Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 72,529   Posts: 1,598,544   Online: 1089
      
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 92
  1. #71
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,501
    Images
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveOttawa View Post
    I'm pretty sure the gallery employee who dialled 999 should probably consider whether the arts field is really where they should be working, do they really have the judgement and values to be a positive asset to an arts institution?
    I think you've summed it up particularly well there Dave.

    Ian

  2. #72
    Andy K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sunny Southend, England.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,422
    Images
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by johnnywalker View Post
    Somehow I have a hard time conjuring up an image of a block-long lineup of people outside of Andy's parent's house waiting to catch a look at little Andy's peepee.
    Same here. Which makes this modern paranoia about people seeing pictures of naked babies all the more ridiculous. All it does is persecute innocent parents who want to record every moment of their baby's life and the detail of every memory.


    -----------My Flickr-----------
    Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.

  3. #73
    Ian Leake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Switzerland
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,373
    Images
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by Andy K View Post
    Same here. Which makes this modern paranoia about people seeing pictures of naked babies all the more ridiculous. All it does is persecute innocent parents who want to record every moment of their baby's life and the detail of every memory.
    Of course if the CPS had decided the other way (which is not beyond the realms of possibilities in today's PC society), then everyone who had viewed Goldin's picture on the web, posted or emailed a link to it, or otherwise trafficked in it would have been guilty of a serious offence in the UK. And didn't someone say it's also in a book? So presumable book owners would have to tear out and shred the offending page...

  4. #74

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Eastern, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,020
    Images
    55
    surely you guys don't believe that Andy's parents displaying his nude baby photo in the hallway is the same as Nan Goldin exploiting children by showing their images in a venue that attracts thousands of people

    Andy, do you have children? if so, where are the naked images of your little girl? if they are innocent and you are ok with them, post a few
    Last edited by Ray Heath; 10-27-2007 at 04:09 AM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: forgot an s

  5. #75
    Ian Leake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Switzerland
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,373
    Images
    48
    Of course it's not the same thing. But Goldin's photo and child porn aren't the same thing either.

    Just for the record, I find her photo particularly distasteful and unpleasant. But that doesn't make it porn. And it doesn't mean that the children were exploited either. The only people who can really judge that are the children themselves and possibly their parents.

  6. #76
    donbga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Shooter
    Large Format Pan
    Posts
    2,084
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Leake View Post
    Of course it's not the same thing. But Goldin's photo and child porn aren't the same thing either.

    Just for the record, I find her photo particularly distasteful and unpleasant. But that doesn't make it porn. And it doesn't mean that the children were exploited either. The only people who can really judge that are the children themselves and possibly their parents.
    Some of Goldin's work that I've seen first hand is pornographic and I think it is the right of a local community to determine what constitutes pornographic material. However if admission to the exhibit is restricted to card carrying adults then I think the work shouldn't have been removed.

    Now least anyone think I'm a prude I'm a big Helmut Newton fan. But as for Goldin, her work totally bores me.

    Don Bryant
    Don Bryant

  7. #77

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Eastern, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,020
    Images
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveOttawa View Post
    I'm pretty sure the gallery employee who dialled 999 should probably consider whether the arts field is really where they should be working, do they really have the judgement and values to be a positive asset to an arts institution?
    g'day Dave

    so you don't feel that an employee should raise an issue in the workplace that they feel strongly about, they should believe in their "betters"

    Ray

  8. #78
    David H. Bebbington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    East Kent, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,364
    Images
    36
    I don't think we have the full facts, Ray. What I have read is that the gallery employee felt it necessary to have the police vet the picture, despite it being common knowledge that the potentially offending picture had already appeared in public in numerous forms, in particular in a show at the Saatchi gallery a few years before. at which time this gallery resisted calls to withdraw the picture and the Crown Prosecution Service subsequently decided there was no basis on which to mount a case. On the basis of these facts, the Baltic gallery person seems to have made a poor, if not ludicrous, decision. If he/she felt they had a good reason to act as they did, I would like to know what that was.

    Regards,

    David

  9. #79
    DaveOttawa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    284
    Images
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by Ray Heath View Post
    g'day Dave

    so you don't feel that an employee should raise an issue in the workplace that they feel strongly about, they should believe in their "betters"

    Ray
    I suspect your post is missing a "?" at the end, assuming it is then the answer is they should raise an issue if they like, regardless of betters, whoever they may be in this case. What they did goes a bit beyond "raising an issue" though.

    The work in question is quite well known, has been exhibited and published over the years since its creation and has not been the subject of any criminal charges. Presumably the gallery had a chance to see it before it agreed to the loan from the collector. So, if you are going to raise the question of whether it is obscene, it would seem good judgement would be to do that BEFORE it is hanging on the wall in your gallery for the exhibition, maybe even before you agree to exhibit it. Poor judgement would seem to be to wait the work is hung and then call the police who take it to the CPS who decide it is not obscene, during which time the collector withdraws the loan anyway. As I said the judgement of the caller is suspect, and it is hard to see how they have done the gallery any good by their actions. Whether intentionally or not they have in effect censored an exhbition (that definitively in law did not contain obscene material) at that institution. Who gave them that power? My point was: is that what you want staff at an art institution to do?
    Last edited by DaveOttawa; 10-27-2007 at 11:35 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: first sentence wasnt clear

  10. #80

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Eastern, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,020
    Images
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveOttawa View Post
    I suspect your post is missing a "?" at the end, assuming it is then the answer is they should raise an issue if they like, regardless of betters, whoever they may be in this case. What they did goes a bit beyond "raising an issue" though.

    The work in question is quite well known, has been exhibited and published over the years since its creation and has not been the subject of any criminal charges. Presumably the gallery had a chance to see it before it agreed to the loan from the collector. So, if you are going to raise the question of whether it is obscene, it would seem good judgement would be to do that BEFORE it is hanging on the wall in your gallery for the exhibition, maybe even before you agree to exhibit it. Poor judgement would seem to be to wait the work is hung and then call the police who take it to the CPS who decide it is not obscene, during which time the collector withdraws the loan anyway. As I said the judgement of the caller is suspect, and it is hard to see how they have done the gallery any good by their actions. Whether intentionally or not they have in effect censored an exhbition (that definitively in law did not contain obscene material) at that institution. Who gave them that power? My point was: is that what you want staff at an art institution to do?
    hi Dave

    well said, and you raise valid points, but surely what happened after the gallery employee raised the issue to authorities was not under their (the employee's) control

    if the episode became a messy, expensive and futile excercise isn't that another matter that raises more questions

    why did it become messy?

    how do the authorities handle such issues?

    who are/what is the CPS and why/how do they get to decide such issues?

    who/what should decide such issues?

    why does anyone need to view such images in other than a personal, private or family setting?

    Ray

Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin