Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Thinking

Bare shoulders earn failing grade for BYU-Idaho student’s art project.

Recommended Posts

Link

Quote

Giles said she respects and appreciates the school's Honor Code. But her professor had included images of partially clothed or nude artwork — like Michaelangelo's David and Delacroix's "Liberty Leading the People" — during classroom presentations, which led her to believe art projects would be granted some flexibility from campus rules.

Having attended Ricks College for two semesters (Fall 1981, Winter 1982), I was not surprised by this story. I was called into the standards office and told to cut my hair. "But it's not over my ears!" "It's too big."

 

Share this post


Link to post

It sounded to me like the professor was appalled that it was her bare shouldered photo that she submitted.  Did he feel sexually harassed?  I'd suggest that if the photo was a selfie, and he did this, she has every right to a Title IX complaint for him apparently sexualizing her photo that was art.    That is what his written response suggested he did.

Share this post


Link to post

I would give her a zero for bad art--daubing paint on one's face and then taking a shower just doesn't qualify as art in my book.

Share this post


Link to post

""I feel bad for the professor," she said. "I don't think he saw this coming.""

Yeah.....

There is no indication in the article it was a selfie.

Share this post


Link to post

I wasn't particularly impressed by the art either...I think her professor's comment was just as likely to have been about her pictures telling no story, what was the purpose of the paint?  If the three shots I saw were it, they were disjointed, random placement.

Her replacement photo was actually a better idea IMO, but poorly executed with the color quality way off and nothing looking like it was prepared (one can see the shadow of a cord, one arm shows a wee bit of sleeve, the sweater arm's hand just hangs there in the middle of the picture, the fingernails of the top hand draw too much attention to themselves...it distracts from what should be the core.

You can find a number of photos expressing the same Idea, can't get a link for the one I like best...the eyes are striking and the hand expresses power in the silencing as opposed to the feeling she just got her roommates and told them to place their hands over another roommate's mouth and face.

Here's one version for abuse:

http://www.humanservices.alberta.ca/abuse-bullying/family-violence-banners-posters-and-walletcards.html

Using faces as a canvas seems popular:

https://www.artflakes.com/en/products/dripping-face

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, Calm said:

I wasn't particularly impressed by the art either...I think her professor's comment was just as likely to have been about her pictures telling no story, what was the purpose of the paint?  If the three shots I saw were it, they were disjointed, random placement.

Do you know what the assignment was (I didn't see where that was explained but will look again)?

I think a zero score is pretty unreasonable even if she didn't do that well on the assignment. She should have gotten some points at least for effort or for turning something in, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post

I think the pictures are kind of interesting, but i'm confused about why she thought that because her professor showed art work depicting partially clothed or nude paintings from hundreds of years ago would be similar to digital pictures of herself (someone who signed the honor code) partially clothed.

It's seems pretty obvious that one would be o.k. and the other wouldn't be under such circumstances.

Share this post


Link to post

Would really like to understand the assignment.  I am not an "art" person but perhaps she was to portray something specific.  I have better pics of my kids with spaghetti all over them.:P Though I love beautiful art in pictures and photography..I am not to judge modern art that I don't understand.  I do feel that everyone should get and "E" for effort.  I actually think the whole think is silly.  If you haven't seen bare shoulders or a body before...you won't know what it is!:D

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, JulieM said:

Do you know what the assignment was (I didn't see where that was explained but will look again)?

I think a zero score is pretty unreasonable even if she didn't do that well on the assignment. She should have gotten some points at least for effort or for turning something in, IMO.

I have no doubt the only reason she got a zero score was because the prof saw it as a violation of school policy, possibly dept or class.  Not suggesting the quality of the work was the reason. 

And it is unclear why it is a violation given that nudes were shown by the professor.  If it is because she photographed a woman in a tube top, is it the action or the photo itself that is the problem?  If the photo, then the nudes he showed should be banned as against policy.  If it is the fact that she saw a woman in a tube top...well, that is going to be a problem for the PE dept most likely.

It comes across as inconsistent, IMO, and needs to be clarified and hopefully it is reasonable.

Having said that, it doesn't appear she appeal to the professor or the department, plus she was allowed to do a makeup assignment, so the calling the news to report it seems rather extreme and selfcentered and either an attempt to get attention or to embarrass the prof, dept, or school.  If she had appealed to the prof and/or the dept first in an attempt to change the policy as she saw it hampering the ability to learn art...as I know some art students over the years who have felt that way and I rather agree with them...that would be different IMO, but this just seems very petty or juvenile to me with the info given.

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, bluebell said:

I think the pictures are kind of interesting, but i'm confused about why she thought that because her professor showed art work depicting partially clothed or nude paintings from hundreds of years ago would be similar to digital pictures of herself (someone who signed the honor code) partially clothed.

It's seems pretty obvious that one would be o.k. and the other wouldn't be under such circumstances.

Is there any indication that it was herself?  The captions just say "a woman" and unless she had a tripod, one of the shots would be difficult...I think it would be very hard to get a good placement using the selfie technique.  Much easier to use a model.  And she had at least two different models in her makeup shot (the main woman is not the same and there were two different hands).

A nude is a nude, IMO.  If it is okay for someone else to be nude in the art class, not sure why it would be a problem for a student for that specific reason...just as exceptions were made for sports classes.

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post

Reread first link and found this:

""My subject was not fully nude and she wasn't posing provocatively," Giles said. "But yes, the shoulders were against the [university] dress code and it did imply she was in the shower"

So I get the problem of a shower scene, the context is different that statues.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Calm said:

Is there any indication that it was herself?  The captions just say "a woman" and unless she had a tripod, one of the shots would be difficult...I think it would be very hard to get a good placement using the selfie technique.  Much easier to use a model.  And she had at least two different models in her makeup shot (the main woman is not the same and there were two different hands).

A nude is a nude, IMO.  If it is okay for someone else to be nude in the art class, not sure why it would be a problem for a student for that specific reason...just as exceptions were made for sports classes.

A nude sculpture, to me, is different than a nude person. I'm thinking the difference between the sculpture of David and a photo of a nude man. 

I could see how one would be allowed and the other wouldn't. 

But yes, if he was showing photos of people with bare shoulders, then her photos should be allowed.

And no, I don't know if the picture is of her or someone else. Good question. From my way of thinking it doesn't make a difference but it would be nice to know. 

Share this post


Link to post

 The way she talks about it, she definitely used someone else.

Share this post


Link to post

She was well aware of the restrictions and if there was any doubt she should have gotten clarification.  It would have been so simple for her to ask.  This way it appears that she was looking for a way to create some drama.

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/3/2016 at 0:46 PM, Marmonboy said:

I would give her a zero for bad art--daubing paint on one's face and then taking a shower just doesn't qualify as art in my book.

Yeah, not impressed with the art, but that's typical college stuff. The shoulders thing shouldn't be a problem. Otherwise why bother even offering art classes? You can't explore art with a puritanical view of the body. There needs to be some bracketing here. 

Edited by Gray

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, ERayR said:

She was well aware of the restrictions and if there was any doubt she should have gotten clarification.  It would have been so simple for her to ask.  This way it appears that she was looking for a way to create some drama.

Do you have proof, concrete proof, that an art student at BYU-I who has been shown full nude depictions of the human body, is "well aware" that base shoulders are no permitted in art projects? Please note that the Professor is alleged to have shown depictions of bare shoulders and bare breasts. So again, if bare breasts, shoulders and male genitalia were shown in class, how is a person "well aware" that bare shoulders are prohibited? A painting or a sculpture is the photo of its time.

Edited by provoman

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, provoman said:

Do you have proof, concrete proof, that an art student at BYU-I who has been shown full nude depictions of the human body, is "well aware" that base shoulders are no permitted in art projects? Please note that the Professor is alleged to have shown depictions of bare shoulders and bare breasts. So again, if bare breasts, shoulders and male genitalia were shown in class, how is a person "well aware" that bare shoulders are prohibited? A painting or a sculpture is the photo of its time.

Were they photographs?  I haven't been able to find anywhere that has said other than the two examples she gives, which were a painting and a sculpture.  

Paintings and sculptures may be the photos of their times but we can all agree that they are not the same thing as actual photos of real people who had to break the honor code themselves to be in them.  

I'd be fine with Liberty leading the people being shown in my son's 9th grade class.  I would not be fine with a picture of a topless woman being shown though and I don't think i'm unique in that.  Our culture recognizes the two are not the same.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, provoman said:

Do you have proof, concrete proof, that an art student at BYU-I who has been shown full nude depictions of the human body, is "well aware" that base shoulders are no permitted in art projects? Please note that the Professor is alleged to have shown depictions of bare shoulders and bare breasts. So again, if bare breasts, shoulders and male genitalia were shown in class, how is a person "well aware" that bare shoulders are prohibited? A painting or a sculpture is the photo of its time.

All I have is my own college experience,  I was never assigned a project, etc. that didn't have an instruction sheet passed out to the class.  Perhaps there was none distributed.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, bluebell said:

Were they photographs?  I haven't been able to find anywhere that has said other than the two examples she gives, which were a painting and a sculpture.  

Paintings and sculptures may be the photos of their times but we can all agree that they are not the same thing as actual photos of real people who had to break the honor code themselves to be in them.  

I'd be fine with Liberty leading the people being shown in my son's 9th grade class.  I would not be fine with a picture of a topless woman being shown though and I don't think i'm unique in that.  Our culture recognizes the two are not the same.

Your rationale is ridiculous. "Our culture"  (what culture the LDS Culture or US culture) recognizes - in a highly subjective way - the difference between pornography and art. A mannequin challenge of Liberty Leading is not pornography.    

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, ERayR said:

All I have is my own college experience,  I was never assigned a project, etc. that didn't have an instruction sheet passed out to the class.  Perhaps there was none distributed.

So you have no real basis to claim she was "well aware" that bare shoulders would not be permitted.

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, provoman said:

Your rationale is ridiculous. "Our culture"  (what culture the LDS Culture or US culture) recognizes - in a highly subjective way - the difference between pornography and art. A mannequin challenge of Liberty Leading is not pornography.    

 

It's not ridiculous, it's just a fact. 

Our American culture sees a difference between a bare chested historical painting  of a woman and a contemporary bare chested photo of a woman. 

Likewise it sees a difference between a historical sculpture of a naked man and a contemporary photo of a naked man. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

What a strange story.  I was a student at BYU (Provo) in the early 80's and my (then) boyfriend was a model for an art class at BYU.  He wore a flesh colored speedo when he posed for the students.  I asked him what the female models wore and he said they wore a fitted, flesh colored leotard.  It had to be tight in order for the students to see the curvature of the body.  I think these photos are pretty dorky personally, but a zero?  I have to wonder if the photos she posted were more cropped than the photos she actually submitted.  I don't think they are particularly immodest, they just aren't particularly good pictures.  Teaching college students myself, I do feel kinda bad for the professor.  Were we really ever that clueless? (Probably)  I think he could have handled it better though.

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, ERayR said:

She was well aware of the restrictions and if there was any doubt she should have gotten clarification.  It would have been so simple for her to ask.  This way it appears that she was looking for a way to create some drama.

I don't know where I saw it, or if I'm imagining it, but I don't believe she was sincere in presenting this assignment. I believe she was trying to see what the teacher would do. She doesn't appear to be genuine about it. If she was then she probably doesn't deserve a zero but pretty close.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, provoman said:

So you have no real basis to claim she was "well aware" that bare shoulders would not be permitted.

BYU dress code should be a hint.

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, provoman said:

Do you have proof, concrete proof . . .

This is a message board full of anonymous posters.  I am afraid you are looking in the wrong place if you want anything more than Idle, anonymous speculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×