Introduction
The gym toned, beefcake, with bare six packed torso became the iconographic representation of masculinity at the end of the 20th century. Sporting heros saturate the media, leaving scant visual reference to the ordinary man. Echoing the objectification of the female body, the male form has contracted in morphologic and
cultural diversity. There is confusion in male sexual identification, perhaps epitomised by ‘metro-sexuality’ arising in the early 21st century. Paradoxically, the social obsession with body image has been accompanied with a conservatism expressing puritan objection to the male nude aesthetic.

This exhibition explores that tension. It links our cultural histories embedded in sculptural tradition with contemporary male nude imagery, articulated by sporting heroism, once the preserve of Gods and Warriors. Challenging the homogeneity of popular masculinity, these portraits find a visual voice in the diversity of multicultural life. Referencing sculpture, there is also a dynamic between traditional 3-D expression with the 2-D media world of print, and electronic landscape.

Created using film-based infra-red photography, this work marks another transition, the rise of digital and fall of chemical photographic technology. Commissioned in 2001 and photographed between 2001and 2005, the work continues to evolve from its traditional photographic heritage, produceded as silver gelatin fine prints, and large format digital prints.

The exhibition has been previously shown in Sydney (2002), Spain (2004), Thailand (2004-05),and Daylesford, Victoria (2007). Selected images were published in ‘Blue’ magazine.

the work
To take more than 30 males predominately from the Asia pacific region and as many "types" as possible, between average fit to gymmed, take off their clothes and give them each a piece of sporting equipment, then pose them in the form of historic sculpture, light them beautifully and photograph them as if they are marble, against a dark background.

The work will work both in the traditional gallery context as well as the more public spaces. The first showing is at the Aquatic centre in homebush. The prints will be predominately 12x16 inches with ten or so bigger.

If this exhibition had of been presented 20 years ago it would be ghettoized as a "gay art show" since that time the adverting and porn (both soft and hard) industries have pushed this type of work into the mainstream. Now in order to make the work touch new nerves I'm not presupposing first world/western superiority in relation to the bodies depicted nor the sculptures.

my work:
This exhibition follows the exhibitions "Occupation" (which was part of the group show "fractured fairytales") shown in 1997, and "tohave + tohold" which toured 2000/1.

"Occupation" looked at men in uniform and how their every day acts have sexual overtones if taken out of context. They were presented as diptychs with the "aggressor" on the left and the "victim" on the right. But when the nationality, size or age of the person in either position changed, it challenges our perception of who was in the position of power.

"to have + tohold" looked at men (44 of as many different ages, sizes and nationalities as i could find) and what they want in relationships. Once again they were presented as diptychs but this time the right side one was the "model's" writing what they require in a partner. The whole show is on the internet and responses from people in cyber space are included in the shows.

This proposed show has the same conceptual motif as these two previous shows. It is an inclusive look at men that live in Australia, this time sport is the bind that is over layed. My work is concerns the beauty and celebration of the average male and addressing issues about the changing masculinity which confronts us. It is about who we all are, not just who we would like to be, or will accept as "desirable".or the current fashionable male body.

in conclusion
As Australia is one of the most successful multicultural nations on the planet and I would like the art presented and representations to reflect this. This body of work is presenting the ordinary as equal to the gods and warriors of a previous generation. I will as usual let the art critics articulate the shows positioning in the current debates on body, masculinityand identity debates, as well as post-modern and post colonial theory.

Nudity of the male form continues to be aesthetically
and socially challenging. By writing back to the Spartan traditions of nudity and sculptural medium Maguire’s photos of modern sportsmen elevate the ordinary man to hero status. It reflects the relative importance that contemporary society places on the sporting hero as a focus for adoration. It recognizes the shift in cultural identity of its Gods and Warriors. Maguire also explodes the idealism of male form that is dominated in popular culture by the Caucasian gym-toned body.
Talking with Garrie Maguire, the commissioning curator for ‘Gods + Warriors’, Sally Breen explores the notions of beauty and power and the ideals of power in his art practice. “Maguire looks at iconic images of the body beautiful but reinterprets and redirects the surface of the skin back to it”, says Breen. “I’d call it more a writing back, which is more of a post-modern trope in that its all about pastiche, all about picking up moments of informed culture to where we are today, and realigning them with Post modern theory, which is the demise of eurocentric hegemony; and that is of such importance: its the one thing in post modernism - that it writes back to the author. And I think that comes about in your practice even though you’re using Anglo bodies you’re positioning them in a venerable state or you’re reinterpreting signs, that once delivered a certain message and you’re throwing them back and saying, ‘hang on, wait a minute, the world has changed and a very different place.’”

“Ironically, Breker was the first to do the gymmer body”, explains Maguire.

Sally Breen: “Irony is the second most important trope in post modernism. Breker is a body that has the leisure time to work out and to work on the ideal body shape, which carries the lines of status to have the time to do that. [It is] completely prevalent now. Look at a magazine stand at the local news agency. The body beautiful, which is the worked body, the muscled body - the muscles are defined not for work, but for presentation for exhibition. These muscles do not come about because you’re banging in nails or beating leather, but because you’re on a piece of equipment that’s designed to make this type of body and it exists completely autonomously outside of work. So, it can become idealised because it is outside the everyday.” “I think the timeliness of your work is that it speaks from a marginalised position. What is interesting about you as an artist is that you’re an anglo artist that, but addressing issues you feel a bit concerned for. Obviously. Otherwise you wouldn’t be doing it, which is a real turn around in political correctness theory in that usually artists from a marginialised position will take up the authorship. Where you are mainstream angloceltic artist in that you’re taking that, you’re taking that responsibility and feeding it back. For me your work is all about writing back to notions about art history.” Maguire: ”That’s interesting because I keep butting up against the whole political correctness thing, that because I’m from the majority culture I can’t take this position because it’s not right.”

Breen: “Why is it not right?”

Maguire: ”I don’t understand that part of political correctness – that only the marginalised can speak for the marginalised. I don’t see [my other work] Assimilation and Gods + Warriors are not ‘preaching’ to those coming out of colonialism, but I feel I’m ‘preaching’ to the majority culture – the Anglo-celtic community. They are my audience; that people from the minority can be proud is a major plus.”

Breen: “As someone looking at your work it could also be said that you are an artist number one, and what ever political message that you happen to be delivering is secondary to your artistic intention – which is about beauty and the body and how you can re-inscribe notions [of] beauty independent of race theory, post modernist theory, political correctness theory when we pare it back to pure aesthetics and you as an artist and take you out of post modernist tropes of the politicisation of art and all those issues that art gets swept up in you’re dealing with notions of beauty.”

Maguire: “Yes, if the work is not beautiful enough that someone can’t walk off the street and find it interesting enough to spent 10 minutes looking at the show - then I’ve failed. If I can’t communicate on the most basic level I’ve failed. If I keep an interest then there are a thousand one things in the show that can haunt the viewer.”

Breen: “If you haunt them that’s what art is all about. There has been (and you’re one of the artists) that is returning back to the real, to the object, returning back to the ideals of art instead of getting caught up with all the political crap. You’re putting them aside and saying this is what I’m compelled to do. If you feel you need to read them in these contexts then it says more about you as an audience than about me as an artist. I think art has always been a two-way street. Whereas you as a producer of art, there is an audience and there is an A Conversation Between the Artist and the Curator object. And it’s always left up to interpretation, you can’t except that.” In writing back to icons from art history, ‘Gods & Warriors’ makes a deliberate commentary of the theoretic underlying beauty and the male nude in art practice. Breen explores the art theory traditions linked to this work.

Breen: “There was no art theory until 1968. Now... there is a desire for artists to go back to the object, to seek beauty, to seek harmony, to deliver what they see to the world back to the world – rather than it be caught up in [the] political. However, because of art theory and because of the whole industry worth a lot of money, in academia in publishing in any kind of art writing any contemporary art space federal and state funding it is tied up in the notion of art theory.

With your work particularly, you are an artist about beauty – classical beauty and the body; and for better or for worse that is a highly contentious issue. Because that in politics will never be resolved, its fluid moving notion that due to different types of media, different ways of presenting the body, different being in space, of moving in space, of representing the body will always change as a photographer. Some people will say that you have the responsibility because you capture the moment. There’s a big debate and always has been a debate about photography and representation and high art and low art. The interesting thing about you is your taking moments of high art and hijacking them fantastically – using the medium of photography, but you’re not just hijacking and repositioning them – you’re actually inverting them and that will always rely on art theorists to disseminate those ideas across. Your work will always be written about, by art critics.”
Maguire: “But I’m fine with that but I can’t articulate it in those terms.”

Breen: “And why should you? You’ve already articulated it. Your responsibility (as you’re an artist) isn’t to write photo-theory because you’re not an academic! Thank God you’re not an academic. That’s the culture industry, Theodore Aduratue, wrote beautifully on it at the Thordore Institute, he wrote all about the culture theory.”

Maguire: “Twenty years ago this was a gay show, 40 years ago it was outrageous... now its mainstream. That’s part of why I’ve highjacked the high art to legitimize the nakedness.”

Breen: “Do you think you need to do that as an artist? Or is it about irony?”

Maguire: ”Yes, I find an irony that I follow Ritts,
Mapplethorpe et el.”

Breen: “What is interesting about your work is you open a can of worms... That’s good because you’re doing quite a few things. You’re providing a platfolm for a lot of people to write about you. I like to talk about art as an industry, not as some autonomous zone where someone sits in the garret and throw out the work into the world. It’s an industry where you are reliant on critics, writers, creators and galleries – and they rely on you. You’re the first point of contact, you’re feeding them with images and they are taking them with them. But I really feel that the wonderful things about your work is... it readdresses the notions of beauty in a very timely way, because beauty has been forgotten about – especially in photo media where everything became goody realism, beauty became poo poo, it was considered not art.

Maguire: “Mapplethorpe was the last artist to make a name for himself doing beauty.”

Breen: “Especially in male figures, then it got really gritty. Mapplethorpe informs so much of 80s and 90s art history. What’s impressive about your work is that when it’s on a table with a lot of other artists or photographers. There’s a conscience effort in representing beauty which is what artists dispel because they believe that beauty (because of all the art history and art theory) is something that will if someone comments that your work is beautiful – it is somehow dumbing it down, which I think is really problematic. That is, in an academic way, you don’t talk about beauty anymore – you talk about politics.

As a photographer, how do you feel about your work and how it’s spoken about? Turning it back around to you?”

Maguire: “It doesn’t worry me. In fact, I like it talked about in those terms because I learnt the terms in phototheory, but I’ve never become confident enough to use them. I’m wondering if I’ll be crucified for using Arno Breker” referring to the Nazi-era sculptor Arno Breker. “There was a change in the ideal body at that time which is prevalent now.” Ironically, popular culture today arguably represents the male form in a quasi-fascist mono-morphic ideal. “I think most of what is now, male iconography and the ‘ideal body’ is so close to what Breker was doing in the 30s...”

Breen: “It’s all tied up with that Aryan mythology I can’t see your getting slammed for using that imagery, because you’re