Post by Chips on May 24, 2008 8:56:43 GMT 9.5
History of Western art littered with images of naked children
According to the parameters set out by Miranda Devine ("Saturated with sex: the campaign to save young minds", May 22), those who produce child porn now include artists who should have their work removed from the Uffizi, the Louvre, the Vatican Museums, the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Art Gallery of NSW. That she lumps Bill Henson in with the likes of reckless advertisers and Dolly is parochial and embarrassing.
The best thing the farce at Roslyn Oxley9 can provide is a debate on displays of child pornography and exploitation: 11-year-olds with stilettos and make-up in crass poses splashed across fashion glossies.
Joanne Dalton Coogee
Disturbed men have killed themselves and others lost their jobs or gone to prison for having images not unlike Henson's on their hard drives. I imagine they, too, would believe an image of a naked child expresses vulnerability and humanity. That, Bill, is exactly the point.
Anne Cooper Undercliffe
Henson's images are potentially arousing to pedophiles, which theoretically makes them illegal in many jurisdictions. But is it appropriate to close exhibitions and store away from view his pictures as well as paintings of ballet dancers by Degas, Robert Mapplethorpe's photographs of four-year-olds and Sally Mann's pictures of her own children? Do we have to ban all images of children because some people's interest is not purely aesthetic?
Chris Oliver Elizabeth Bay
Photos of nude children are "honest and beautiful". Isn't that the stock defence of the child pornographer?
George Fishman Vaucluse
People should worry about their perceptions. If you see pornography and sexuality, you should be concerned about what a naked child represents to you.
Angela Dalton Coffs Harbour
I wonder if Kevin Rudd saw the exhibition before declaring the content revolting and free of artistic merit. I question whether he should make pronouncements on such matters, or leave it to us to decide what constitutes art.
John Mitchell Killarney Heights
Like a number of art teachers at a conference at the Art Gallery of NSW a few years ago, I was deeply disturbed by some of Henson's imagery. At the conference Henson said he was not responsible for the way audiences interpreted his work, missing the point that the objectification of children in this way is voyeuristic and therefore reprehensible to people who work with adolescents.
Any teacher who took their students to such an exhibition or studied Henson would need to think carefully about the impact on the students. Statistically there are likely to be victims of sexual abuse within the class. The impact of his work on such an audience reinforces the belief that adults condone such behaviour.
Karen Mors Mount Keira
According to the parameters set out by Miranda Devine ("Saturated with sex: the campaign to save young minds", May 22), those who produce child porn now include artists who should have their work removed from the Uffizi, the Louvre, the Vatican Museums, the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Art Gallery of NSW. That she lumps Bill Henson in with the likes of reckless advertisers and Dolly is parochial and embarrassing.
The best thing the farce at Roslyn Oxley9 can provide is a debate on displays of child pornography and exploitation: 11-year-olds with stilettos and make-up in crass poses splashed across fashion glossies.
Joanne Dalton Coogee
Disturbed men have killed themselves and others lost their jobs or gone to prison for having images not unlike Henson's on their hard drives. I imagine they, too, would believe an image of a naked child expresses vulnerability and humanity. That, Bill, is exactly the point.
Anne Cooper Undercliffe
Henson's images are potentially arousing to pedophiles, which theoretically makes them illegal in many jurisdictions. But is it appropriate to close exhibitions and store away from view his pictures as well as paintings of ballet dancers by Degas, Robert Mapplethorpe's photographs of four-year-olds and Sally Mann's pictures of her own children? Do we have to ban all images of children because some people's interest is not purely aesthetic?
Chris Oliver Elizabeth Bay
Photos of nude children are "honest and beautiful". Isn't that the stock defence of the child pornographer?
George Fishman Vaucluse
People should worry about their perceptions. If you see pornography and sexuality, you should be concerned about what a naked child represents to you.
Angela Dalton Coffs Harbour
I wonder if Kevin Rudd saw the exhibition before declaring the content revolting and free of artistic merit. I question whether he should make pronouncements on such matters, or leave it to us to decide what constitutes art.
John Mitchell Killarney Heights
Like a number of art teachers at a conference at the Art Gallery of NSW a few years ago, I was deeply disturbed by some of Henson's imagery. At the conference Henson said he was not responsible for the way audiences interpreted his work, missing the point that the objectification of children in this way is voyeuristic and therefore reprehensible to people who work with adolescents.
Any teacher who took their students to such an exhibition or studied Henson would need to think carefully about the impact on the students. Statistically there are likely to be victims of sexual abuse within the class. The impact of his work on such an audience reinforces the belief that adults condone such behaviour.
Karen Mors Mount Keira