Naked art...?

I heard that the American photographer Spencer Tunick headed off to Mexico City recently to take some pictures of naked crowds in popular spots of such city. Picturing naked masses is not unusual of Tunick's style, but what makes this event different from the others is basically the amount of individuals who volunteered to participate in the photo: the authorities calculate around 20,000.

It is a very impressive amount of people. 20,000 individuals who have no better thing to do on a Sunday morning than getting naked for Tunick's lens. Worst of all: It looks that the incident has become a major source of pride to Mexicans, or at least, to those who participated.

Is it really something to feel proud of? Despite the fact that a Guinness record was awarded to the crowd for this activity (probably tagged as the 'largest amount of people naked on a public area'), whether it's something to feel proud of depends on everyone's point of view of life, moral and social values. It is certainly a very arguable topic, and the discussion about it would be endless. Thus, I will not go any further on my criticism than telling that, in my own personal point of view, an "artwork" of this nature is extremely grotesque, vulgar and aberrant.

I'm sure that the people that participated in Tunicks photo session have a very different opinion than mine, which is very acceptable of course. However, as far as I know, Tunick's pictures are all about naked crowds, and the shoots don't vary very much from one to another except for the location: Amsterdam, Barcelona, Buffalo, Dusseldorf, Caracas, Mexico City... Is that really an expression of art, the fulfillment of twisted desires in someone's mind, or just a natural phenomenon adequate for our times, to show that freedom of speech and expression are for real?

That's just an idea to think about...