Down Under is where Bill Henson finds himself today, his work and reputation is at the heart of the debate as is his recent nude images of a thirteen-year-old girl, are the images art or pornography. Henson and his supports stand by the position that the work is ART and that there is or never was any intention to create pornographic images. The Australian government and several agencies that work to protect children disagree. They say the work is pornographic and that Bill Henson has broken the law. Henson’s work at the Roslyn Oxley9 in Sydney has been conficasted by officials who say that the artist has broken the child pornography law. Several of the images are full frontal nudes of the thirteen year old girl in question. The only image I have viewed is on the Art News Blog site. The first comment on the ANB site was “I really, truly did not appreciate having to look at this apparently illegal photograph. Covering this story did not require reprinting,” That comment got me thinking. To discuss these images or any other works of art that create a controversy over censorship or the legal nature of the work requires viewing, or how else would you be able to determine if in fact there was an issue. How can we as a free people presume that the authorities represent our best interests or points of view? Yet there is the real problem of protecting our children from harm. As a parent of three girls who are now grown, I can assure you that I would never have consented to allow them to be photographed in the nude by anyone. This Childs parent has come forward in defense of Henson stating that they and the child have always had an interest in Art. Well for Arts Sake. So let us enter the unthinkable world where art does have boundaries, but let us also think about who decides those boundaries. Several art critics have suggested that because pubescent children have been depicted in art in the past in all their natural beauty it is perfectly fine to depict them that way today. This is true Egon Shiele the German Expressionist the disciple of Gustav Klimt is most famous for his pubescent sexual depiction of children. However, he too was censored, arrested, and stood trial for his actions even though he was found not guilty. As I imagine Henson will be found not guilty also if he is charged. You see the ground here is not solid and the difference between art and pornography is at best unclear in this case and it does change continuously with the mindset of society. In Shiele’s time young woman married at 13 or 14 years of age while now today, that would be unheard of in the civilized world. Then I go back to the father in me and ask did Henson just miss the whole issue of innocence he was trying to portray in his work. Did he miss the sexual nature of the images of a pubescent girl, who radiates the awaking of sexuality? I do not think so. Henson knows exactly what he was after in the work when he made those images and when he edited the photographs. He knew they were like Andy Warhol’s Car Wrecks Awful to look at but at the same time, you cannot look away. This is what Henson accomplished with these photographs, that is why they are so dangerous and why they created so much controversy. But what Henson did not think about was the child and the impact this work would have on her life. Again as a father I can easily imagine that child attending a Middle school along with hundreds of other children her age and I can imagine the torment she will endure at the hands of her peers, any body remember Middle School. In addition, the fact that this story has reached Global scale and that those images are out there on the worldwide web, on pedophilia websites that deal in child pornography should have been on Henson radar, but it was not. Could Bill Henson achieve his intent of these images without risking the child, to such harm? Is Ann Geddes a pornographer too? She uses images of nude children in her work. Certainly, a sick mind out there would find these images sexual in nature. And if you follow the current Law regarding the use of such images any website or publisher that reproduces these images is committing a crime. Then there is the censorship of movies and games rated for adults not children, rated R for restricted. So the balance is this, do we risk censorship to protect our children, or do we look the other way when questionable images of children are called art. And if we do censor where do we stop. Do we go into all the museums and galleries and seize works that fit the profile. Perhaps the artist must take responsibility for the answer when they attempt to make an image like these. Could Henson have gotten his message across in another way or was it important to show the sexual awaking of an adolescent in all of her nudity. I will imagine that we all will have different feelings about this issue, but I will stick with protecting the best interest of the child.
http://www.artnewsblog.com/2008/05/bill-henson-nude-teen-controversy.htm
Sydney Morning Herald
http://www.smh.com.au/news/arts/fullfrontal-attack/2008/05/30/1211654306570.html
Filed under: Art, News, On Art, Photography, Politics, Uncategorized , Bill Henson, Censored art
