While art comes in different forms and interpretations, more often than not, viewers have found intensified visual engagement in the three dimension depictions brought about by sculptures.[1] The structures, created mostly out of anything moldable would range from clay to wood and even metals. The Art of Sculpture of the human male and female body can be traced back in history to the ancient Greeks.

In ancient Greece, the artwork was rather formal and dominated by the Greek mythology gods at the beginning. Heroes are also included in the artwork which began to suddenly change at around 500BC with the interest of the ordinary world and its ordinary people. Despite the change, the male and female body remained a representation of a straight forward human body, a type of an outside picture of a human being.

In the re-imagination of what the human figure could be, the Art of the human body sculpting has evolved over the years with the influence of artists like Constantin Brancusi. Born in 1876 he is noted to be a pioneer of modernism. Modernism advocated for the use of new imagery and techniques that better reflected the realities of modern societies. Brancusi, in his work depicting what he termed to be the human representation of a woman, brought about controversies with his famous artworks like Princess X facing rejection at times.

Louise Bourgeoisie found a way of merging both contemporary and ancient artworks which would seem difficult to others in to one.[2] Well known for bringing sexuality to the public eye, the artiste considered her work to be a therapeutic process for the rough path that she had been through in her childhood. She explores the human body by molding them in to what may appear to be body organs of sexuality. The Cumul 1 is one of her works that is loaded with descriptive male and female parts.[3] Her works on the human body explore sexuality and gender. Most of her topics often touching upon her feminist grounds of female sexuality, their fragile nature, and their affecting matters.

In regards to the difference between the male and female bodies as represented by straight forward artists and a representation of artists like Brancusi and Bourgeoisie, I feel that the latter have a more powerful abstraction. While the traditional works may differ in one way or another, they lack originality and creative imagination, which is shown in great lengths of concealed realities by artistes Constantin and Louise.[4] Their works evoke a spirit of critical thinking and in-depth analysis created by their originality and development of the pieces. The artists make use of materials like latex, wood and other materials polished to adequately depict their representation, knowing quite well that material matters if there is a delivery  that they would like to communicate across.

Through the use of abstract forms by the artists, a perception mostly denied by Brancusi in regards to his artwork, a cosmic balance is achieved. From a powerful abstraction perspective, the sculptures of both Bourgeoisie and Brancusi are serenely simplified and individually expressed with high purity. While the artists’ content varies a great length with   Louise focusing mostly on sexual organ abstracts, there is a sense of true freedom and great strength that can be derived from the simple but voluminously vocal works of art from artists on their representation of the human body.

[1] Karen Schifman. Louise Bourgeois: Destruction of the Father Reconstruction of the Father, Writings and Interviews 1923-1997. MIT Press. 1994.  Retrieved from

[2] Karen Schifman. Louise Bourgeois: Destruction of the Father Reconstruction of the Father, Writings and Interviews 1923-1997. MIT Press. 1994.  Retrieved from

[3] Slatkin, Wendy. Women artists in history: From antiquity to the 20th century. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1985.

[4] Balas, Edith. “Object-Sculpture, Base, and Assemblage in the Art of Constantin Brancusi.” Art Journal 38, no. 1 (1978): 36-46.