« DADT Discussion: Socarides, Frank, Stachelberg, Capehart | Main | Born November 14-15: Adolf Brand, François Ozon »

November 13, 2010



I love it when academics get things basically wrong:

"The crowd is not admiring the boxer's jab, but his body, especially his buttocks."

It is the viewer of the painting who sees the boxer's buttocks, which like the rest of his backside are exquisitely lit for our delectation; the "crowd" is in front of him, no doubt "admiring" his basket. Perhaps the youth will twirl and show the rest of himself to the crowd, but in the painting as it is, nope.

I must say, those conservative Victorians exposed a lot of their boxers' flesh! Even we supposedly more sophisticated 21st Century types don't have our boxers enter the ring with their ass cheeks hanging out.


LACMA had a recent exhibit of Eakins' sports paintings and Salutat was included. Glorious work. But I had never been in a gallery that was so noisy with people talking in conversational tones, including some of the guards. I think they were unnerved by so much male flesh.


@Duncan: Isn't it possible that the viewers vantage point is shared by more of the audience? Most boxing rings I've seen have seating on four sides.

I saw the exhibit this weekend: superb, inspiring, and beautiful.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Most Recent Photos

  • Marriagethousand
  • Blackpeng
  • Queerthreads
  • Meanwhileelse
  • 57bus
  • Nutter
  • Soloway
  • Sketchtasy
  • Maggie
  • Newnegro
  • Patel
  • Running