Comments on: Cate Blanchett defends controversial Australian photographer http://www.celebitchy.com/12003/cate_blanchett_defends_controversial_australian_photographer_against_child_pornography_claims/ Stylish celebrity escapism Wed, 15 Feb 2012 06:50:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Daina Khamo http://www.celebitchy.com/12003/cate_blanchett_defends_controversial_australian_photographer_against_child_pornography_claims/#comment-1817340 Daina Khamo Sun, 07 Nov 2010 01:44:51 +0000 http://www.celebitchy.com/?p=12003#comment-1817340 Bonjour Guru, ce que vous inciter à mettre un article. Cet article a été extrêmement intéressant, surtout depuis que je cherchais des idées sur ce sujet jeudi dernier. Bonjour Guru, ce que vous inciter à mettre un article. Cet article a été extrêmement intéressant, surtout depuis que je cherchais des idées sur ce sujet jeudi dernier.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

]]> By: Predatory Cougar http://www.celebitchy.com/12003/cate_blanchett_defends_controversial_australian_photographer_against_child_pornography_claims/#comment-40369 Predatory Cougar Sat, 31 May 2008 20:27:54 +0000 http://www.celebitchy.com/?p=12003#comment-40369 I tell you what art is, art is the fabulous velvet paintings one finds on their way to Tijuana. I tell you what art is, art is the fabulous velvet paintings one finds on their way to Tijuana.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

]]> By: Alison http://www.celebitchy.com/12003/cate_blanchett_defends_controversial_australian_photographer_against_child_pornography_claims/#comment-40072 Alison Sat, 31 May 2008 02:19:16 +0000 http://www.celebitchy.com/?p=12003#comment-40072 Queenie asked if any of his work involved naked pre-pubescent and teen males. The answer is yes. The cancelled exhibition involved photographs of a young girl AND a young boy. There is a huge double-standard in the media that all the focus is on the girl and no-one cares about a naked teen male. Some of the photographs in question can be found here: http://www.news.com.au/gallery/0,22056,5031912-5010140,00.html While I agree that there are naked children in art extending back hundreds of years I think that these photos push the boundaries of what is acceptable now. People did not speak of paedophilia before the 1950s. Now we are much more aware of the need to protect the rights of children. I do think this needs to be factored into what is acceptable and what is not. That said, this has now descended into a witch-hunt with galleries and public buildings taking down other Henson photos which do not involve teens or nudes. I think this is a debate on children's rights, art and pornography that needed to be had. Unfortunately it has polarised the press and the Australian public so that those protecting artistic freedom are seen as being naive and apologists for child porn, and those who are against these photographs are seen as overly censorial and anti-art. Sadly it's such an emotive topic that calm and rational discussion seems impossible. Queenie asked if any of his work involved naked pre-pubescent and teen males. The answer is yes. The cancelled exhibition involved photographs of a young girl AND a young boy. There is a huge double-standard in the media that all the focus is on the girl and no-one cares about a naked teen male.

Some of the photographs in question can be found here:
http://www.news.com.au/gallery/0,22056,5031912-5010140,00.html

While I agree that there are naked children in art extending back hundreds of years I think that these photos push the boundaries of what is acceptable now. People did not speak of paedophilia before the 1950s. Now we are much more aware of the need to protect the rights of children. I do think this needs to be factored into what is acceptable and what is not.

That said, this has now descended into a witch-hunt with galleries and public buildings taking down other Henson photos which do not involve teens or nudes.

I think this is a debate on children’s rights, art and pornography that needed to be had. Unfortunately it has polarised the press and the Australian public so that those protecting artistic freedom are seen as being naive and apologists for child porn, and those who are against these photographs are seen as overly censorial and anti-art. Sadly it’s such an emotive topic that calm and rational discussion seems impossible.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

]]> By: Devilgirl http://www.celebitchy.com/12003/cate_blanchett_defends_controversial_australian_photographer_against_child_pornography_claims/#comment-39995 Devilgirl Fri, 30 May 2008 22:56:55 +0000 http://www.celebitchy.com/?p=12003#comment-39995 Yes, FIREDMYASS, I am well aware of the Sistine chapel and what is on the ceiling, given the fact that I have a degree in Art History, specializing in the Renaissance. No where in my post did I mention child porn, I believe what I said is that nude children are nude children. I find no art in the photos of Mr.Henson. MY OPINION. I don't get where you took my comments as saying it was child pornography? I mentioned artists who I THOUGHT were artists. I made them examples of what I thought was art, just because I don't find Henson's photos great works of art, doesn't mean I thought that they in turn were pornographic. Re-read my post and maybe you will get my meaning the second time around. Yes, FIREDMYASS, I am well aware of the Sistine chapel and what is on the ceiling, given the fact that I have a degree in Art History, specializing in the Renaissance. No where in my post did I mention child porn, I believe what I said is that nude children are nude children. I find no art in the photos of Mr.Henson. MY OPINION. I don’t get where you took my comments as saying it was child pornography? I mentioned artists who I THOUGHT were artists. I made them examples of what I thought was art, just because I don’t find Henson’s photos great works of art, doesn’t mean I thought that they in turn were pornographic. Re-read my post and maybe you will get my meaning the second time around.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

]]> By: *michka* http://www.celebitchy.com/12003/cate_blanchett_defends_controversial_australian_photographer_against_child_pornography_claims/#comment-39557 *michka* Fri, 30 May 2008 01:09:08 +0000 http://www.celebitchy.com/?p=12003#comment-39557 to cate and the 42 other people...do you think that "artistic" types are exempt from being pedophiles??? very naive.... to cate and the 42 other people…do you think that “artistic” types are exempt from being pedophiles??? very naive….

Report this comment as spam or abuse

]]> By: firedmyass http://www.celebitchy.com/12003/cate_blanchett_defends_controversial_australian_photographer_against_child_pornography_claims/#comment-39480 firedmyass Thu, 29 May 2008 19:56:03 +0000 http://www.celebitchy.com/?p=12003#comment-39480 Devilgirl: you do realize that Michelangelo painted many nude children, right? The Sistine ceiling has dozens of them -- and not just chubby little cherubs, but adolescent male figures in full, uh... display. By your subtle and nuanced analysis ZOMG CHILD PORN!!! Devilgirl: you do realize that Michelangelo painted many nude children, right? The Sistine ceiling has dozens of them — and not just chubby little cherubs, but adolescent male figures in full, uh… display. By your subtle and nuanced analysis ZOMG CHILD PORN!!!

Report this comment as spam or abuse

]]> By: Devilgirl http://www.celebitchy.com/12003/cate_blanchett_defends_controversial_australian_photographer_against_child_pornography_claims/#comment-39466 Devilgirl Thu, 29 May 2008 19:42:51 +0000 http://www.celebitchy.com/?p=12003#comment-39466 Art is Michaelangelo, Van Gogh, Ansel Adams, Rodin. Nude children, are nude children. Art is Michaelangelo, Van Gogh, Ansel Adams, Rodin. Nude children, are nude children.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

]]> By: firedmyass http://www.celebitchy.com/12003/cate_blanchett_defends_controversial_australian_photographer_against_child_pornography_claims/#comment-39392 firedmyass Thu, 29 May 2008 16:59:07 +0000 http://www.celebitchy.com/?p=12003#comment-39392 "Nudity" does not automatically equal "porn," as some of you so obviously believe. If the the photos are not pornographic in content, the mere fact of the age of the subject does not magically render them as such. I'm all for protecting children (I have a 16 y/o daughter -- and no, I would not consent to her being photographed in this way), but these things need to be looked at in context and with a minimum of hysteria. “Nudity” does not automatically equal “porn,” as some of you so obviously believe. If the the photos are not pornographic in content, the mere fact of the age of the subject does not magically render them as such. I’m all for protecting children (I have a 16 y/o daughter — and no, I would not consent to her being photographed in this way), but these things need to be looked at in context and with a minimum of hysteria.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

]]> By: geronimo http://www.celebitchy.com/12003/cate_blanchett_defends_controversial_australian_photographer_against_child_pornography_claims/#comment-39280 geronimo Thu, 29 May 2008 12:37:48 +0000 http://www.celebitchy.com/?p=12003#comment-39280 @Triple H. Interesting Qs. And I identify with the angle you're coming at it from - ie. one that doesn't equate child nudity with suggestiveness. My response, for what it's worth: Re Kim Phuc. In this instance, the nudity has no relevance at all, it's just a fact, but what it does do is give the image extra poignancy and brilliantly captures the vulnerability and fragility of human life alongside the grim, harsh, metallic reality of war. Absolutely iconic. No matter how many times I see this pic, it still stops me in my tracks. Re your other Qs, you might find this article interesting, particularly the last section 'Photographic Content' as it deals with a lot of what's being discussed here. http://www.sssswr.org/prog99/steinberg.htm @Triple H.
Interesting Qs. And I identify with the angle you’re coming at it from – ie. one that doesn’t equate child nudity with suggestiveness. My response, for what it’s worth:

Re Kim Phuc. In this instance, the nudity has no relevance at all, it’s just a fact, but what it does do is give the image extra poignancy and brilliantly captures the vulnerability and fragility of human life alongside the grim, harsh, metallic reality of war. Absolutely iconic. No matter how many times I see this pic, it still stops me in my tracks.

Re your other Qs, you might find this article interesting, particularly the last section ‘Photographic Content’ as it deals with a lot of what’s being discussed here.

http://www.sssswr.org/prog99/steinberg.htm

Report this comment as spam or abuse

]]> By: Triple H http://www.celebitchy.com/12003/cate_blanchett_defends_controversial_australian_photographer_against_child_pornography_claims/#comment-39272 Triple H Thu, 29 May 2008 11:03:17 +0000 http://www.celebitchy.com/?p=12003#comment-39272 Sorry, but I have another question: What if the artist had used the same model, but managed to make people believe she's 18? So, you thought you were looking at a 18 year old girl, but you were actually looking at a 13-year-old. Would that still make us sick? What is it? Sorry, but I have another question:

What if the artist had used the same model, but managed to make people believe she’s 18? So, you thought you were looking at a 18 year old girl, but you were actually looking at a 13-year-old. Would that still make us sick? What is it?

Report this comment as spam or abuse

]]>