Nudity: anatomy of our senses
We have always had a difficult relationship with nudity: it is a sensitive point where converge our biological, social and individual start. Biological natural dictates the need to remove clothing if it is hot, and put it on again when it is cold. But nudity seems socially unacceptable, calling in many cases; religion - regardless of denomination - consider it sinful. At the same time it is idealized, almost deified art. From these contradictions and individual experience, including parental education and their own relationship with the body, woven our perception of nakedness - his or someone else's.
Stripped naked and
Nudity may encourage or inhibit, shock or lure. "It depends on the context of the cultural setting of view - says cultural studies Olga Weinstein. - In one case perceived as nudity impropriety, and the other - as an object of art. English art historian Kenneth Clark (Kenneth Clark) has formulated the difference between nakedness and nudity, (which correspond to the meaning of the concepts of "naked" and "nude" in our language). In the first case this body is still storing traces of clothing, that is, stripped, (whereas, in principle, it ought to be dressed). This nudity, implying a violation of social conventions. And in the second - it is the nakedness without printing clothes, without the seal of sin. It is self-sufficient - as the nudity of antique statues. "
These views reflect the idea of dualism of the divine and the earthly, pure and sinful. On the one hand, our civilization has its roots in antiquity: the beautiful body shape have been sung for centuries, starting from athletic proportions of women in ancient Greek sculptures and ending with an idealized female body in the art of the Renaissance. On the other hand, we have inherited the Christian conception of sin, "embarrassingly" flesh. Therefore, the ratio of the body is always burdened existing in our mind the contradictions between the ideal and the real. We mentally compare ourselves with the object of art as a benchmark and recognize their real body unfit to demonstrate to others, unworthy. "To be ashamed of his own body, do not open it - it is one of the ways of society, aimed at keeping a tight rein on our biological, animal nature, - said social psychologist Julia Zudina. - Previously, this control is carried out with the help of religion. But let's take a modern, often discussed problem: the ideal model of the body cause psychological discomfort regarding their body at normal average women. Paradoxically, it is the same mechanism acts: mass culture imposes restrictions on our consciousness, making feel uncomfortable, ashamed of his own body, thus demonstrating the dominance of the social over the biological. In this sense, mass culture took the place of religion, the tenets of which have no effect on the people now as before. "
From Adam and Eve
Recall the Old Testament legend of the expulsion from paradise: eating of the tree of knowledge, the first people to see the light and saw that they were naked. Almost simultaneously with the awareness of their nakedness (ie sinful) they invented their own clothes - fig leaves. "In interpreting the biblical story, we can see a picture of the development of the human personality - says Julia Zudina. - Staying in Eden womb, a man is in complete and tranquil merger with the world around him. Being "expelled" out of heaven, he feels the environment as hostile, opposed him. And as awareness of his own "I" feels the need to separate themselves from the world, define the boundaries of themselves with a physical barrier - clothes ".
Christianity assimilated the Old Testament history of the breed "theory of modesty," which dominated our culture for centuries. "In the history of culture had existed under the guise of the" theory of decency ", - says Olga Weinstein. - Decently it was completely hide your body under clothing, with enthusiasm by some of its decorative properties was considered a sin of vanity, impermanence. Nevertheless, the clothes are not always conducive to modesty as completely closed body excites desire, arousing erotic imagination. Therefore, despite the fact that a woman's attractiveness was furnished with all sorts of restrictions, fashion has always developed in accordance with its own logic and leave enough space for eroticism through forms of the game. "
The skillful exposure of
Casanova once noticed that skillful exposure of any part of the body looks much more exciting than full nudity. Developing this idea, the fashion historian James Laver (James Laver) created the theory of "moving erogenous zones." In accordance with it in each historical period fashion displaces the erotic focus on a particular area of the body, exposing the shoulders, neck, ankles, knees, abdomen. It is important that other parts of the body have been closed. Thus, extensive cleavage of the XIX century, which could be considered indecent even in our time, was supplemented crinoline skirt, completely hiding the outlines of her hips. "This change of" scenery erotic "is a special logic - says Julia Zudina. - Recall the beginning of the twentieth century and the first female emansipe. Gradually shortening the skirt - first to the ankles, then to mid-calf - allow women to open up. Metaphorically, it is nothing like the ability to move forward. Women's liberation from dependency, an opportunity to "stand up", to develop and make a career is accompanied by almost proportional shortening of skirts. The most striking illustration of this - fashion 70s and especially the 80s, when, in addition to tiny skirts appear long jacket with straight artificially extended shoulders. It symbolizes the complete readiness to take on women's and men's roles. What happens now? We see that the erotic focus has shifted to the stomach - is the consumption area, enjoying life. Our age is inherent in hedonism, quality of life and enjoyment of life are paramount. Exposing the stomach and decorating it with tattoos and piercings, we declare ourselves and others: "I am ready to enjoy!"
The strange thing is - bikini: some 30 square centimeters of fabric can do nudity acceptable. Swimsuit does not change the shape of our body, does not hide any real or perceived flaws, but somehow fundamentally changes the ratio of others, and our sense of self. "There are categories of decency inherent in our education, that is, the society", - says Yulia Zudina.
Once fully covered bathing suit body and consisted of special dresses, trousers just below the knee, bathing stockings and boots made of soft leather. One hundred years ago, only the bravest bathers could afford to enter the water barefoot - so strict were the requirements of decency. With the onset of the industrial revolution swimsuit evolved rather quickly, turning from tight fitting leotard into a kind of modern split swimsuit and, finally, in a scandalous mini bikini. This shocking invention belong House Christian Dior represented Louis PEAP (Louis Reard), presented to the public in 1945 swimsuit of several triangles and ribbons. He was doomed to produce a bombshell, so Rare called it "Bikini", the title of an atoll of the Marshall Islands, which were carried out its first nuclear test. The new fashion was denounced by the church and banned in some Catholic countries - Spain, Italy. "While the bikini quickly won the French beaches in the US conservative social morality a long time did not allow this innovation is widely spread, - says Olga Weinstein. - Only in the '60s, in the wake of hippizma, bikini penetrated the American beaches and became more or less acceptable from the standpoint of propriety. " It c hippizmom and it calls "to release the body to freedom" attributed the spread of naturism (nudism), and more socially acceptable "toplesc". The emergence monokini swimsuit, consisting only of tiny panties, coincides with a new wave of feminism, when women asserted their right alongside men bare upper body in public places for recreation and swimming.
Return to Eden
With the onset of warm whole colony of nudists go to the water - they have already mastered beaches all inhabited continents. Sometimes an ordinary "civilized" beach happens to meet fans complete outcrop. "It is an indescribable, overwhelming feeling of freedom and dissolution in nature, when you swim in the sea without clothes! - says the 36-year-old Tatiana. - Touching the water and completely naked, exposed skin purifying effect and fills the extraordinary energy. Anyone who has ever tried it, becomes convinced nudist for many years. " With it absolutely agree 29-year-old Julia, "The idea that you need to sunbathe and swim in some small synthetic cloth, seems completely absurd, unnatural. That in itself is unpleasant in the heat, let them remain white untanned patches on the body, "Merging with nature, feeling the particles of the universe, a feeling of oneness with the world - exactly describe naturists their experiences, that they are eager to experience again and again. It is a return to the lost paradise once. "Thus one is freed from the control of society - said Julia Zudina. - His prohibitions constantly act on our nature, and very stressiruyusche. Getting rid of the clothes, we are destroying the kind of a thin film that separates our being from the outside world. Dive into the bosom of Mother Nature in feeling full merger with the surrounding is like a return to the serenity of the womb. At the same time flirting and promiscuous sex in a naturist environment did not occur more frequently than in any other. Or maybe even less: a fully naked body contains no intrigue, no heats sexual interest. "
A man and a woman
Female and male nudity is perceived by us in different ways. According to sexologist Igor Kon, is partly due to the anatomy: female genitalia are hidden deep in the body, men, in contrast, are on the outside, and immediately attracted attention. Therefore, male nudity seems more immodest than the female, and its demonstration of the image is always violate any cultural inhibitions and causes confusion. Frontal image of a naked man in the eyes of censorship - is the critical point that separates erotica from pornography. "Demonstration of male genitalia, especially the erect penis, and everywhere was not so much an erotic gesture as a gesture of aggression and call, - says Igor Kon. - In all societies where power belonged to men, images of male and female body are polar, and their anatomical features are symbols of gender stratification. They reflect the cultural perceptions of masculinity and femininity, and man always acts as a subject, and a woman - as an object. In the works of art she is usually more or less passive poses, revealing their nakedness tantalizing potential appraising look male viewer. In the words of American writer John Berger (John Berger), men act, women are themselves. Men look at women. Women watch themselves while looking at them. It determines not only the relations between men and women, but also the ratio of women to themselves. " Therefore feelings about how her body looks without clothes, much more typical of women than men. It constantly evaluates himself, because traditionally a male companion chose, proceeding from its physical qualities. Man is more or less indifferent to their bodily advantages, except for one - which is called "man." According to Yulia Zudina, "a man has at least two good reasons to hide your body under your clothes: physical vulnerability of its anatomy and social clichés, forcing him constantly to be concerned." The persistence of these stamps and reflects the euphemism "manhood." Although it would seem, as the size and shape of the penis may be linked to human dignity?