Artistic or "revolting"? - photographs of naked children

[Spink]

just wondering if anyone else was interested in this news story news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7492579.stm - Kevin Rudd (Aussie PM) has been speaking out about art involving photographs of naked children..
I was curious about what exactly he thought was "revolting" about the Henson pictures, and what he "couldn't stand" about the one in the article.

No one has said "it's art therefore beyond criticism" Dittany

Just that art is supposed to stimulate debate.

I don't see any prematutre sexuialisation in the picture of the girl in the kitcsh landscape.

Well, at least this parent probably ticked the box for permission to photograph the girl at school.....he he

But have you ever seen a six year old sit like that? I think a) it's pretty shit (although that's not that relevant here) and b) although not sexual it is a child in an adult pose and with a very odd knowing look. Is it really a photograph? It look slike a painting to me - definitely manipulated. Whereas the photographer's pictures are a) beautiful and b) natural, they look like children and adolescants. I do agree it's the burgeoning sexuality of the older children I'm not sure about and that's why I'm a little uncomfortable with the girl under the gum tree (but not the profiles).

I like the one of the three kids, but not the others. And especially not the one called 'fallen child'. The title is creepy and the child looks like she has been hurt or is dead

this is a zombie thread

it is more than 4 years old

How did I not notice that! Thanks for pointing it out!

How did you find it ? You must have had to do some waaaaaaaaaaaay scrolling

I don't know....was just browsing! Don't remember scrolling that much :-/