Thread: DPP to consider charging Henson

People seem to have fairly fixed views about whether it is art or porn and I have nothing new to add on that particular aspect of this controversial issue.

I will say however, that I think the people responsible for the production and display of these images are either completely oblivious to the current attitude of society towards anything that even smacks of child abuse or exploitation or else they were deliberately being provocative.

If the former is true, then they have just been made aware of something that most of the rest of society has been conscious of for some time.

If the latter, then they can hardly be surprised at the reaction.

Yeah I dunno. I think that probably as a collective our thoughts are a lot more similar than what it may appear by reading this. I think what is generating the apparent divide is what we think the pictures actually are.

I say this becuase I doubt that anybody has seen the pics, the allegations were from somebody that is probably at the extreme end of the field and the media has beat it up, but when I googled his images they were nothing that I would have thought much about after moving on to the next page.

It really is a discussion in my opinion based on very little information.

I totally agree that child pornography and paedophilia is totally wrong and those who commit these acts should be dealt with the full strength (and maybe more) of the law.

But, what makes a photograph pornographic? Is every nude photo ever taken to be considered pornographic? Some people would say yes? Would they be right? No.

What a strange society we live in where we accept nude photo's of children below say the age of 10 as being cute and innocent and nude of over 17 years being OK because they are “of age”. We have a strange belief that these middle years are taboo? Why? The natural form is a beautifull thing be it 2 weeks or 92 years of age. Are we afraid that every other person we meet is a paedophile, pervert or sicko? Is this the media making us all live in a constant state of fear? We all know what the human body looks like and why should we be afraid of it?

Bill Henson has been one Australia's most respected art photographers for years. A documentary made in 2002 was recently aired on ABC TV again and his photos back then were no different to the current ones. Yet when the documentary was made he was portrayed as a talented artist who took amazingly insightful photographs. I'd like to see a producer brave enough to make a similar documentary now that the media has launched its volley of mud in his direction.

Art has challenged us for years and if it didn't I think we would live a very boring society. It’s intent is to make us think. If we were to start censoring art we would be crossing into very scary times.

We do need to push these boundaries. If you don’t approve of his art then don't look at it. There is not a paedophile around every corner like the media try to make us believe. Why don’t we lighten up and look at the beauty in the world rather that the evil and the hatred thet we all seem to love dwelling on.

It's just my opinion, it my not be yours, but we are all entitled to one. That's good thing about living in a free country!

Cheers,

Originally Posted by LavisLane

I have a degree in visual arts but still struggle to express the artistic merit of the works - the artist aims to convey the period in everyones life when they begin to realise they're transition into adulthood. A powerful and confusing time when we're upon the verge of adult potential while limited by a childs experience and social limitations.

I think all he did was record and convey the time in the girls life where she was being exploited by her parents and a dirty old man hiding behind a camera.

Apart from the obvious

What sort of persons would have gone to see the exhibition?

Would it be frowned upon if the photo's were taken by a 15 yr old boy?

Would it have been frowned upon or deemed inappropriate if the girls father or uncle had taken the images?

If the images were in a mens magazine would the average reader feel uneasy viewing them?

If the images were never exhibited but uploaded on the net and posted on a g rated forum like this, would the mods delete them or police flag them?

If you looked over your neighbours fence and saw the original photo shoot going on would you ignore the incident or contact the police and/or DOCS?

Can we finally establish that the images are inappropriate.

Originally Posted by dobbo

I think all he did was record and convey the time in the girls life where she was being exploited by her parents and a dirty old man hiding behind a camera.

Apart from the obvious

What sort of persons would have gone to see the exhibition?

Would it be frowned upon if the photo's were taken by a 15 yr old boy?

Would it have been frowned upon or deemed inappropriate if the girls father or uncle had taken the images?

If the images were in a mens magazine would the average reader feel uneasy viewing them?

If the images were never exhibited but uploaded on the net and posted on a g rated forum like this, would the mods delete them or police flag them?

If you looked over your neighbours fence and saw the original photo shoot going on would you ignore the incident or contact the police and/or DOCS?

Can we finally establish that the images are inappropriate.

This is it. It's much like the bullbar debate from Harold Scrubby and then the beat up by the media may not necessarily represent whatever the real facts may be - be they good or bad. The comparison in essence is still the same.

Originally Posted by dobbo

Please explain to me why you would like to see a 12yr old girl photographed like in the images, what artistic merit can you possible get? What is your interpretation of the images?

Firstly, let me defend that comment as it insinuates that I wish to see naked children photographed. I am not a 55 year old paedophile who wishes to see naked children, who hides behind his computer. I am 18 and I am involved in the arts - it is what I enjoy. I perform in stage productions, and play in orchestras for musicals and concerts - to me, arts of any description is about expressing oneself, one's thoughts. Some people are arts driven and some people aren't. I created this thread because I'm perplexed that we have to consider jailing someone who has tried to articulate a particular theme through their work.

I have not seen the images myself, and I don't have any wish to see them. I became aware of the topic when I was chatting to staff at a photographic gallery in Heidelberg where my sister was exhibiting her photographic work. What struck me was that a man who has clearly set out to create art now faces the threat of imprisonment.

As for my interpretation - Henson has accurately expressed his thoughts, but he has done so in such a way that in 2008 is admittedly, very inappropriate. The rest of his collection which is still on the gallery website is really amazing work.

Originally Posted by dobbo

I presume by your response you do not have a young daughter, I do, and I would not let anyone exploit her in any way. I don't know of a parent who would let their child be photographed in such a way, therefore can we summise that there is something slightly wrong with this "acclaimed photographers" work.

I certainly don't have a daughter. Most people (myself included) would not allow their children to be photographed naked, but there are some very open minded earth-parent unusual types out there that obviously did allow their children to be photographed naked - which is how this whole problem started!

This will be my last comment on the topic as I do not want what I have said to be further misconstrued.

Originally Posted by JohnR

I totally agree that child pornography and paedophilia is totally wrong and those who commit these acts should be dealt with the full strength (and maybe more) of the law.

But, what makes a photograph pornographic? Is every nude photo ever taken to be considered pornographic? Some people would say yes? Would they be right? No.

What a strange society we live in where we accept nude photo's of children below say the age of 10 as being cute and innocent and nude of over 17 years being OK because they are “of age”. We have a strange belief that these middle years are taboo? Why? The natural form is a beautifull thing be it 2 weeks or 92 years of age. Are we afraid that every other person we meet is a paedophile, pervert or sicko? Is this the media making us all live in a constant state of fear? We all know what the human body looks like and why should we be afraid of it?

Bill Henson has been one Australia's most respected art photographers for years. A documentary made in 2002 was recently aired on ABC TV again and his photos back then were no different to the current ones. Yet when the documentary was made he was portrayed as a talented artist who took amazingly insightful photographs. I'd like to see a producer brave enough to make a similar documentary now that the media has launched its volley of mud in his direction.

Art has challenged us for years and if it didn't I think we would live a very boring society. It’s intent is to make us think. If we were to start censoring art we would be crossing into very scary times.

We do need to push these boundaries. If you don’t approve of his art then don't look at it. There is not a paedophile around every corner like the media try to make us believe. Why don’t we lighten up and look at the beauty in the world rather that the evil and the hatred thet we all seem to love dwelling on.

It's just my opinion, it my not be yours, but we are all entitled to one. That's good thing about living in a free country!

Cheers,

Thanks John, well written. That's how I feel about the arts. To see beauty in the world and use it to seek solace in it from the otherwise vulgarity and hate in the world.

i must be slow, but i dont get this latest politically correct storm over a couple of breasts.... sorry.

it smacks of the worst kind of political correctness to me.

most admit they havent seen it, but deem it bad on the notion of nudity.

i have to say what i do find extremely worrying is the notion that just because it is nude, it must have sexual conertations.

that statement of belief worries the living crap out of me i have to say.

what was shown in the photos?

two breasts on a young person.

the press admit themselves that we see them day in day out in news footage from most poor nations in the world.

is that footage to be deemed pornoghaphic as well?

is it different if it is a well to do white girl from melbourne, not a refugee from some poor godforsaken hole in africa?

whats next?

all males over 10, or under 25 or over 50 wont be allowed on the same side of the street as teenage females because someone somewhere might suggest that it might elict an immodest thought in some poor week minded soul.

i dread to think what in hell it is going to be like in another 20 or 30 years if this drivel keeps on.

luckily the "Y" gene is breaking down as we speak and will have been completely removed from humanity in under 125000 years....

give me a break .... and they reckon the taliban are bad.

and dont for one minute enterain the thought that i in any way condone sexual predation of any type.