OT, " Henson', How far can this eventuate??. Frightening!!.

I've been bush for a week.

Have I missed something?

Jim.

Henson is the "character" that painted the nude children. Apparently searched playgrounds for prospects according to Bigpond news item.

The way the arts community has backed this freak show is to me reason enough that the government should not be wasting money on them.

I have something in my shed that would cure Henson of his need to scour schools to find children to photograph nude, its called an elastrator, him and all his cohorts and supporters would benefit from it as far as I am concerned. If any average guy was found with photos like that on his home computer he would be arrested for pedophilia but because its "art" its ok...give me strength.... art is the perfect excuse for pedophiles to legally do what they enjoy and this is a perfect example of it in action

12 years ago, I worked as an investigator [mainly Workers Comp].
The general rule was: If the 'sit' [where you parked] was within a Km of a school you had to notify the school Princpal and the nearest Police Station.

These days, back in my original trade, I carry out maintanance on Public Housing, Local Body buildings and Schools.
You wouldnt believe the paper work and hoops one has to go through just to enter a school and do a small repair.

The problem being, as I see it,
All children deserve the right to be protected from all this sort of crap, but, and a big but, I feel that the media and society has basicaly deemed every bloke to be a paedophile and its up to him to prove otherwise.

Getting way out of hand I reckon.

Cheers......Lionel.

There are two issues here.
The first one is an artist whose works have already been the subject of very close political, social and police scruitany. Whether you or I agree or disagree with the police is immaterial.

The second issue is the actions of a school principal.
He should be well aware of the requirements for access to any children or their images.
As an ex chalkie, I think that he should be fired !

Let's be clear on howhis happened.

The guy took no photographs without a long process of seeking parental permission, explanations and discussions with parents and finally parents being present during the photo sessions.

All the principal did was to allow him to accomapny her through the school grounds looking for possible subjects whose parents he could then approach.

I know for a fact that this happens with a couple of high schools in the area where they shoot "Home and Away" - parents are stoked and flattered to have their kids as extras on TV and they're well paid too.

How's this different?

Also think of a talent scout coming to a school play or eistedford - is this wrong?

Why anybody would want to take pictures in the first place of nude children I cant workout. As far as Im concerned (just my opinion) even if parents allow for some one to take nude pictures of kids then they would not be welcome in my house EVER. Call it art, what ever you like to me its not write. While we dont have kids I can gurantee you for sure as sh@t they will never have pictures taken of them in the nude by anyone. Yes shots in the bath when they have bubble bath all over them or the like, or possibly running around the yard with there undie's or swimmers on. Its not some thing that should be taken lightly. Just have to look at all the attempted abductions lately, daily in the papers, to many sicko's out there that are jumping at this oportunity to grab a child. If I see some one taking pictures of my kids they will be taking pictures of there insides because that is where the camera will end up. Just my personall opinion which Im sure will agrivate some people on here. Regards Steve M

Hello all,

I have read this thread and can remember the last one that was posted on the subject.

I have noticed time and time again the arts fraternity harp on about what would have happened to Michelanglelo et al etc.etc. if they were around now. Well can I make the point that societies evolve, what was once acceptible then may no longer be acceptable now. For example there are ancient societies that thought that the practice of peadophilia was OK, and that while womens sole function was to breed, young boys sole function was for fun. Want another example of societies changing values, not that long ago in Australia aboriginals were considered fauna and not worthy of the basic rights and freedoms all other Australians enjoy. There areplenty of other examples of how values and societies change, I could go on and on.

My point is that you cannot apply todays values onto those of years and centuries gone by and vice versa.

Whilst I cannot speak for others I cannot understand how anyone could think that naked photos of young children could be of any value, let alone of value to the artistic.

Henson's work may be completely innocent but what it does do is give creedance, legitimacy and value to people who use those types of images for reasons other than what they may have been intended.

I am glad my children and their school was not involved.

As a modern society we are bound by our many laws, one of which is to prevent the exploitation and abuse of our children, it is sad to use artistic value to get around these laws.

My two bobs...

Steve.

Gday Axle,
Im with you. It shouldnt have happened.
I blame the parents even more than the weirdo who took the shots.

Cheers

NeilT Writes
“All the principal did was to allow him to accompany her through the school grounds looking for possible subjects whose parents he could then approach”.
This is predatory?
NeilT Writes
“I know for a fact that this happens with a couple of high schools in the area where they shoot "Home and Away" - parents are stoked and flattered to have their kids as extras on TV and they're well paid too”
I believe the school should be told what the end production will be.
And if they are, their head should be on the chopping block for allowing it.
NeilT Writes
“Also think of a talent scout coming to a school play or eistedford - is this wrong?”
I think you are very much confused.
NeilT Wites
Remember - no law has been broken here except possibly that the Principal allowed supervised access to a talent scout. And the protection of the child has remained priority one all through this exercise.
No law has been, maybe broken. Bull bleep . What about doing the right thing.
Maybe it’s just me?
Our kids are our future. With out a future we don’t exist.
What has been done in the past has, has been done. Michelangelo, daVinci, Raphael, Rubens and on and on all through the history of western art, that was then, we are talking now. When published these children are still children, innocence
I have drawn a line in the sand.
Do not involve our children in your sick attempt to justify the existence of ART.

This discussion has become quite polarised.

I dont know you blokes but, Im developing a feeling that, on one side we have the 'mans man', stubby in one hand, fist clenched in the other, Im a legend type.......verses......... the limp wristed, chardonay sipping, discussing the artistic merits of a rusty baked bean tin type on the other.

As previously mentioned, this subject came up a while ago and my response is now as it was then:
I didnt see anything sexual, preditory or shocking in those photos, however, I didnt see anything artistic either.

Woops.....Ive slipped into the middle ground.....lol.

Cheers......Lionel.

If the question is about whether Hanson should have been allowed access without parental knowledge then my vote is for a resounding no. I’m sure that in the fullness of time the principal of the school will be moved on.

If Hanson wanted access to this ‘pool of talent’ than a note should have been sent home to parents suggesting this and that contact could be made privately. I would be outraged if I had a note from Hanson, or anyone, for that matter suggesting they had observed my child at school….

It is astonishing that any commercial enterprise should be allowed to scout in our schools, let alone someone as controversial as Hanson.

Are our children now to be paraded in the school ground, touted as commodities potentially for sale?

As a community we should feel outraged.

What a load of crock this all is ......

If I read it all correctly;

1/. .. This Henson bloke is a known and convicted pedophile.
2/. .. Neil T is pretty much accused of suppling his needs
3/. .. Hairy ( NT) is off his paranoia meds
4/. .. And due processes, parental controls, govt regulations etc have all been ignored.

Pffffft ......

The only thing that has been done wrongly here .. in my opinion .. is that this Henson character chose to exhibit the kids in an adult style pose. Bit like dressing them up in adult clothing. Not natural or normal life at all ... his choice of presentation is totally wrong in this day and age. About time the art world got a wake up call ... Damn shame the media cant cop the same. Look at how Hairy (NT) has got himself worked up, thanks to traditional media sensationalism.

Nice try on rationalism and reality NeilT ... doesnt work in this modern age of misleading journalism.

........... This is about the only post that made sense:

By John G

One of the issues is that we don't get to hear just what proposal the principal had from the artist in question. Maybe the School Board has guidelines for school visitors and maybe the principal conformed to the guidelines - who knows?

I support the arguments about protecting children, but do parents give permission for politicians to attend schools? for Rugby League (or AFL) players to attend schools?, for childrens' book writers to attend schools? What if a group of 'Green' parents objected to a 4WD dad or mum talking to kids about the delights camping in the bush?

I enjoy these stimulating threads but they can be frustrating because email exchanges just don't cut it when complex topics are raised.

.............. And as for this:

By Hairy (NT)

Michelangelo and Da Vinci and Raphael etc didnt take photos unless Im mistaken and wheather their artworks truely represented an individual I dont know either.
But do you really think something that happened hundreds of years ago is relevant today???

Those now reknowned great artists of years ago did not take photos ... BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T. Painting and Drawing was the medium of the day. Today its digital photography.

And as for what happened hundreds of years ago ... Its why we are where we are now. I'm guessing that if you place no value on the past, you probably get stuck in the same boghole every time you go on a trip.

This thread, apart from the footy results has become a waste of bandwidth.

Phew!!!

Lovely Day!!!!!!!

I've been watching this thread all day. Most entertaining.

First of all let me say I wouldn't give you two bob for the art world and reckon govt funding should be removed. Not that my opinion is relevant, just stating this to let you all know my standing.

Now, Henson. THE FACTS.

1. There is no evidence, allegation or suggestion that he is a paedophile
2. His art is not pornography.
3. His art has been seized by Police, subjected to legal scrutiny and been given the "all clear".
4. He was at the school after following all proper channels ie permission from the Principal.
5. All his past "victims" support him.

Would there be the same uproar if it was Kevn Sheedy trying to unearth the next James Hird or the Conductor from the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra trying to fing a budding Concert Pianist?

I think not.

Storm in a teacup.

Jim.

SMH Comment (Opinion)