The Right of an Artist to Choose His Own Subject Matter

By Arnel Mirasol

Eyes of Love, 2008, acrylic on paper

Not too long ago, I had an online tiff with Kirsten Anderberg, who describes herself as a feminist, historian, human rights activist, writer and musician. When I checked her profile info, I realized that she is also a 1997 graduate of the Whittier Law School. So, she must be a full-pledged lawyer by now. Awesome credentials indeed, anyway you look at it. Our discussion revolved mainly about the paintings I did of nude female models (sample above) featured in the several girlie magazines I kept at home. Kirsten wondered why I was doing only female nudes. She asked me to add male nude paintings to my repertoire, to which I answered that it's a big no-no for me, because naked male bodies disgust me. Apparently, she overlooked , the "hahaha..." I end my answer with to indicate that I'm just being facetious. She assailed my saying that, because she must have thought my disgust real. She quickly presumed that I was homophobic, or a hater of males. ( Kirsten and I were both wrong in our understanding of the word. Homophobia actually means fear or hatred of homosexuals. My apologies.) Well, what else should I say. I'm a true blue straight male who don't exactly relish painting models with dangling, or, God forbid!, tumescent sexual paraphernalia.

She next told me that she can't quite believed that I see nothing beautiful in Michelangelo's naked male sculptures (left). Well, which artist won't be entranced by them. In fact, when I was still in art school, Michelangelo's paintings of powerful males (below) were the first artworks I tried to emulate. I was so enthralled by him that I bought two books that featured his art.

But Kirsten should understand that when an artist admires male nude artworks, it doesn't follow that that artist will be obliged to also create male nude artworks. Not wanting to paint naked male bodies doesn't imply hating them, or the male specie in general. Kirsten insistence on their being one and the same is stupid logic. My fascination with Michelangelo's paintings of naked males is over, and I'm now pouring my efforts in painting, not only female nudes, but also picture book illustrations and other paintings depicting a variety of subject matter and styles.

Her supposedly observant eye then focused on a female nude painting I did - that of Marilyn Monroe in high heels - Maria Lina Desnuda (left). She remarked that Marilyn shouldn't be so glamorized because she led a sad life. She may have achieved fame and fortune, but she in truth felt exploited. That's why she succumbed to the lure of drugs and was so depressed that she eventually committed suicide. How true and how sad.

But what Kirsten said next, floored me. Here, unedited, are her exact words: " I ask you paint a few of her DEPRESSED, LONELY, DRUNK ALONE DESPERATE let's paint REAL portraits of who she was for once! Paint THOSE pictures, not this trite predictable made up crap of a "fairy tale" of what women never should want to be unless they want to be MISERABLE AND DIE YOUNG."

The nerve! Who does she think she is? She has no right whatsoever to dictate to me what I should paint next. It's none of her business if I want to paint a thousand portraits of a glamorized and orgasmic Marilyn Monroe oozing with sex appeal and joy. Kirsten opinions on my art doesn't count. She may affixed to her name all those highfalutin titles, but still, I won't consider her critique valid and relevant: because I can see at a glance that her knowledge about art is sparse and threadbare.





The only opinions about art I highly esteem and put a high premium on are those of my peers - my fellow artists; those of the art critics, art dealers, art collectors, and most especially those of my family and friends, because I know that they always mean well even if they negatively criticized my artworks. If she wanted more male nudes painted, then I, a male painter, shouldn't be the one she should pester. She should ask the female and gay painters she knows to do it for her. Maybe, she should also request the best painter nowadays of pin-up style female nudes (below), Olivia de Berardinis, to cease painting those naked women in porn poses and high heels, and instead start painting male nudes from now on. And Kirsten should also stop from lumping us painters of female nudes with pornographers. Nude female art is not pornography. The biggest pornographers are all there in the US. It would be best perhaps if she send Hugh Hefner, Bob Guccione and the other porn moguls there a facebook message each sometime. They might appreciate it and may add her perhaps to their list of friends. They'd be thrilled having a feminist as friend.