Ludwig has a brilliant point here. Any takers? Are you going to call the police onto the newspaper and indict it's editors for distribution of "child pornography"? Where are the police? Why haven't they taken action? What about all the people who have shown this work in the past 25 years and the people who make the documentary on his work? You people are socailists and fascists of the worst kind.

Vanilla

Thanks for the link to Hoyden... I could really identify with what tigtog had to say about her experience.

When I looked at Henson's photos of the 13 year old girl, I was immediately transported back to my adolescence. In his photo I saw some of the 'almost anger' as my body changed despite how I felt about it... and how I was perceived differently by adults. I recall feeling that I wasn't asking for this new form of attention and I certainly wasn't comfortable with it. Perhaps if I'd been a part of a nudist colony like tigtog, I would've been more comfortable.

At my last counselling session, I asked my psychiatrist if he encountered many people with mental or sexual issues due to growing up in naturist clubs. His answer; no.

I understand this is anecdotal, but it does indicate the extent of discomfort the rest of us have with our bodies and sexuality. A young person with a strong sense of self and knowledge about their body is far less likely to be victimised by anyone including paedophiles.

Hiding away from our natures causes most of our sexual problems. Some can look at a naked body and see it as disgusting is a sad state for our culture and future. We urgently need to accept ourselves as we truly are. Children sense immediately if an adult is uncomfortable or ashamed.

That is not to say that 'anything goes'. The issue of informed consent both by the subject and parents is crucial. Some children are confident and fully supported and others aren't.

As some posters have noted, there are people who see Henson's work as horrid/pornographic, which reveals more about them and their sexual issues than about the artwork.

Henson's art is stunningly beautiful and we would be poorer without this beauty. The same cannot be said about true porn - it exploits our sexuality. I know this is a generalisation about porn; I am trying to make a distinction between it and the work we see in art-galleries.

Art makes us think, porn makes us hungry.

Fractelle,

I wonder who it is you are referring to when you suggest that some contributors think that the childs naked body is disgusting?

I'm yet to actually see anyone suggest that.

What I find highly distasteful is the desire of a 40 year old man to take photos of a naked child for his and others enjoynment/entertainment.I'm not saying that the work is neccessarily pornographic, although a pedophile who has photos similar in composition should be vulnerable to prosecution. Arts role in pushing boundaries is to find the limits of acceptable behaviour and push them a little to see if they are appropriate. The broader community seem to be saying that in this case Henson has gone too far

All that stands in the way of prosecution of Henson, and the media outlets who have printed the photos, is the fact that it is supposed to be art.

The arty types seem to be suggesting that if something is supposed to be art, it cannot be also be pornography, or pedophilia, or propoganda or polemic. I think they are clearly wrong. Just because it is art doesn't automatically make it acceptable.

The content of a picture does not change depending whose hands are on it Paul. If that is the case, perhaps they should be imprisoned for having any pictures of children at all.

You want thought crime? ok, line up with the nazis and communists.

"All that stands in the way of prosecution of Henson.........is the fact that it is supposed to be art."

No. It was fully consented and the model is perfectly happy with this. Can you explain how a naked child's body is innately offensive and indecent, to the degree it is considered pornography? And if it is so, how can you explain the history of art, which is full of naked adolescents?

Paul.L - "The arty types seem to be suggesting that if something is supposed to be art, it cannot be also be pornography, or pedophilia, or propoganda or polemic. I think they are clearly wrong."

And I think they are right. Pornography is specifically intended to provoke a sexual response in the viewer, and few - if any - alternative readings are possible. Henson's work is clearly not intended to advertise the girl sexually. If a particular viewer sees the girl in the photo as a sex object, then that is a peculiarity of the viewer, not the work.

See Fractelle's post above for an expression of the depth and range of feelings Henson's art provokes. If someone can see nothing but pornography in Henson's photos, it suggests a profound lack of emotional depth and/or a moral hysteria hair trigger.

There are actually people in the art world who are uneasy about this photo. It's time to end the artificial divide, created here and elsewhere, between on one side an informed and art-loving elite and on the other an ignorant and fearful bunch of philistines. Many who are critical of Henson's latest work would actually fit more comfortably on most issues in the former rather than the latter group.

Steel, the history of art might be full of naked adolescents as you say, but any work of art must be considered in its historical context. It is only now, not in any former time in history, that we are facing an unprecedented epidemic of child abuse. Like it or not, a photographic image of a child today in our culture is not the innocent portrayal it might have been in other periods of history or indeed still might be today in other cultures.

I lament this every bit as much as do you and other supporters of Henson's work. It's no use hand wringing now and crying over lost innocence. The damage is done. It's been happening slowly and relentlessly for a long time now, due largely to the aggressive corporate sexualization of children and the explosion of general accessibility to all manner of written material and visual images that the Internet has provided.

Henson has crossed the line here and he should have anticipated the negative reaction this photo would invoke. No matter how haunting or poetic his work might be, his judgement here was badly lacking. And this girl will live with that for the rest of her life. Even had the photo still been hanging unremarked on a gallery wall, the chances are high in my view that she would one day regret exposing herself so vulnerably to a camera lens and the curiosity and hostility of the outside world.