I like to close each month with a Close-up—a chance to hear your thoughts on a topic that's been rolling around in my head while researching the blog. I find myself asking this question more and more as I work on bushnstache. If my interest were simply the male nude, contemporary photography would give me endless material. Yet I keep returning to images made fifty, seventy-five, or even one hundred years ago.
Why?
Part of it is certainly the photography itself. Part is the history. But I suspect there's something deeper. These images were created in a world where desire often had to be coded, where beauty and shame could exist in the same photograph, and where the simple act of looking carried a different weight than it does today.
When I visit other vintage physique blogs, I notice everyone has their own preferences. Some love the earliest academic studies. Others prefer the polished physique era of Mizer or Bellas. Some gravitate toward candid military snapshots or amateur photography. Others are drawn to overtly erotic work. There seems to be no single reason we're all here.
So I'm curious...
What draws you to vintage male photography?
Is it the history?
The artistry?
The models?
The photographers?
The mystery?
The forbidden quality?
The nostalgia?
Something else entirely?
Or do you actually prefer contemporary work and simply enjoy looking back?
I'd love to hear what keeps bringing you back.
The hot faces/bodies and bad-boy vibes. XG
ReplyDeleteI wonder if the “bad-boy” vibes are connected to the models being more straight-presenting back then, or being tough guy jocks or bodybuilders or actual street hustlers, runaways, drifters, or in Hurles’ case actual criminals?? bns
DeleteI like un-staged photos of men doing everyday activities where they need to be naked for some reason. And there are many of these.
ReplyDeleteLoving the word choice, “need” to be naked. I think I know what you mean. Almost like the camera caught them in their natural habitat? The candid camera idea? bns
DeleteYes. If you're working around water and could get drenched, you do it naked, then your clothes are still dry. Or when it's too damn hot to wear clothes, like in a factory or on the farm. And locker, changing, and shower rooms. Sometimes you just take your clothes off for a game of football!
DeleteHaha! Yes, I love that too! Really miss those days😂😈💕bns
DeleteVintage photos appeal to me because they are natural in so many ways. First, they come from a time when it was natural for men to be nude together. Second, men's bodies were naturally developed through labor or measured exercise. No chemical enhancements. And finally, a lot of them were naturally proud of their bodies. Yes, some were shy about being photographed, but it amazes me how many are obviously proud to be seen.
ReplyDeleteThere's a completely lost innocence in modern male nude photography. Although there certainly are still artistic and sensitive images being made, for the most part it is crass and vulgar. You have to go back in time to see men who are naturally sexy without trying . . . or even knowing they are sexy. And that's what makes them special.
Ah! You are touching on some concepts I've been trying to name, but you just laid them in writing perfectly. The word "innocence" jumps out at me, and it's opposite ideas, "crass and vulgar." As I reflect on these notions, it occurs to me that those two versions of the male nude photograph have always co-existed, thinking of Galdi vs Townsend etc, but I agree it seems the 'crass' was the exception early on and now it seems to be the rule and more 'innocent' or 'natural' or unassuming images seem to be increasingly rare in the 21st century, certainly since the internet and apps began. Also, we have to remember the laws have relaxed around this work as have the social-psychological notions around homosexuality...at least in most countries, so perhaps the "true" inclinations of the creators are being expressed. I mean we definitely saw Mizer's work evolve to be more "smutty" towards the end of his career. And I've recently stumbled across early work by Bellas that was definitely pornographic...so who knows what all was in their private collections. I'm sure there was an audience. The other idea you brought forward, that I also love, is the idea of being "natural" and men being "nude together." First, their bodies just happening to be fit through physical labor or measured exercise rather than pumped up with steroids or chemical enhancers. And then, being "proud" of their bodies just for their own sake rather than for likes on their social media or only fans accounts etc...such a business, such a cry for attention. I agree with all of this and will continue thinking on it. Thanks, friend. bns
DeleteThis has been a very interesting discussion about the topic of male nude modelling through the decades. I would like to add that today's models seem very jacked and maybe even over fit. It tends to add stress and tension to the photo with the tautness of the body. In earlier decades model poses were more relaxed and easily placed.
ReplyDeleteI'm referring to present day male nude models.
ReplyDeleteGreat observation! I never thought about that. I think that aligns with Jerry’s thoughts about vintage models after seeming more “natural.” I’d add maybe less self-conscious. The other elephant in the room is that the film had to be developed and prints produced in a dark room. They could do some minor retouching but not the photoshopping or instant viewing as digital files now, so the models may have never seen their own images and they may have been lied to about the audience or money involved. My point, if they weren’t getting feedback or attention for their photos, they may have not thought about overproducing themselves unless they were competitive bodybuilders. I’m only projecting. But you’ve got me thinking. Thank you, bns
Delete