I am a photographer and photojournalist who has worked in a variety of print and online media and also exhibited fine-art photography in solo and group shows. My undergraduate and graduate-level training includes studies at the Savannah College of Art and Design, Academy of Art College, SFSU, and RISD. Therefore, to an extent I should know whereof I speak.

McGinley's work doesn't define a generation: very little art can encompass something so broad. Nor do I think the term "hipster" should even be brought to the table here. Slate is in general a very good news/op-ed outlet but I cringe when their writers must use terms like "hipster": these kids are my generation and look like people I know, work with, and party with. If they wore Nike running shoes (no, not the retro ones either) instead of Converse would they be hipsters? If they rode really tech mountain bikes instead of old-skool bikes would they? Please don't try so hard to seem . . . so 2002. Ok? Ok.

What I see Ryan McGinley as doing of lasting merit is two-fold: 1, he has brought nudity into corporate advertising at a higher and more open level than it has conventionally (even in recent years) been used. 2, he treats male and female frontal nudity in equal terms and no longer do we see women as sex objects via nude work because he treats male models along the same lines. While there is an erotic aspect to his work, it's more about freedom to be nude in such situations and the confidence in being photographed as such over a gaze directed expressly at the nude body. I remember as a kid in the later 1980s and early 1990s I saw many R-rated films, magazine ads, and yes even fine-art photography that was mainly focused at female nudity. Larry Clark and later Anthony Goicolea were central in looking at nudity or even sexuality in a different light for my generation of photographers. Yes, Nan Goldin mattered too, but in a different way. Ryan McGinley isn't breaking that kind of ground but he's putting forth some really interesting and pleasing work.

Thank you cloud! I couldn't agree more. As an artist who uses multiple mediums to generate a final piece my most controversial and often without intent, have always been my male nudes vs. female nudes. Since the bulk of my work doesn't even focus on nudity in general anyways, those few pieces can draw both welcome and unwelcome attention just because of the dichotomy in USNA marketing and art. None of my shows in Europe have ever had a problem. Although, if I were greedy, salacious does sell. It is a fine line to walk ethically as an artist.

People who run around naked with one another in the woods are hipsters. It means people way into the beyond (anti-conventional adventurers. Bliss farmers. People who don't care about what anybody else thinks or says.) It's not a stupid term. It's associated with self-expression and it fits in very well with what McGinley is saying which is "these people have found a unique relaxation. They know about something unique." That's what 'hip' means.

Then they are a little behind the curve as people have been hip for centuries, mostly in Europe.