is lena dunham naked too often?
Image: Wikimedia Commons
Like many other people my age (read: twentysomething ladies), I’m totally excited about the return of highly successful HBO series, Girls, by Lena Dunham (writer & lead actor).
If you’ve seen it, you’ve probably noticed how often Dunham is in the nude on the series and the media/blogosphere backlash against it. From sex scenes to just doing average things like brushing her teeth in the bathroom, we’ve seen every inch of her from intimacy to in and out of the toilet.
I like Dunham and to be honest, I felt like the nudity was refreshing. In her own words she stated the nudity as this: ‘Yeah. It’s because it’s a realistic expression of what it’s like to be alive.’
It is a realistic expression of what it’s like to be alive and I feel like Dunham is just comfortable and confident enough to show herself naked on screen.
It was at the Television Critics Association panel that Dunham found the necessity to defend her nudity when one of the audience members (Tim Molloy from The Wrap) voiced his opinion on the redundancy of her nudity:
‘I don’t get the purpose of all the nudity on the show. By you particularly. I feel like I’m walking into a trap where you say no one complains about the nudity on Game of Thrones, but I get why they’re doing it. They’re doing it to be salacious. To titillate people. And your character is often naked at random times for no reason.’ (Emphasis mine)
As you can imagine, there was a stream of support in defense of Dunham’s so called redundant nudity. I had no idea that nudity in all its forms was there for a purpose? Sometimes, you just sleep naked and you wander off into the bathroom? In Dunham’s case, I feel like her nudity does serve a purpose. It’s simply to show that the series wants to seem ‘real’ and as ‘unedited’ as possible in its depiction of the lives of these young women.
The comments made by the reporter from The Wrap seem to insinuate that if you don’t have a ‘made for TV’ body, then there’s no point in showing it to the cameras. He later had this to say about his comments on his personal Twitter:
‘Perhaps she’s critiquing the male gaze. That’s why I asked. I’m asking questions, not giving answers.’
Maybe it’s just me, but the nudity that Dunham chooses to show in Girls is obvious. Can’t Molloy see that she’s simply someone who’s comfortable with her body and that she doesn’t find it necessary to hide it? Is she really critiquing the male gaze or is she simply confident and comfortable enough to not give a damn? I feel like it’s the latter.
What do you think, Lipsters?
Is the nudity in HBO’s GIRLS ‘necessary’? Does it rail against the male gaze? Or is it just ‘a realistic expression of what it’s like to be alive’ plain and simple?
Share your thoughts in the comments!
If you have strong views to the contrary of this article and would like to share them with the world, email Ruby, Lip’s news editor, to pitch your ideas! [email protected]
Everyone is talking about Lena Dunham’s nudity like it’s a big deal – because she has a body that doesn’t fit in to society’s beauty norms. No one would bat an eyelid if she was thin, tanned, with perfectly-proportioned boobs and bum. Go HBO for depicting realistic nudity!