Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Debate has been raging down here this last week about a guy called Bill Henson. An artist who held an exhibition displaying photos of naked children, some include a full frontal nudity shot of a 13 year old girl.

The police stepped in a took down the photos and were considering laying charge against the Bill Henson, even the prime minister has weighed in, calling the photos disgusting.

 

Now this

 

A YOUNG Melbourne artist appalled by the controversy over photographer Bill Henson has thumbed her nose at police by putting on public display her own photographs of naked children.

 

Victoria Larielle plans to project up to 40 photographs of two 11-year-old boys on to a screen tonight at Melbourne's inner-city Loop Bar.

 

The photographs, taken in 2001 with the permission of the children's parents, form part of her exhibition I Am Not A Photographer Not A Pedophile But An Artist. Larielle's protest was designed as a response to police flagging child pornography charges after seizing more than 20 of Henson's photographs from a Sydney gallery last month.

I don't know if the the words 'pedophile' or 'disgusting' are accurate descriptions. Stupid and naive are more appropriate. The egos of these 'artisans' know no bounds.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether they are paedophiles or not is not the major problem.

Whether they conducted themselves appropriately is not the issue either.

 

What is of greatest concern is that even if they have conducted themselves with concern for the children they have used in thier 'art' and the children have not been exploited (and I say IF)...the images are like candy to actual paedophiles.

 

Who is to say one of these sicko's doesn't take a liking to one of the kids in the images and seek them out for thier perverted pleasures... Who is to say the sicko getting turned on my the display doesn't pluck a child off the street on thier way home....

 

It should not be encouraged.

 

Who goes to these shows anyway?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No charges laid against this artist.

 

DETECTIVES cleared a provocative photographic display of naked children that opened in Melbourne last night.

 

Two plainclothes officers sat through a 10-minute projection of images by artist Victoria Larielle.

 

The show, entitled "I am not a pornographer nor a pedophile but an artist", was held in the city's Loop Bar.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Here we go again.

In the middle of the furore about naked children being used in art. These tossers decide it's a great time to promote their 'art' by exposing their 6 year old daughter's naked body to the nation for scrutiny.

 

Art Tossers

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a father of three young girls I feel myself inclined to agree with what everyone is saying BUT, art has always challenged and pushed boundaries and demanded that people take stock of their perceptions and realities. We are who we are as much for our art as anything else. We should not need to restrict expressions of art or culture on the possibility that some miscreant will take advantage of it. One could adopt a similar attitude with a myriad of acts and items in our society - cars, knives, gas, petrol and so on, all of these things may be misused by some nutter to harm others, do we remove them from our community? Of course not. Anglo-Saxon culture has always been prudish, with the US taking the notion to extreme levels. In our media nudity is almost always presented in a sexual context but it need not be and isn't in many other cultures. Nudity is not pornography, if we can get our heads around this idea and stop regarding it as if it were we might find that the sadder members of our community aren't conditioned to act like Pavlov's dogs when they see a bit of skin. It is all a bit of a storm in a teacup with both sides of politics trying to prove they are more outraged than the other.

 

Simon Schama presents an excellent series called the Power of Art. In it he describes art as being " the enemy of the routine, the mechanical and the humdrum. It stops us in our tracks with a high voltage jolt of disturbance; it reminds us of what humanity can do beyond the daily grind. It takes us places we had never dreamed of going; it makes us look again at what we had taken for granted."

 

 

 

That said, did you see the clothes the girl's father was wearing? I was more offended by that shirt and tie than anything else.

 

Just to add a bit more...not that I reckon the magazine's actions were in anyway responsible or sensible in the context of the debate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the motivation of these people that outrages me (and I'm genuinely outraged). Trying to prove a point and promoting their art using naked photos of their 6 year old daughter is just about as selfish as you can get. Selecting this moment in time, during major controversy about this very subject, surely suggests that their prime motivation is having their name splashed around in the papers in the name of artistic endevour. It doesn't hurt to have the PM involved either.

 

Unfortunately RD we need to allow for the sickos in our society. I'm sure 99% of us men can see the innocence in these images BUT what about the other 1%? That 1% can inflict a hell of a lot of damage on innocent children. So I believe (very sadly) that the measure of what we should or shouldn't display in the public eye starts with the sickos.

 

And what about the sickos? Shunned and scorned by society What messages are they getting from all this. "Hey. Maybe it is OK to look at naked young girls".

 

Do you think they care wether it's pornography or art?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mantas I agree with most of what you say in the first para. But the second para I think is misguided. To what extent do we modify our actions, behaviour and culture to take account of a very very small minority of people? We now have people banning photography at school events and people feeling concerned about letting (adequately sun screened) babies and young children bath naked at the beach. Let's get a grip here. Paedophilia has been around literally forever. It is shunned and its perpetrators vilified for good reason, but I don't see the existence of those wankers as a reason to restrict the way we as a people express ourselves.

 

The third para is also misguided. If there is anyone suggesting that the sight of naked children might be titillating, it is the people outraged here. The funny thing about nudity and sexuality is the mystery involved, once everything is out in the open and common place, it loses much of it's excitement and allure. So rather than saying, ho hum, big deal we have this "outrage" which automatically converts something perfectly natural and quite common place (naked children that this) into something forbidden and therefore, by implication for some, altogether more exciting. What is going to get the weirdoes off more do you reckon?

 

My wife is entirely on your side here, by the way. I'm not some naturalist sitting at home at my computer in the nude espousing the benefits of getting one's gear and prancing around the place, just trying to add a different view.

Link to post
Share on other sites

>We now have people banning photography at school events and people feeling concerned about letting (adequately sun screened) babies and young children bath naked at the beach. Let's get a grip here.<

Slightly different RD. These things happen in the bright light of day usually in crowded places under intense scrutiny from the parents, sure there maybe a pedo hanging in the bushes, but it's a little different to buying a publication with naked children in it and doing god knows what later in private.

 

I appreciate your view (and partly agree) but feel there's a sense of naivety on the part of the 'artists' and there supporters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...and in some cases the 'artists' are just looking for a fight for freedom of expression. It is like a red rag to a bull - even the sniff of censorship of creative expression has always stirred a massive over reaction from the arty lefties.

 

I am just not sure this is the fight they should be fighting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find this debate quite strange that a modern society like Australia has become so strung up on nudity that they cannot possibly see the naked form as being art. Better ban Nirvana album covers. Little kids on the beaches, make sure they are covered up (tops too girls). Coppertone ads no more. Art books with nudes should be burnt. Nudist beaches have to go as well. No cameras at kids sporting events. The government needs to create some dress standards there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

TJ, we are talking about naked GIRLS aged 6, 9 and 13! Not nudity in general. They are photographed in deliberate poses for adult viewing pleasure. I would post some pics but it would inflame the debate even further than nessecary. You can look for yourself on the net, they are not hard to find.

For what it's worth, I actually think the images are cute and innocent, as I do when I see my own naked 8 year old girl. Possibly even artistic. BUT That's far from the point. I'm not a representative for every male on the planet.

I'm certainly no prude, I often take my kids to a nudist beach where we surf. They even call it the 'dangler beach'.

 

(i better explain, i dont actually go nude my self) shifty

Link to post
Share on other sites

TJ,

 

Nudity and art have always gone hand in hand, and there have always been nude paintings and etchings of babies (cherubs) and sweet innocent children - but what we have now is an explosion in this kind of PHOTOGRAPHIC kiddie porn art.

 

The sicko's have found thier loophole and they do not want anyone to close it up.

 

I would be surprised if any one of you saw these photographs (not paintings) with children in submissive sexual poses with fear or shame on thier faces and felt good about them. They are just off.

 

Like the next person I love the little naked sweet pic's on Anne Gedde's cards...and I see true value in the famous vietnam pic of the girl running naked (saw an interview with her recently - very courageous woman!)....these are NOT the kind of pic's we are talking about. It is the out and out, push the boundaries kiddie porn.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally Posted By: Mamabear
but what we have now is an explosion in this kind of PHOTOGRAPHIC kiddie porn art.

The sicko's have found thier loophole and they do not want anyone to close it up.

I would be surprised if any one of you saw these photographs (not paintings) with children in submissive sexual poses with fear or shame on thier faces and felt good about them. They are just off.


Really mama? Are we talking about the same images here? Are we talking about Henson's work and the recent magazine articles or something else?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rag-Doll,

 

The cover shot itself was not posed too poorly - but the expression on that child's face was truly saddening. Maybe I am more sensitive to it, being that I read peoples body langauge and facial expression for a living - but it chilled my blood. As did the facial expression on Henson's Image. The images contained inside the magazine were much more explicit.

 

And yes these are tip of the iceberg.

 

No problem with naked art. No problem with naked children. No problem with the appropriate use of naked children in art...but the emotively dark and over sexualized photographs of children put on public display is just overstepping the boundary of common decency.

 

My opinion. Happy for it to be disagreed with.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally Posted By: Mamabear

No problem with naked art. No problem with naked children. No problem with the appropriate use of naked children in art...but the emotively dark and over sexualized photographs of children put on public display is just overstepping the boundary of common decency.

My opinion. Happy for it to be disagreed with.


No disagreement here, in fact I reckon pretty much any normal person is going to have a similar view.


Is this a first? Have we just had a discussion about a highly sensitive and emotive topic that has ended in agreement? Hmmmm, it just doesn't seem right.
Link to post
Share on other sites

>The sicko's have found thier loophole and they do not want anyone to close it up.<

 

 

That pretty well sums it up in one sentence for me.

 

I would go as far as saying 'It's the thin end of the wedge'. Every society has boundaries on this sort of stuff. These 'artists' push the boundaries, apparently that's what they are supposed to do. What irates me is they are using their own children to do so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/10/2300486.htm

 

Ohhh...and now there is more.

 

After reading this I am even more convinced that these parents are not doing thier daughter any favours!

 

Fancy finding something overtly sexual about your 2 yr old sucking on a pacifier and then publishing those pics for others to admire - umm - is the man an idiot?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a good friend in the force who was involved in child porn investigation. Trust me the sickos were not looking at the so called art that is in question. It is an ugly part of society and Jake the Mus has the answer but for a moment think of the unthinkable and that is what these priks are doing to our children. Beware of the restrictions you believe will make a safer society because it creates levels and as you have found now with the ridiculous situation of taking photos at kids sporting events it will only become more obsessive and the parents of that little girl running around the beach without a top on will be accused to inciting molesters.

Difficult and delicate subject and a debate that should be had - which is also what art creates.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole issue has been blown so out of proportion it's just plain ridiculous. But with Aussie politicians all trying to outdo each other on family values it's hardly surprising. Especially after years of the ultra conservative Howard government bringing Aussie family values back to the around the 1950's. Just glad I don't live there anymore. You guys can have it...

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...