________________________________
BOWDOIN JOURNAL OF ART, 2017

 12

Figure 4

Joan Jonas. Still from Vertical Roll. 1972. Monograph. The Metropolitan
Museum of Art, New York.

____________________________________________________________
BOWDOIN JOURNAL OF ART, 2017

 13

Bibliography

“Dirty Art: Andy Warhol’s Torsos and Sex Parts.” The Warhol.org. Accessed April
20, 2016. http://www.warhol.org/responsive/event.aspx?id=2056

Eck, Beth A.. 2003. “Men Are Much Harder: Gendered Viewing of Nude Images”.
Gender and Society 17 (5). Sage Publications, Inc.: 691-710.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3594705.

Ellenzweig, Allen. 1992. The homoerotic photograph: male images from Durieu/
Delacroix to Mapplethorpe. New York: Columbia University Press.

Jonas, Joan. 1972. Vertical Roll. Video. Chicago: School of the Art Institute of
Chicago.

Mileaf, Janine A.. 2002. “Poses for the Camera: Eadweard Muybridge's Studies of
the Human Figure”. American Art 16 (3). [University of Chicago Press,
Smithsonian American Art Museum]: 31-53.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3109424.

Mulvey, Laura. “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema.” Film Theory and
Criticism: Introductory Readings. Eds. Leo Braudy and Marshall Cohen.
New York: Oxford UP, 1999: 833-44.

Muybridge, Eadweard. 1887. Animal Locomotion, Vol. 1: Plate 62. “Running at

full speed.” Washington, D.C.: National Museum of American History,
Smithsonian Institution.

____________________________________________________________
BOWDOIN JOURNAL OF ART, 2017

 14

Pollaiuolo, Antonio. ca. 1465. Battle of the Naked Men. Engraving. New York:
The Metropolitan Museum of Art.

Warhol, Andy. c. 1977. Nude Male Model. Polaroid print. New York: The Andy
Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc.

Weinberg, Jonathan. 2004. Male desire: the homoerotic in American art. New
York: H.N. Abrams.

____________________________________________________________
BOWDOIN JOURNAL OF ART, 2017