Are they really so different?

While it is customary for us to take a critical view of modern day advertisements and their use of sexuality and women to get their message across, how different are they really from some of history's most valued paintings. The first picture is the Venus of Urbino painted by Titian and is on display in the Uffizi in Florence. The painting depicts a young woman, nude and laying on a bed presumably post sex, gazing at the viewers of the painting while her maids search for her clothes in the background. The second image is a modern advertisement commissioned by Calvin Klein with the purpose to selling cologne, again with a naked woman lying on a couch staring provocatively at the camera. In reality, both images are not very different. Yes, the first is considered a masterpiece (how brilliantly the artist captured the female body, the use of color and intricate details and time that must have gone into it), however its goal is the same as the Calvin Klein ad: to appeal to the male senses. According to Wikipedia, the painting was commisioned by the Duke of Urbino as a wedding gift and "instructive model" for his young bride. Even Mark Twain wrote about this painting, calling it "the foulest, the vilest, the obscenest picture the world possesses." While the Venus of Urbino may not have been so blatantly selling a product like Calvin Klein is, it is still trying to appeal to men who at the time were the exclusive buyers and commissioners of artwork. The woman in both of these images are objects of the "male gaze" with passive, downward look, arousing the idea of a personal connection with the viewer. The personal bond with a man is what both images have succeeded in creating, thus making their product desirable.