TheByte

Monster · 07-06-2008, 02:05 AM

Lately there has been a media storm and debate in Australia about whether nude photos of girls as young as 13 and 14 years old can be considered as art.

This is the front cover of the Art Monthly Australia Magazine, the photo was blacked out by the msn website to avoid legal issues. The girl on the cover is 6years old. Angered by the "hysteria" over ''artist'' Bill Henson's pictures of a 13-year-old girl, the magazine also has a number of highly sexualised images inside, according to the Sunday Telegraph newspaper.

In this case, the child has been exploited for the purposes of making a political point.

It all started 2 months ago when australian ''artist'' Bill Hanson opened his exhibitions where photos of completely nude young girls were open for public display (if you want to see what the photos are like you have to look for them yourselves). The Australian Prime Minster Kevin Rudd condemned Bill Hanson publicly, which angered the art community, and they wrote a letter to the PM, arguing that these photographs and the artist did not sexually exploited these children. Here is their full letter

Quote:

PRESS RELEASE: MAY 27, 2008

Open Letter in support of Bill Henson
From Creative Australia 2020 Summit representatives

Wednesday, May 28, 2008

As members of the Creative Stream of the Australia 2020 Summit, we wish to express our dismay at the police raid on Bill Henson’s recent Sydney exhibition, the allegations that he is a child pornographer, and the subsequent reports that he and others may be charged with obscenity.

The potential prosecution of one of our most respected artists is no way to build a Creative Australia, and does untold damage to our cultural reputation.

The public debate prompted by the Henson exhibition is welcome and important. We need to discuss the ethics of art and the issues that it raises. That is one of the things art is for: it is valuable because it gives rise to such debate and difference, because it raises difficult, sometimes unanswerable, questions about who we are, as individuals and as members of society. However, this on-going discussion, which is crucial to the healthy functioning of our democracy, cannot take place in a court of law.

We invite the Prime Minister, Mr Rudd, and the NSW Premier, Mr Iemma, to rethink their public comments about Mr Henson’s work. We understand that they were made in the context of deep community concern about the sexual exploitation of children. We understand and respect also that they have every right to their personal opinions. However, as political leaders they are influential in forming public opinion, and we believe their words should be well considered.

We also call on the Minister for Environment Heritage and the Arts, Mr Garrett, to stand up for artists against a trend of encroaching censorship which has recently resulted in the closure of this and other exhibitions.

We wish to make absolutely clear that none of us endorses, in any way, the abuse of children. Mr Henson’s work has nothing to do with child pornography and, according to the judgment of some of the most respected curators and critics in the world, it is certainly art. We ask for the following points to be fairly considered:

1. Mr Henson is a highly distinguished artist. His work is held in all major Australian collections including the Art Gallery of NSW, Art Gallery of SA, Art Gallery of WA, National Gallery of Victoria and the National Gallery of Australia.

Among international collections, his work is held in the Solomon R Guggenheim Museum, New York; the Victoria and Albert Museum, London; San Francisco Museum of Modern Art; the Los Angeles County Museum of Art; the Denver Art Museum; the Houston Museum of Fine Art; 21C Museum, Louisville; the Montreal Museum of Fine Art; Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris; the DG Bank Collection in Frankfurt and the Sammlung Volpinum and the Museum Moderner Kunst, Vienna.

Major retrospectives of Mr Henson’s work at the Art Galleries of NSW and Victoria attracted more than 115,000 people, and produced not one complaint of obscenity. His work has also been studied widely in schools for many years.

2. Mr Henson has been photographing young models for more than 15 years. Until now, there has been no suggestion by any of his subjects or their families of any abusive practices. On the contrary, his models have strongly defended his practice and the feeling of safety generated in his process, and have expressed pride in his work.

We suggest that the media sensationalism and the criminalisation of laying charges against Mr Henson, his gallery and the parents of the young people depicted in his work, would be far more traumatic for the young people concerned than anything Mr Henson has done.

3. The work itself is not pornographic, even though it includes depictions of naked human beings. It is more justly seen in a tradition of the nude in art that stretches back to the ancient Greeks, and which includes painters such as Caravaggio and Michelangelo. Many of Henson’s controversial images are not in fact sexual at all. Others depict the sexuality of young people, but in ways that are fundamentally different from how naked bodies are depicted in pornography. The intention of the art is not to titillate or to gratify perverse sexual desires, but rather to make the viewer consider the fragility, beauty, mystery and inviolabilty of the human body.

In contrast, the defining essence of pornography is that it endorses, condones or encourages abusive sexual practice. We respectfully suggest that Henson’s work, even when it is disturbing, does nothing of the sort. I would personally argue that, in its respect for the autonomy of its subjects, the work is a counter-argument to the exploitation and commodification of young people in both commercial media and in pornographic images.

Many of us have children of our own. The sexual abuse and exploitation of children fills us all with abhorrence. But it is equally damaging to deny the obvious fact that adolescents are sexual beings. This very denial contributes to abusive behaviour, because it is part of the denial of the personhood of the young. In my opinion, Mr Henson’s work shows the delicacy of the transition from childhood to adulthood, its troubledness and its beauty, in ways which do not violate the essential innocence of his subjects. It can be confronting, but that does not mean that it is pornography.

Legal opinion is that if charges were laid against Mr Henson, he would be unlikely to be found guilty. The seizure of the photographs, and the possible prosecution of Mr Henson, the Rosyln Oxley9 Gallery or the parents of Henson’s subjects, takes up valuable police and court time that would be much better spent pursuing those who actually do abuse children.

4. Perhaps the most distressing aspect of the trial-by-media to which Mr Henson and his work has been subject over the past few days, is how his art has been diminished and corrupted. The allegations that he is making child pornography have done more to promote his work to possible paedophiles than any art gallery, where the work is seen in its proper, contemplative context. It is notable that the attacks on Mr Henson’s work have, almost without exception, come from those who are unfamiliar with the photographs, or who have seen them in mutilated or reduced images on the internet.

If an example is made of Bill Henson, one of Australia’s most prominent artists, it is hard to believe that those who have sought to bring these charges will stop with him. Rather, this action will encourage a repressive climate of hysterical condemnation, backed by the threat of prosecution.

We are already seeing troubling signs in the pre-emptive self-censorship of some galleries. This is not the hallmark of an open democracy nor of a decent and civilised society. We should remember that an important index of social freedom, in earlier times or in repressive regimes elsewhere in the world, is how artists and art are treated by the state.

We urge our political leaders to follow the example of Neville Wran, when in 1982 a similar outcry greeted paintings by Juan Davila. At that time, Mr Wran said: “I do not believe that art has anything to do with the vice squad”. With Mr Wran, we believe the proper place for debate is outside the courts of law.

Alison Croggon
Writer

2020 Open Letter in Support of Bill Henson ~ theatre notes

At no point did these artist explain why they have to use a 13 year old girl, and in what way can they consider photos of nude 13 year old girl as artwork.

If the police discovered any of these photos in our computer, we will be arrested for possessing child pornography and send to prison. It is true that artists are allowed to push the boundaries, however they must never cross the boundaries set by the law, they cannot use their ''artistic values'' as a shield and defend against their actions.

Rob · 07-06-2008, 02:57 AM

I think this [so called] artist was being deliberately provocative ....my personal feelings about these types of images is pretty negative. There is a big difference between [the very sentimental and sugary] Anne Geddes type of imagess and these.

Child abuse is far too common. We all know that some people will take a great interest in these types of images for all the wrong reasons -- I don't see much artistic merit in them at all -- they do feel very exploitative to me.

The Diva · 07-06-2008, 09:29 AM

That is awful!

I understand the "artist" claims he is trying to make a stand against censorship,
but it seems he is in for a quick and easy "buck" .

He used the shock factor of nude children to call world wide attention, this is free publicity .
Yes , it would be considered child porn.

I believe his work speaks more to the "child exploitation" case than the censorship case.

Contemplation ( as they claim) my foot!

For every art lover who will go to a gallery to admire his work, probably 10 perverts will show up to "admire" his work.

The worst is that it inspires feelings of exploitation for all those who do not have rights.

Rob mentioned the work of Anne Geddes, in 10, 20 or 30 years her subjects
would not be ashamed to say they were in a nude picture.
As a woman in the professional world , I don't believe the girls in this case
would feel the same.

Monster · 07-06-2008, 11:26 AM

This debate will go on for a while in Australia, wait til tomorrow when the major newspapers pick up on this story.

After all this talking about the artists and the art community, we should also turn our attention to the parents of these children. What exactly are they thinking? I struggle to think this photo is all done for the purpose of art, the young girl has makeup on and wears an facial expression which is similar to models of a much older age.

It is just baffling to read that some sections of the community actually voice their support for these type of ''art work'' and the most supririnsly of all, Cate Blanchett has came out and defended Bill Hanson for his photographs of full frontal nude photos of 13 and 14 year old girls.

The Artist · 07-06-2008, 12:00 PM

Child nudity?
If its a naked baby..who cares..
but from like age 5-18 is ****** up...

Gullwing · 07-06-2008, 04:45 PM

--The potential prosecution of one of our most respected artists is no way to build a Creative Australia, and does untold damage to our cultural reputation--

Are they F***ing stoned

If you prosecute is artist then you do untold damage to out cultrural reputation. Yes yes it does much more harm to the culture to lock this guy up then allow him to take advantage of little girls and post naked pictures of them.

If a mother or father took these pictures and had them developed at a shop the persond developing the pictures is forced to call the police and the parents would be in jail.

I can't stand most modern "art"

Rob · 07-06-2008, 07:02 PM

^ Well I love Modern Art ....but some of it is deliberately provocative and controversial.

Some of the sculptures and installations by Jake and Dinos Chapman are particularly offensive and disturbing:

(I have posted a link to an image rather than an image itself -- just in case some object to it)
http://www.brown.edu/Research/dichtu...n/ZygoticL.jpg

The Artist · 07-06-2008, 07:52 PM

^thats ******* scary..
thats not art..
its like a window into a maniacs mind..

Monster · 07-06-2008, 07:54 PM

Today, the father of that 6 year old girl has publically criticised the Prime Minister about his remarks on that photo, it is quite unbelievable, and it is quite disturbing since the father of this girl is a university professor.

Quote:

The father of a six-year-old girl who appeared naked on the cover of a magazine has taken a swipe at Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's tough stance on nude child art.

Is the photograph of the naked girl going too far? Have your say.

"It's interesting that if the Prime Minister comments on, say the greenhouse effect, he gets expert advice first," Monah University Associate Professor Robert Nelson was quoted in The Age as saying.

"I would like to know which art expert advised him on this."

The photograph of the girl, Olympia, was taken by her photographer mother, Polixeni Papapetrou, and published on the cover of tax-payer funded magazine Art Monthly Australia in a protest against the treatment of artist Bill Henson.

Mr Nelson said his daughter, now 11, often posed for his wife and that the family had no regrets about the "great work of art".

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd yesterday said he couldn't stand artwork depicting naked children.

Mr Rudd said work such as that shown in this month's edition of Art Monthly Australia did the opposite of restoring dignity to the debate over depictions of children in art.

Angered by the "hysteria" over Henson's pictures of a 13-year-old girl, the magazine included a number of highly sexualised images inside.

Art Monthly editor Maurice O'Riordan said he hoped the July edition would restore some "dignity to the debate".

Mr Rudd was asked if the picture restored dignity.

"If you ask for my personal view, no it doesn't. It does the reverse," he told ABC television.

"My view hasn't changed on this. We're talking about the innocence of little children here.

"A little child cannot answer for themselves about whether they wish to be depicted in this way.

"I have very deep, strong, personal views on this, which is that we should be on about maximising the protection of children.

"I don't think this is a step in the right direction at all."

"Frankly, I can't stand this stuff."

Nude girl's dad challenges PM

For f*%k sake, nobody have to hear from an art expert before giving out their opinion of an ''artwork'', and it is absolutely ridiculous to compare the greenhouse effect to photos of nude children. The PM, and everyone else doesn't need an art expert, common sense will tell you that it is just wrong to put a nude 6 year old on the cover of the magazine, which can be bought by anyone.

The art community thinks they have a superiority over everyone else and they can do whatever they want, above the law, in the name of ''artistic beauty''. Just saying it is ''great work of art'' does not explain anything, it does not justify their argument at all. If a photo of a nude 6 year old can be a great artwork, then all of us can be great ''artists''.

Rob · 07-06-2008, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by monster

For f*%k sake, nobody have to hear from an art expert before giving out their opinion of an ''artwork''

Hmm, that would very much be the current attitude.

However, if we don't know or understand the intentions of the artist, we could easily misinterpret the work.

In our postmodern culture that embraces pluralism, every opinion is considered valid -- regardless of how uninformed.

For many, Art has become a form of entertainment (and much art plays to this) -- unfortunately, it is often only taken at face value ...without much interest or desire to understand deeper meanings.

07-06-2008, 02:57 AM	#2
Rob Aficionado Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 4,618 Thanks: 892 Thanked 719 Times in 401 Posts	Re: Can child nudity be depicted as art? I think this [so called] artist was being deliberately provocative ....my personal feelings about these types of images is pretty negative. There is a big difference between [the very sentimental and sugary] Anne Geddes type of imagess and these. Child abuse is far too common. We all know that some people will take a great interest in these types of images for all the wrong reasons -- I don't see much artistic merit in them at all -- they do feel very exploitative to me. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Share on Facebook! Google Bookmark this Post! Spurl this Post! Reddit! Wong this Post! Tweet This!

07-06-2008, 09:29 AM	#3
The Diva Master Shopper Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Tampa Bay Posts: 926 Thanks: 974 Thanked 860 Times in 424 Posts	Re: Can child nudity be depicted as art? That is awful! I understand the "artist" claims he is trying to make a stand against censorship, but it seems he is in for a quick and easy "buck" . He used the shock factor of nude children to call world wide attention, this is free publicity . Yes , it would be considered child porn. I believe his work speaks more to the "child exploitation" case than the censorship case. Contemplation ( as they claim) my foot! For every art lover who will go to a gallery to admire his work, probably 10 perverts will show up to "admire" his work. The worst is that it inspires feelings of exploitation for all those who do not have rights. Rob mentioned the work of Anne Geddes, in 10, 20 or 30 years her subjects would not be ashamed to say they were in a nude picture. As a woman in the professional world , I don't believe the girls in this case would feel the same. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Share on Facebook! Google Bookmark this Post! Spurl this Post! Reddit! Wong this Post! Tweet This!

07-06-2008, 11:26 AM	#4
Monster Advocate Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Sydney Posts: 924 Thanks: 86 Thanked 105 Times in 68 Posts	Re: Can child nudity be depicted as art? This debate will go on for a while in Australia, wait til tomorrow when the major newspapers pick up on this story. After all this talking about the artists and the art community, we should also turn our attention to the parents of these children. What exactly are they thinking? I struggle to think this photo is all done for the purpose of art, the young girl has makeup on and wears an facial expression which is similar to models of a much older age. It is just baffling to read that some sections of the community actually voice their support for these type of ''art work'' and the most supririnsly of all, Cate Blanchett has came out and defended Bill Hanson for his photographs of full frontal nude photos of 13 and 14 year old girls. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Share on Facebook! Google Bookmark this Post! Spurl this Post! Reddit! Wong this Post! Tweet This!

07-06-2008, 12:00 PM	#5
The Artist Shaolin Shadow Boxer Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Sweden Gothenburg Posts: 9,171 Thanks: 41 Thanked 334 Times in 242 Posts	Re: Can child nudity be depicted as art? Child nudity? If its a naked baby..who cares.. but from like age 5-18 is ****** up... Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Share on Facebook! Google Bookmark this Post! Spurl this Post! Reddit! Wong this Post! Tweet This!

07-06-2008, 04:45 PM	#6
Gullwing Enthusiast Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 361 Thanks: 19 Thanked 82 Times in 67 Posts	Re: Can child nudity be depicted as art? --The potential prosecution of one of our most respected artists is no way to build a Creative Australia, and does untold damage to our cultural reputation-- Are they F***ing stoned If you prosecute is artist then you do untold damage to out cultrural reputation. Yes yes it does much more harm to the culture to lock this guy up then allow him to take advantage of little girls and post naked pictures of them. If a mother or father took these pictures and had them developed at a shop the persond developing the pictures is forced to call the police and the parents would be in jail. I can't stand most modern "art" Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Share on Facebook! Google Bookmark this Post! Spurl this Post! Reddit! Wong this Post! Tweet This!

07-06-2008, 07:02 PM	#7
Rob Aficionado Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 4,618 Thanks: 892 Thanked 719 Times in 401 Posts	Re: Can child nudity be depicted as art? ^ Well I love Modern Art ....but some of it is deliberately provocative and controversial. Some of the sculptures and installations by Jake and Dinos Chapman are particularly offensive and disturbing: (I have posted a link to an image rather than an image itself -- just in case some object to it) http://www.brown.edu/Research/dichtu...n/ZygoticL.jpg Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Share on Facebook! Google Bookmark this Post! Spurl this Post! Reddit! Wong this Post! Tweet This!

07-06-2008, 07:52 PM	#8
The Artist Shaolin Shadow Boxer Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Sweden Gothenburg Posts: 9,171 Thanks: 41 Thanked 334 Times in 242 Posts	Re: Can child nudity be depicted as art? ^thats ******* scary.. thats not art.. its like a window into a maniacs mind.. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Share on Facebook! Google Bookmark this Post! Spurl this Post! Reddit! Wong this Post! Tweet This!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
New objects	Rob	Concepts & Designs	230	05-24-2009 04:30 AM

Search Cloud

TheByte

Can child nudity be depicted as art?