The Mersey? It's the Tyne, you dolt!

/angry Geordie

Have any farkers participated in his works before? What was it like? Any thoughts?

Some girls are bigger than others.

/err no wait that's morrissey

Spencer Tunick is awesome. I remember articles have been greenlit about him before. I believe I have also seen a docu on HBO about him and his work.

I thought there were black Europeans

/gullible

If it was the Mersey shouldn't they be going by ferry?

Done it before in NYC. Great fun and poke in Guiliani's eye too (back when he was a Nazi, pre-9/11)

It's nothing sexual? I abuse myself looking at "art" when the hardcore stuff isn't working. I can some people getting naked as a dare. I can also see them saying, "it's for art", when they just want to be around a bunch of naked ladies.

I went to a nudist beach expecting hot college girls, I got children and grandmas instead.

Mersey me..

More idiocy being passed off as 'art'. Ridiculous.

Does "The Mersey Beat" still exist?

sweet Merseyful jeebus

Putting aside the media spectacles Tunick makes and the treatment there. The finished photographs are pretty neat...I like the ones where he gets hundreds of people all lying the same way and makes these oceans of flesh-tone that spread up and down entire streets.

Is it just me, or are a lot of those people about as white as notebook paper??

wow glad Im not theonly guy who first thought of gerry and the pacemakers. And wasnt it Ferry cross the Mersey?

I want to do this!!!! When will he be in San Francisco?!?!

Angry Geordie, I used the Mersey instead of the Tyne, because I was trying to appeal to the International Audience (aka Americans).

My abject apologies, as the Tyne slides by....

/submitter
//Glaswegian

great but that guys art work blows. I've seen it before.

I don't get the artistic merit. I'm not much of a scholar, so take it for what it's worth. Also, I don't think the art breaks many boundaries, as I think most people are as artistically sensitive as myself.

You be the judge of his work

NSFW if you have really good eyes

Have any farkers participated in his works before? What was it like? Any thoughts?

I posed a couple years ago in Cleveland. For me it was damn cold and I had to get there before dawn. He is right about the non-sexual part. Everyone that was there was interested in the art and the chance to be a part of something unique. Our claim to fame was the photo ended up having the most naked people at one time in North America. If I recall it was 2754 total. To enter you had to sign an artist waiver so I assume the count was accurate. Afterwards I and a few others stuck around to talk to Spencer. He was a pretty cool guy and seemed very grateful that so many people would show up to pose so he can keep doing what he likes doing.
Oh, and if you get the chance to pose it is worth it. I have a nice 8'x10' photo of the final art that was sent to me for free to remember the event by.

Here are a couple of photos from shoot I was at (somewhat NSFW) www.cleveland.com

CrazyBob: More idiocy being passed off as 'art'. Ridiculous.

Why don't you like his art, because he does nude photos?

This thread needs more Ha! Ha! guy.

Albert Frankenstein [TotalFark]

Why don't you like his art, because he does nude photos?

No, because SFW nude photos make the baby lucifer cry.

ha-ha

:(

Hey, where are the people decrying the "I don't like looking at boobies!"?

Oh wait, that's just in the breastfeeding thread...I keed, I keed!

As one who thinks the majority of "modern art" is a pretentious joke...I think this guy's (Tunick) stuff is actually pretty cool.

He should do some stuff with different colors (like in Africa or India). All those pale, pink bodies...

I'd be in one.

If this did happen in Liverpool, there'd be 1700 very nekkid people complaining their clothes got nicked while their backs were turned.

"I'd jump into the River Mersey, but it looks like rain."



/not the right screencap, but...
//semi-obscure?

No Ha Ha guy?

Just imagine the smell of ass all around you......

yack!!!!! No thank you....

I would count this as art because it DOES break boundaries. Americans (and to a lesser extent, europeans) are wierdly uptight about nudity. Many things regarding our bodies have become hyper-sexualized. Consequently, the words many are taught to associate with sex such as "dirty", "shameful", "forbidden", and "taboo" are also associated with naked bodies. I think this man's work is a powerful statement that it doesn't have to be this way and that bodies can be just that.

I would like to see each ass painted a different colour and make the world's largest rainbow!

sunbumfla

I would like to see each ass painted a different colour and make the world's largest rainbow!

Nah rainbows are teh ghey now.

kalidaemon


I would count this as art because it DOES break boundaries.

Why does something have to break boundaries to be art?

I agree with the rest of what you said though...

I'm a photographer. I like the guy's work. Nudity in art is usually involving one to a handful of people. Inevitably, most nude art is erotic, even if the artist claims its not supposed to be.

I don't find his art erotic though. Something about seeing hundreds or thousands of pale nude bodies changes it. There is a sense of vulnerability to it. That thousands of people choose to stand around naked together for the picture is also somewhat noteworthy. And that my friends, is why it is unique and why it is art.

Don't try to define what is art and what isnt. You inevitably end up sounding like an asshole.

Hell of a Full Moon ..Ay Chum
**********************************

Don't try to define what is art and what isnt. You inevitably end up sounding like an asshole.

Ah, but could the act of classifying a performance as art or not art be considered art?

"Don't try to define what is art and what isnt. You inevitably end up sounding like an asshole."

Couldn't agree more.

His work reminds me of the concentration camp photos and the photos out of Cambodia...

right on nacho man

Ha! Ha! Those British and their silly names!

...that really works better with the actual picture. Because he's a colonial guy and all.

Kaybeck: This thread needs more Ha! Ha! guy.


It's called cowbell. Get it right.

Albert Frankenstein: Why don't you like his art, because he does nude photos?

It isn't art. Stop cheapening the term.

Nudes can certainly be art. Photography can certainly be a form of art. Sensationalist idiots like Tunick, however, are not artists.

I agree with xlbrooklyn, the pieces remind me of concentration camp photos with piles of dead naked bodies.

Hence the vulnerability association. The only time most of us are used to seeing that number of nude bodies is when they're dead from war time atrocities.

Don't try to define what is an atrocity and what isnt. You inevitably end up sounding like an asshole.

Albert Frankenstein:

Spencer Tunick is awesome. I remember articles have been greenlit about him before. I believe I have also seen a docu on HBO about him and his work.

Let me correct that for you.

Spencer Tunick was awesome

His early work was brilliant. But he hasn't had an original idea in years.

TheDirtyNacho:

Don't try to define what is art and what isnt. You inevitably end up sounding like an asshole.

Pardon? As the viewer I certainly can define what art is and isn't. Don't tell people they can't define art for themselves (and express the opinion), because, y'know, you inevitably end up sounding like a pretensious asshole.

kalidaemon: I would count this as art because it DOES break boundaries.

If you mean did break boundaries, then I agree. But as I said earlier, he isn't doing anything innovative anymore. He's become a cliche of himself.

For those who dont seem to get why those who try to define what art is and what isnt art inevitably sounds like an asshole... lets think about it.

You're sitting around trying to convince others that something isnt art. You're taking the time to actually do this. You're working up arguments in your mind that attempt to what is essentially, demean others harmless viewpoints. Sure, you could disagree with its societal value, interpretation and what not, but no, you're going to make a blanket statement thats its simply not art. But isnt that ridiculous? Who makes you the master of art? Heck, i'm a photographer and im not about to tell you what is and isnt art. Its pointless and quite simply...makes you sound like an asshole.

I mean, theres really nothing else to say about it. Just some helpful advice, because theres a whole lotta folks on here who ought to relax and get out once in awhile and enjoy life, the world and the interesting people throughout it.

seriously guys. you get so worked up and argue with other internet guys to no end about anything, and yet accomplish absolutely nothing while doing it. what did robin williams say in good morning vietnam... you are in more dire need of a blowjob than any white man in history? well you might not be white, but you get my drift. I used to be like that, a few years ago. An unhappy virtual shut in, typing angry comments to strangers half the world away. Then I dont know..I grew up. I found a love for life and a drive to do something with it. I started by going outside, smiling at strangers and stretching my mind open and looking for beauty wherever I could. I gained new friends, a new outlook on life, better health and it became a cycle of optimism. Hard to believe I was nearly a cynical shut in not so long before.

Wow talk about rambling! anyway, now ill be on my merry way :) ive typed way too much into this.