It's a picture of some naked kids, two of them apparently restraining another one, one might legitimately assume for the purpose of sexual assault. Ordinarily this would not bother me, except that this is just one of many such works by Australian photographer Bill Henson-whose exposition has recently been banned in Australia-and these children are live models.
I don't know how much money their parents were paid (probably not that much) but where would they draw the line whebn it comes to financial inducements? Being no prude by any stretch of the imagination, I am no fan of censorship. Still, I hold the Aussies made the right call here. At the very least, they had the right, and even the responsibility, to investigate.
This blogger put it best-art is not above the law.
Hat Tip-Sonia Belle
4 comments:
legitimately assume for the purpose of sexual assault.
You have a very rich imagination. What I see is two kids helping a third who seems to be unconscious.
Nothing sexual is going on.
Yeah, and they just happen to be naked.
If you want to defend this, Sonia, that's fine, but if you cant come up with anything any better than that, you'd better give it up.
This artist bills his work, and it is billed by others, as sensual in nature. He makes no bones about it. His subject matter deals with kids whose age puts them at the onset of puberty. What he is getting at is obvious. Like I said, if this was paintings, I would be fine with it. My problem is the fact he is using live models.
, if this was paintings, I would be fine with it. My problem is the fact he is using live models.
Most painters use live models too...
I am aware of that, but the fact is, they don't have to use underage children, they can find adults who would be sufficient. If they have any artistic talent at all, they can easily transpose them into children with no difficulty at all, which is not so easily done in photography.
Your photographer here just needs to find a different subject matter, or learn to paint.
Post a Comment