Post by Chips on May 26, 2008 9:07:49 GMT 9.5
Art that provokes risks being labelled pornography
Among the many cliches endorsed at the 2020 Summit was the one about art (or in this case the meaningless term, creativity) being provocative and challenging. Now that some art has provoked, what has happened? The Prime Minister who invited us to Canberra has questioned the abilities and credentials of a major Australian artist. To deepen the hypocrisy, Labor leaders have tried to distract attention from sexual abuse within their own party by punishing an artist. This is unacceptable. I regret attending the 2020 Summit and invite others who attended to join me in protesting the treatment of Bill Henson over the last few days.
Michael Gow South Brisbane
Are we now to ban Franco Zeffirelli's 1968 masterpiece Romeo And Juliet on the grounds that Olivia Hussey was 15 when she appeared nude in the film? Would the actress support such an action on the grounds that the director exploited her? I doubt it. The child protection campaigner Hetty Johnston, who made the complaint against Bill Henson's latest exhibition, is quoted ("Art obscenity charges", May 24-25) as saying: "I asked them to prosecute both the gallery and the photographer, but I'd like to see the parents as well looked into." Until the police raid, Henson's young models no doubt regarded themselves as fortunate because they worked with a great artist to create something mysterious and beautiful. Ms Johnston implies they have been exploited by a pornographer with the collusion of their parents. Is this really in the best interests of the children? Who is abusing them? Is it Henson, or is it our legal system and the media that promote this moral panic? There are children out there who really do need protection. This spectacle does nothing for them, or our society.
Nick Parsons Lithgow
Martin Sharp's quoted remark, "she gave her trust to Henson … and this trust has been violated by the police and Kevin Rudd's comments", illustrates how the artistic community sees itself as above the law. Our society has rightly decided that children need to be protected from those who would abuse their trust to exploit them. Who has abused this girl's trust? Kevin Rudd didn't photograph her nude and put her on display. Bill Henson did. This is not the old argument about art and pornography; it's about exploitation of children. Rudd is correct. Let our kids be kids.
Laurie Strachan Kuala Lumpur
Here was the opportunity to set himself apart. He could have said: "I found the photographs tasteless. However, I accept that minds differ, more importantly, I accept that, ultimately, it's a matter for the law, and that's all I'm going to say." Instead, he out-Howarded Mr Howard.
David Ash Bondi
Some 40 years ago on the legendary Mavis Bramston Show, the late Gordon Chater read from a work by Constance Spry, on the art of flower decoration. His particular take on the otherwise innocuous passage would have been enough to raise our current prurient police force to heights of frustrated sexual frenzy. He concluded by saying, "But you have to know what to look for!" Pornography, like art or beauty, is often in the eye of the beholder.
William Lloyd Denistone
What's happening to this bizarre country? How disturbing to find a respected art gallery invaded by the puritan moral police for exhibiting the work of a sensitive, accomplished artist. Even more disturbing to have his work condemned by a preaching prime minister. These are works of art and the public can choose whether to view them. There has never been anything remotely pornographic in this artist's work; in fact, it's the antithesis of pornography: it is nuanced, delicate and subtle. Henson conveys the vulnerability of his subjects, young and old. Our moral arbiters might more effectively censor the despicable, violent rubbish which bombards us daily via the media. Australia's double standards increasingly beggar belief.
Janet Wright Battery Point (Tas)
There is a certain irony that World Youth Day is being held by an organisation that successfully covered up pedophilia for several decades in a city where art is confiscated as pornography.
Zuzu Burford Heathcote
Am I in some sort of a time warp? I'm sure I fought against ridiculous censorship during the '60s and '70s and here we go again. How could anyone, apart from those with twisted minds, see anything but true beauty in Bill Henson's extraordinarily aesthetic images? Viewing them will not cause me to become a pedophile just as removing them from the gallery will not deter pedophiles from pursuing their chosen way of life. I am now wondering why I put so much effort into ensuring the Rudd Government got into power. Did our philistine Prime Minister actually view the images as anything but black-and-white newspaper photographs? Oh despair!
Robyn Stutchbury Lane Cove
Out they come on their high horses, the champions of art and censorship. Well, boys, don't worry: the barbarians are not at the gate quite yet. People have a legitimate right to be concerned about images of naked children put out in the public domain for possible exploitation. Comparing their complaints with various past trials of book censorship does not detract from the fact that, at the end of the day, these are real children here. And why does the photographer keep revisiting the theme? It wouldn't be because it proved to be a very commercial enterprise, would it?
Jill Karpin Port Macquarie
Nudity and pornography are not synonyms; ignorance and censorship may well be.
Carolyn McKay Mosman
If the images Bill Henson and his supporters regard as "art" were found on someone's computer while it was in for repair, and police were notified, would the owner be charged with possessing child pornography? I think the answer would be "yes".
Robert Macnab Bulli
As the mother of a 13-year-old girl, I would rather she visited the (uncensored) Bill Henson exhibition than read a Dolly magazine.
Andrea Wilson Greenwich
Among the many cliches endorsed at the 2020 Summit was the one about art (or in this case the meaningless term, creativity) being provocative and challenging. Now that some art has provoked, what has happened? The Prime Minister who invited us to Canberra has questioned the abilities and credentials of a major Australian artist. To deepen the hypocrisy, Labor leaders have tried to distract attention from sexual abuse within their own party by punishing an artist. This is unacceptable. I regret attending the 2020 Summit and invite others who attended to join me in protesting the treatment of Bill Henson over the last few days.
Michael Gow South Brisbane
Are we now to ban Franco Zeffirelli's 1968 masterpiece Romeo And Juliet on the grounds that Olivia Hussey was 15 when she appeared nude in the film? Would the actress support such an action on the grounds that the director exploited her? I doubt it. The child protection campaigner Hetty Johnston, who made the complaint against Bill Henson's latest exhibition, is quoted ("Art obscenity charges", May 24-25) as saying: "I asked them to prosecute both the gallery and the photographer, but I'd like to see the parents as well looked into." Until the police raid, Henson's young models no doubt regarded themselves as fortunate because they worked with a great artist to create something mysterious and beautiful. Ms Johnston implies they have been exploited by a pornographer with the collusion of their parents. Is this really in the best interests of the children? Who is abusing them? Is it Henson, or is it our legal system and the media that promote this moral panic? There are children out there who really do need protection. This spectacle does nothing for them, or our society.
Nick Parsons Lithgow
Martin Sharp's quoted remark, "she gave her trust to Henson … and this trust has been violated by the police and Kevin Rudd's comments", illustrates how the artistic community sees itself as above the law. Our society has rightly decided that children need to be protected from those who would abuse their trust to exploit them. Who has abused this girl's trust? Kevin Rudd didn't photograph her nude and put her on display. Bill Henson did. This is not the old argument about art and pornography; it's about exploitation of children. Rudd is correct. Let our kids be kids.
Laurie Strachan Kuala Lumpur
Here was the opportunity to set himself apart. He could have said: "I found the photographs tasteless. However, I accept that minds differ, more importantly, I accept that, ultimately, it's a matter for the law, and that's all I'm going to say." Instead, he out-Howarded Mr Howard.
David Ash Bondi
Some 40 years ago on the legendary Mavis Bramston Show, the late Gordon Chater read from a work by Constance Spry, on the art of flower decoration. His particular take on the otherwise innocuous passage would have been enough to raise our current prurient police force to heights of frustrated sexual frenzy. He concluded by saying, "But you have to know what to look for!" Pornography, like art or beauty, is often in the eye of the beholder.
William Lloyd Denistone
What's happening to this bizarre country? How disturbing to find a respected art gallery invaded by the puritan moral police for exhibiting the work of a sensitive, accomplished artist. Even more disturbing to have his work condemned by a preaching prime minister. These are works of art and the public can choose whether to view them. There has never been anything remotely pornographic in this artist's work; in fact, it's the antithesis of pornography: it is nuanced, delicate and subtle. Henson conveys the vulnerability of his subjects, young and old. Our moral arbiters might more effectively censor the despicable, violent rubbish which bombards us daily via the media. Australia's double standards increasingly beggar belief.
Janet Wright Battery Point (Tas)
There is a certain irony that World Youth Day is being held by an organisation that successfully covered up pedophilia for several decades in a city where art is confiscated as pornography.
Zuzu Burford Heathcote
Am I in some sort of a time warp? I'm sure I fought against ridiculous censorship during the '60s and '70s and here we go again. How could anyone, apart from those with twisted minds, see anything but true beauty in Bill Henson's extraordinarily aesthetic images? Viewing them will not cause me to become a pedophile just as removing them from the gallery will not deter pedophiles from pursuing their chosen way of life. I am now wondering why I put so much effort into ensuring the Rudd Government got into power. Did our philistine Prime Minister actually view the images as anything but black-and-white newspaper photographs? Oh despair!
Robyn Stutchbury Lane Cove
Out they come on their high horses, the champions of art and censorship. Well, boys, don't worry: the barbarians are not at the gate quite yet. People have a legitimate right to be concerned about images of naked children put out in the public domain for possible exploitation. Comparing their complaints with various past trials of book censorship does not detract from the fact that, at the end of the day, these are real children here. And why does the photographer keep revisiting the theme? It wouldn't be because it proved to be a very commercial enterprise, would it?
Jill Karpin Port Macquarie
Nudity and pornography are not synonyms; ignorance and censorship may well be.
Carolyn McKay Mosman
If the images Bill Henson and his supporters regard as "art" were found on someone's computer while it was in for repair, and police were notified, would the owner be charged with possessing child pornography? I think the answer would be "yes".
Robert Macnab Bulli
As the mother of a 13-year-old girl, I would rather she visited the (uncensored) Bill Henson exhibition than read a Dolly magazine.
Andrea Wilson Greenwich