The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Crucified on the cross of political correctness > Comments

Crucified on the cross of political correctness : Comments

By Ross Buncle, published 4/6/2008

Should we let the nanny state stomp on our right to assess controversial works, and undermine our cherished democratic values in the guise of protecting them?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
This article is very brave, and probably the most accurate responses I have seen on this great issue to date. YES I say great issue. As an artist that focuses into erotica and sexuality, - www.myerotictouch.com confronts most of its viewers - so, of course I am happy that the police raided Hensons show. Needless to say, I am also undermined by the common grounds censorship of the art, and at the same time not surprised, by the backward and closed mindedness of the Australian authorities. - if you are fearful of it, hide it away, wipe it out, or pacify it - hasn't this been our cultural stance since the initial invasion of this country anyway? what is the difference now? Nothing really, only the fact that we can now intellectually discuss the events, and possibly stand against it??
Posted by dkiss, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 9:50:25 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This is now the seventh thread on this subject on OLO. So I had no expectations of the article containing anything new. But it does. It presents a very interesting multifaceted perspective. Good one Ross.
Posted by Ludwig, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 11:37:24 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes yet another article on this same subject. The debate on Henson's work is nothing to do with political correctness in my view. It would be if 'cultural elites' (as described in another OLO article) were arguing that naked pictures of children in sexual poses is okay in the intersts of art. That would be political correctness. Rudd was in fact going against the artistic tide.

If we were talking about pictures of nude adults these articles shouting out 'censorhsip', 'big brother', 'nanny states' and the like would have some merit, but we are talking about children. Big difference.

Is there to be no line at all for artists? Do artists expect to live under a different set of rules than the rest of us? Is there any situation where sexualisation of children is okay
Posted by pelican, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 12:48:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hensons work is art and it should be dealt with accordingly. It is being exhibited in an art gallery, dealing with artistic and poetic imagery. It is a far cry from pornography. Art is still the cognition of life, a deeper penetration and understanding into life. A different way of understanding the world in perpetual change.

Judy Annear of the Art Gallery of New South Wales Annear (AGNSW), who was curator of Henson’s 30-year retrospective at the AGNSW in 2004-05, said the censorship was “appalling”. She repudiated the allegations of child pornography.
“I’ve known Bill’s work for 30 years and we’ve been collecting his work since the early 1980s,” she said. “We mounted a major retrospective in late 2004 and 65,000 people saw it here in Sydney and there were no complaints. We produced a book for show and it sold out—probably about 4,000 copies—and again there were no complaints. It then went to Melbourne and broke all records for a major solo show.” Asked about what had produced the hysterical attack on Henson, she replied: “You have to look at the broader social arena." http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/jun2008/bhen-j03.shtml
Rudd and the Labor leadership have seized on the Henson issue as a diversion from mounting social tensions resulting from the rapid rise in the cost of living and growing hostility—just six months after its election—to the Labor government. Like the Howard government before it, Rudd Labor is trying to develop a political constituency among the extreme right, Christian fundamentalists and other disoriented layers to use as a means of intimidating and suppressing critical thought, as it ramps up its assault on the social conditions of the working class.
Much of the language and the lies being used by Rudd and his cohorts is chillingly reminiscent of the language and anti-democratic measures that led to the Nazi book burnings and the Nazis’ characterisation of virtually all modernist art as Entartete Kunst or Degenerate Art. These attacks are part of a right wing political agenda that seeks to debase and degrade society including demeaning all the the Arts and twenty years of cuts to funding.
Posted by johncee1945, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 1:51:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Those who support Henson,would you also defend the free publication of all forms of pornography on the grounds of freedom of expression ?What if some porn indeed has artistic merit,as do Henson's pictures,admittedly, not that Im saying that his work is pornographic?
I dont hear accusations of political repression and that the government intends to begin witch-hunting and burning books over that one single issue.I'm simply pointing to the childish over-simplification that you guys are dishing up by way of serious debate.
Wish you'd be consistent.

socratease
Posted by socratease, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 2:16:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ART and the changing of culture.

Philosophy is usually translated into "Art" some of which in turn is the shock troop unit against culture. Once we have seen it all and done it all, what next? Art explores 'new things'..but does it do so with a moral conscience and compass?

Philosopher-->Artist--->The Public (breaks down resistance to new ideas)

Commercial interests weigh up the acceptance of these new ideas and try to get their merchandise 'just right' on the line between 'ok' and 'risque' .. sex always sells they tell us.. and I'm sure this applies to art as well as cars.

BUT THEN.. we reach a status quo.. 'borrrrrrring'.. so some bright spark artist thinks "I'll challenge some barriers and boundaries"

Adventurous movie makers go down the dirt track ..of course its not about 'money' but 'artistic freedom'...

Then our impressionable youth are exposed to the new normality and the cycle begins again. "Another step downward"

We do need a Savior, the crucifixion which will bring us home has already been done. The cross has done its work. The rest is up to us.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 4:56:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Will Ross Buncle log on here and defend his article?

Why, why not?
Posted by Rainier, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 5:01:10 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
socratease says :"Those who support Henson,would you also defend the free publication of all forms of pornography on the grounds of freedom of expression ?" This is just verbal jugglery. The drive behind pornography is based on exploiting sex, turning sex into a profit, into a commodity, the creation of a market on the most backward of relations. But that is Capitalism the system the governments actively fight for to exploit every aspect of life from workers labor power, predatory home lending, food and to water.
Socratease says" "I dont hear accusations of political repression"
But this attack is political repression and the Arts have come under attack in the universities and TAFEs with courses cut, reduced and much of the art being hosed out. And other art exhibitions have been attacked by governments. Complaints from rightwing groups with an axe to grind and the sensational media do not constitute breaking the law.I find the mass media including the idiot box, with its daily dose of murder sex and violence and its perspective to dumb people down - pornographic. The nude figure too has been a legitimate subject for artists for a full five centuries.
Posted by johncee1945, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 5:04:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
socretease,

Those who condemn Henson, will you call for the censorship of all forms of pornography that involve children in vivid sexual scenes, and demand the confiscation of any publication of such along with the charging of all individuals involved? Of course you will but you know as well as I that those are quite impossible ... too difficult.

To those who support the political repression of Hensons work, the witch-hunting of Henson and his supporters, do you want consistancy across the artistic spectrum? Then why won't you support the banning or burning of famous literature that is much more explicit than anything Henson has published? Not only are de Sade's works 'sadistic erotica' but the pedophilia in Voltaire's work Candida is probably worthy of greater damming as it titilates with a sexual adventure between a 12 year old girl and an adult male.

Wish you'd show some consistancy.
Posted by keith, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 5:22:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Probably the most thoughtful pro-Henson article so far, but I'm disappointed that his liberalist defenders themselves are still locked in the issue of pedophilia. I understand that such is the populist rhetoric meant to carry opinion on this issue through the media. However, this topic's ideological implications are much broader than the matter of pedophilia, even though obviously encompassing a major part of that issue too. While I agree with Buncle's concern about the media-spin usurpation of critical discourse over Henson (the "pissing me off" aspect), we should remember that phenomenon surrounds nearly all political discourse now.

Given what I perceive to be a more pressing and general political context here, Buncle's article does not make explicit enough his own ideological convictions. What is the topic's actual relationship to Buncle's notions of "cherished democratic values" and "principles"? I think Buncle uses the terms insidiously and uncritically, just like the party chiefs' own motherhood statements of populist manipulation. And Buncle: what's wrong with a "nanny state" (though I believe it hardly deserves the title now)? Give me a nanny state over a neocon/lib privatization "whore state" and blustering "rugged individualism" or "bully state" any day.

Consider the unwitting irony of Johncee's emotive “nazis...book-burnings”, etc. (echoing MUP's Lousie Adler): liberalist Henson aesthetics are precisely the spillway of anti-traditional sentiment underpinning Fascism's orgiastic and misanthropic indulgences. Remember too the actually corrupt, hypocritical Nazi description “degenerate art”: NS art was very degenerate, and often pedophilic.

Again in this forum I conjure – after Buncle's all-too-brief Sade reference - Pasolini's eloquent “Salo” and its sharp, direct relevancy, light years beyond any Henson exhibition; recall Pasolini's celluloid tribute to Breughel under Orff's “Veris leta facies”.

And then...it's only a matter of time that unexamined notions of "democratic value/principle" and "free expression" sanctioned by caveats of “art” will lead to snuff venues and yet further degradation of humans, including adolescents, babies and foetuses, and say incorporation of plastinated cadavers in installation works. If that's the "aesthetic" you want, along with its resultant "morality", then you will surely reap it.
Posted by mil-observer, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 5:28:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In response to Rainier, here I am, logging on - but what would you have me "defend"?

To be honest, I wonder whether those posters who have taken positions contrary to mine (or at least, positions they think they are contrary) have even bothered to read the article properly - if so, they appear to have not fully understood it.

I expressed an ambivalence on the issue of censorship in relation to the Henson furore for reasons I took some care to expand upon, yet the reactions of the anti-censorship brigade here amount to huff and puff and the general hysterical kneejerk stuff that is typical of the mindset, and reflect only the authors' views, without regard to the actual content of the article.

If any of this brigade can elevate their thinking beyond tedious cliche and manage to speak directly to the article while coming up with some real points worth debating, rather than pushing their moral wheelbarrows along a very well-worn track, I'll be happy to respond accordingly.
Posted by Ross Buncle, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 5:43:27 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Didn't see your post, mil-observer. Just want to state that my dismissal in my previous post of the anti-censorship brigade's rants does not include you.

To be honest, I found your writing pretty dense and a bit difficult to digest on first reading. That's another way of saying I don't think I understood everything you were saying and need more time to try to get to terms with the issues and points you raise! I haven't time to respond right now, but will get back when opportunity presents.
Posted by Ross Buncle, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 5:52:49 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes Ross, I realized that your post was directed elsewhere in the hiatus of our crossed webform submissions.

I should rephrase my previous (and, forgive, presumptuous) description of that part of the Pasolini work: I meant "tribute to Breughel AND Bosch". The 350-word limit cut me off.

Although I perceived the "Salo" scene's style and light closer to the softer Breughel canvas, the harsh, brutal, subject matter and compositional structure obviously evoked Hieronymus Bosch.
Posted by mil-observer, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 6:05:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Nice article, Ross Buncle. However, I'm curious as to why you haven't viewed the images yourself, given that they've been available on mainstream media websites, and elsewhere. They're still up at this blog, which also has some good discussion and a video of an interview with Bill Henson:

http://www.sauer-thompson.com/junkforcode/archives/2008/05/bill-henson-6-u.html

On the basis of what you've written, I'd expect that you would be somewhat less ambivalent on the issue of censorship of these images if you'd actually seen them, since they are neither pornographic nor exploitative.

Other than that, I generally agree with everything you've said.

mil-observer: << Although I perceived the "Salo" scene's style and light closer to the softer Breughel canvas, the harsh, brutal, subject matter and compositional structure obviously evoked Hieronymus Bosch. >>

Actually, the obvious artistic reference for me in Henson's work is Caravaggio.

Boazy: << Philosophy is usually translated into "Art" some of which in turn is the shock troop unit against culture >>

Spoken like a paranoid and ignorant philistine.

<< We do need a Savior, the crucifixion which will bring us home has already been done. The cross has done its work. The rest is up to us. >>

Spoken like a paranoid and ignorant godbotherer.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 7:16:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJ

You are much to kind to Boz Diva.
Posted by keith, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 7:39:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The sacred cow of art defended by the Paddington set. Hey , get whose hands off what art? We draw the same long bow calling photography art as we do calling motor racing sport. Football is sport , cricket is sport. And hey , what about that defining moment in art history when Gough paid four million dollars for blue poles. Well ladies and gentlemen , that was art. And oh yea, that was also the same Labor party in federal government.
On conclusion could I suggest to the arty set on line ; get a hair cut and get a real job!
Posted by diver dan, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 9:20:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
johncee1945

Read your post again please.You concur with what I say:
"...the drive behind porn is based on exploiting swx,turning sex into profit,into a commodity....but that is Capitalism" the last little bit then tries to hide behind socialist claptrap.

What the hell is Hensen's nudes if it isnt "based on sex, turning sex into profit, into a commodity"
purrrrlease dont tell me Hensen has not made a quid out of it or that he has donated the entire amount in the best socialist tradfition to ease the plight of all children who have suffered child abuse.

Do you have children as young as those models?If you had, would be happy to bare their pubescent bodies for the artist in the name of art and free expression?Yeah.I bet you would.

I am not against the freedom of expression if artists use models who give consent knowing fully well what they are doing.

socratease
Posted by socratease, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 9:57:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think these pictures are going to set a precedent!

Nest time a bloke is arrested for having child porn and he is standing in front of the judge explaining himself he will simply say "its art your honour" and all the people here who have defended this so called artist will also run to the defence of the pedophile/artist.

Pedophile = Artist

There are all sorts of draconian things which are considered art by the mentally disturbed and naked pictures of children in sexual positions are one of them!
Posted by EasyTimes, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 11:01:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ross, thanks for a thoughtful article. You have portrayed the mix of feelings that issues such as this raise.

I find myself with a degree of unease about the photo's but a far greater degree of unease at the censorship of them. It's not always easy to articulate mixed feelings on a topic to those who must see the topic in absolutes.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Wednesday, 4 June 2008 11:49:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I hope this to be my last reply to the topic
as i was molestered at the age of thirteen the topic is a sore point, i cancelled notification to it long ago but my inbox is flooded with people thinking it is a topic of debate.

ONE IN FOUR children get molesterd GET IT?

If your one every time the debate gets new wind you get reminded
GET IT?

SO we have artists doing nudes [hey if its adults who the hell cares

BUT WHEN IT IS CHILDREN
even children THAT HAVE BEEN NORMALISED to being nakid in front of adult males OR been CONditioned to be photographed from god alone knows what age

It enter's the realm of assult
ColLuded and persistant assult
And when these arty types realise it they still INSIST on THEIR right to cvieuw ANYTHING they DAMM well please ,TO use ANY excuse to console their perversion into a sort of acceptable voyerism in the name of art

Call a spade a spade
a child a child
EVEN on tv they dont show images that COULD serve child perverts pleasure
BUT you arty farty subsidised elite are as persistant as any child moleser stalking their next victim GET IT?

JUST to get your next fix-ation
YOUR latest aqusition
no matter what you think [you are sharing this blog space with children[adults who because their child hood was stolen all ways stay that abused child
GET IT?
who are afraid even to touch their own child ,for fear of what was done to them by some liberal minded pervert

go to a child molestation court case some time [see what fricken lawyers do to get the perverts off [or at worst a suspended sentance [its like being raped five times ,
once by the pervert [then when the family says your lying, [then the cops not believing you , then in the pre trial , then in the trial

and then having to recall it every time the topic comes up
forever
GET IT?
Posted by one under god, Thursday, 5 June 2008 12:46:06 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
one under,

your view reflects the same sentiment as wrong-doers, namely you project your own feelings/emotions/desires onto others and expect them to ADJUST to YOU.

This is no slight on you, it is calling attention to the way in which behaviour cycles and thus continues to weave its nasty pervassive web. Nothing changes and things get worse.

Its intriguing that these media images are frowned upon yet nary a murmur about the rampant violence and killing of those evil nasty menz that passes for entertainment in the media. The cognitive dissonance of lamenting images that reflect or create sexualisation and not killing, runs deep in our society. l think it reflects the perception of the relative social value of who is being victimised.

In any event, its confusing as to why you have, of your own volition, sought out and engaged a subject that reflects personal experiences that you would rather not recall.

"and then having to recall it every time the topic comes up forever."

You dont, you can switch off the poota.

"GET IT?"
Posted by trade215, Thursday, 5 June 2008 10:12:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
trade whilst I agree for the most part with that last post the comment was made early in the post you were responding to " i cancelled notification to it long ago but my inbox is flooded with people thinking it is a topic of debate."

Still it's a choice to follow through on those inbox messages.

Perhaps under one god is a bit like those who get badly burned by family court or similar and are unable to accept that there is another side to the argument, that it's not all black and white, that their own experience does not encompas the whole. It takes time and willingness to move on from some experiences.

The world would be a much poorer and sadder place if we allowed the agenda to be set based on just the bad things that happen. Those who've been harmed are often unable to see the flip side of the issue.

It's a constant struggle to find the balance between minimising the harm done through the abuse of freedom and the harm done through restricting freedom. We do try and set constraints to protect children and we try and set those constraints at a level that still allows children to develop fully, to be equiped for adulthood and to cope with the changes they undergo along the way.

I suspect that this issue is more to do with differing views on where that balance lies than with the freedom of artists to do what they like. That those opposing art such as Hensons consider the harm and risks associated with its production and showing outweigh any benefits while those supportive of Henson consider the benefits to outweigh the risks.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Thursday, 5 June 2008 12:06:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
R0bert, "The world would be a much poorer and sadder place if we allowed the agenda to be set based on just the bad things that happen"

That is exactly how the world is at present. Any issue that is about restricting or removing rights and increasing penalties for normal civilian behaviour is about this.

I think it's reasonable to conclude that we are already poorer and sadder than we should or could be, because of this mentality.
Posted by Steel, Thursday, 5 June 2008 1:51:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
trade you thought of becoming a lawyer

you think the same way

''>>your view reflects the same sentiment as wrong-doers,''<<
yes if the victim hadnt worn a short skirt your honour ''she was asking for it''

its the same mentality that tells the pervert to say ''i was molestored as a child your honour [ie the poor me defense[so the dirt then isnt on the pervert but the one that molestered him][tell me where it ends]?

thus clear boundry needs to be set

you have no idea of what the victim goes through ,this is clear by your rationalising and defending perversion

and yes its an opinion,
but i have earned the right to speak from personal experience
[have you?]

you have no idea about projection
just by cleverly 'in theory' saying;
quote
''>>namely you project your own feelings/emotions/desires onto others and expect them to ADJUST to YOU.''<<

what has the 'artist' done?

who's desires were met in seeking out the teenage girl to be photographed in the NUDE'?

If the girl came up with the idea and sought out the artist ;
where is the artistic merrit?

more likely the pervert sought out a young girl
sought out some liberal mother

[possably by word of mouth [or some elite sociaty get together ]
or via the pervet club [no doudt govt subsidised]

how egsactly was the mother approached?
how do you find a mother [i use the word lightly]
that solicits a pervert to photo he child nakid?

Or did the pervert look for a likely subject ?
[ie solicitation]?

The matter only get cleaned up by absract comparison , by searching out the true facts ,the matter gets murkyer and smellier

but you no doudt will find a selective point to make your next thrust into defending a clear perversion.

But it is by these type of converations you find each other!

There will allways be some pervert ready to pounce upon the next innocent ,and then some retard to defend them and a lawyer to get them off.

plus they possably get a nice picture to wit.
Posted by one under god, Thursday, 5 June 2008 2:06:12 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"I find myself with a degree of unease about the photo's but a far greater degree of unease at the censorship of them. It's not always easy to articulate mixed feelings on a topic to those who must see the topic in absolutes."

I don't have that problem, in London it is child pornography, Henson can't do it there. We had him in mind when we re-vamped our child pornography laws.
Posted by UNCRC, Thursday, 5 June 2008 3:22:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"It is being exhibited in an art gallery"

Not true, it may be the most downed-loaded naked little girl photo of all time. It is now an iconic image of the pedophile movement. We can say thank-you to Australia for that.

The Japanese love it, and do you know why? Because it is so them, they're hooked on pedo-fetishism.

They were squirting it over the internet before the police did anything. It was also used as part of a commercial promotion. The other thing is that it was about child sex and pedophilia.

What we have is an Oz elite (which is embarrassing in itself) telling the rest of Oz, that they're hicks not to dig it.

In London, it has been prohibited from exhibition because it is child pornography there. Also, the pro-Hensonites are censoring 'concerned parent' those posts are zipped off their blogs in two ticks.

They want to use children in sexual photography and they expect the Prime Minister no less to buckle to them. Well, in NYC, LA or London, they'd be told to get psychiatric treatment.

The other thing, half of Henson's vile supporters are barely literate, that's a bit hard to take as well.
Posted by UNCRC, Thursday, 5 June 2008 3:31:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
UNHRC>"I don't have that problem, in London it is child pornography, Henson can't do it there. We had him in mind when we re-vamped our child pornography laws."

Are you going to arrest Henson if he visits London, or the model and her parents who are both happy and proud of the work (see end of this comment)?What about all the British artists who have naked children in their work?

UNHRC>"Not true, it may be the most downed-loaded naked little girl photo of all time. It is now an iconic image of the pedophile movement"

It's a great picture, isn't it? I've heard a lot of pedophiles have catalogues of children in their possession- are you going to accuse your department and clothing stores of child pornography by association? There is nothing wrong with nakedness. It's been this way in art throughout history. By your definition, a naked child playing on the beach is a child pornographer/exhibitionist. I find you and your attempts to portray children that way disgusting.

What you are doing is tainting the girl with the brush of pedophilia, when she is merely naked. She felt perfectly happy and safe doing the modelling, and her mother did so as well. Don't you care about their opinion? Or are you going to demonise the girl and tell her to be ashamed of herself?

>" Also, the pro-Hensonites are censoring 'concerned parent' those posts are zipped off their blogs in two ticks."

Is that all you are? I thought your opinion had some currency with the lawmakers in the UK. I gave you more respect than you deserved. You certainly haven't extended the courtesy to recognising or reading the opinions of the actual parent of the adolescent and herself. And guess what they are concerned about:Bigots like you hijacking their situation to promote your own agenda. Now that is sickening and not the sign of a concerned parent at all,but a religious,reactionary bigot..

http://www.smh.com.au/news/arts/this-is-not-porn-say-hensons-models/2008/05/25/1211653846181.html
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23776064-421,00.html

What about this artist, who is showing an exhibition of two naked 11 year old boys?
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23797460-2,00.html
Posted by Steel, Thursday, 5 June 2008 4:36:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
My apologies for taking so long to get back. If anyone is still following the thread, rather than individually respond to posters' comments, I have just published a new blog post which includes the controversial Henson pictures and an updated precis of my stance on the issues surrounding them.

Viewing these pictures has enabled me to resolve most of the dilemmas that I discussed in my Online Opinion article - but a couple remain. For anyone interested, my new blog post can be found at: http://theboomtownrap.perthpunk.com/wordpress/?p=118
Posted by Ross Buncle, Friday, 6 June 2008 5:50:20 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
That's a good point about thought crime in there. We certainly are close to it.
Posted by Steel, Friday, 6 June 2008 6:26:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It's just tragic when folk still want to batter the notion that there is a form of social commentary, in which social justice ideals are sustained, and in which "political correctness" is a real ideal and not just a fashion.

Don't imagine that you can knock folk just for trying to be politically correct, otherwise you only prove that you don't have your own social justice values sorted out.

If you want to knock the "politically correct" you at least have to have a real academic argument against the position which has already been debated into correctness.
Posted by Curaezipirid, Sunday, 8 June 2008 2:43:14 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Curaezipirid,

I don't know whether you were referring to me, but if so, I'd respond that I have argued as rigorously as I am capable on all issues I raised. One of my main concerns was to avoid taking the easy reflexive arts-identikit view on anything! If there's an issue I brought up that you think is not supported by reasoning (whether you agree or disagree), identify it. As it stands at the moment, in my view your comment appears to lack substance.
Posted by Ross Buncle, Sunday, 8 June 2008 5:50:26 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Ross, just caught up with your article and blog post. It might be of interest to know that I am a mother (of boys and a girl, adolescents and just adult). My daughter (who is an 18 year old art student) tells me that if Bill Henson had ever wanted to photograph her, she would have been honoured. She is young enough to remember being 13, and his photographs speak deeply to her: she is a very vociferous defender of his work, and has been very upset by the accusations made against him.

And I would have no problems in permitting her, if the art was all of it, and I would be proud of the pictures. As another mother says elsewhere on the site, they are deeply moving photographs of a very transitory age, and to have such photographs of one's children would be something you would treasure. However, there is a caveat: if I thought she was going to be let in for the kind of public condemnation that has been driven by certain ideologues in this debate, I would advise her strongly against it. Not because I had any fears about Henson, but because of the prurient minds out there that would transform what she thought was her collaboration in making a beautiful piece of art into something horrifying and disgusting. If she were the model at the centre of the furore, I would be feeling that she had been violated and disempowered by those ugly accusations, and I would be very concerned for her.

(cont)
Posted by Alison Croggon, Monday, 9 June 2008 12:03:28 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
(cont) - And that consideration - a very recent, if rather major one - aside, I would be very angry if anyone forbade me or my daughter our free choices on this matter, since in no way is she being placed in danger. Other parents with other children would make different decisions, for their own reasons, as is their right; I am an artist, I understand and value what artists do, and I can make judgments for myself on the moral equity of other human beings. So far as I can work out, the issue of consent only applies to sexual acts; I have issued consent for all sorts of vital decisions all through my children's lives, such their health, their education, and whether they are old enough to cross roads on their own, and when I thought it necessary, have forbidden them their desires, as does every parent. And as they have earned more authority through self-responsibility, they have been given more autonomy. This is a delicate and always negotiable process, which cannot be pinned down by the crude processes of legislation. The less the state interferes in such things, unless there is a clear case of harm being done, the better.
Posted by Alison Croggon, Monday, 9 June 2008 12:04:22 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Needless to say, Alison, I understand and agree with all points you make. It's a relief to encounter someone who sees the complexities of the issues involved and sorts through them cogently as you have, without putting the blinkers on to shut out inconvenient complicating considerations. No mean feat - and going by my reading, one that most folk who have entered the great debate have not managed to negotiate successfully.
Posted by Ross Buncle, Monday, 9 June 2008 2:51:52 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Aslison, thanks for those excellent posts.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Monday, 9 June 2008 7:38:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
When images hurt and exploit people they sould be banned.
Posted by BR, Monday, 9 June 2008 1:35:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy