I see that photo (and a lot of Sally Mann's photography) as a direct descendant of the fantasy photos taken by Julia Margaret Cameron. It's one of the more "obviously artsy" of Sally Mann's photos.
Sally Mann's photograph "Night Blooming Cereus" (link provided)
Meh, my gob is not smacked after seeing a five year old posing au naturel in nature. The artistic intent is clearly laid out in the essay by Bullock's daughter. I just dug The Family of Man out to take a peek - the image is 7" on the long side fwiw, and the offending butt cheek is a quarter inch.
The image is the first in the book after the title page, and is used to illustrate the opening essay by Carl Sandburg. If there is any remaining confusion about the image I imagine reading Sandburg's essay would fix that. Then again maybe not.
View attachment 388521
Everyone's giving their ethics, values, and opinions here. I'm surprised you of all people object to me giving mine. How do you have a one-side discussion?
That is several allusions now to Alan and individuals expressing concern, having problems of their own or suggestions that one wonders what it is about that person's mind that takes them to that place, etc.
Enough weasel words; what are you all implying that requires phrasing things with deniability. Speak plainly or can the rhetorical smears.
That is several allusions now to Alan and individuals expressing concern, having problems of their own or suggestions that one wonders what it is about that person's mind that takes them to that place, etc.
Enough weasel words; what are you all implying that requires phrasing things with deniability. Speak plainly or can the rhetorical smears.
I think it is fine for Alan and others to disapprove of the work.
And I understand that there are communities of people who disapprove of the work.
The work can be disquieting, and I understand why people might lump it in with photographs that are far more egregious.
There is an important difference between that though and taking a further step - applying legal tools to force withdrawal of the work from public view, and applying criminal penalties to the photographer or anyone who displays the work .
If I read Alan and others correctly, they think that the law mandates that further step. That seems to be a fair place to disagree.
That is several allusions now to Alan and individuals expressing concern, having problems of their own or suggestions that one wonders what it is about that person's mind that takes them to that place
The difference is that nobody else is saying people should be sent to jail for innocent activities which aren't illegal but which go against one poster's moral values.
Meanwhile, in the real world, people don't go to jail for photographing family members naked. Certainly not in the West.
My comment about the Mann picture in my post 510 said: "I think the DA should return photos after the Exhibition is over and move on. It's not clear Texas law was violated."
Maybe not in jail, but deported.
Caution: Nude Baby Photos Can Result in Arrest, Law Prof Warns
The ABA Journal is read by half of the nation's 1 million lawyers every month. It covers the trends, people and finances of the legal profession from Wall Street to Main Street to Pennsylvania Avenue.www.abajournal.com
I'm more focused on why the TX authorities should wait until the show is over. They should decide the fate of the allegation(s) much sooner than Feb 2. Either they are going forward with prosecution or not...
I see that photo (and a lot of Sally Mann's photography) as a direct descendant of the fantasy photos taken by Julia Margaret Cameron. It's one of the more "obviously artsy" of Sally Mann's photos.
I fail to see how this picture has any connection with those taken by Julia Margaret Cameron.
Stylistically, Clive. The general appearance of the photo. The use of a flower as an accessory. Let your imagination run wild.
Stylistically, Clive. The general appearance of the photo. The use of a flower as an accessory. Let your imagination run wild.
But Julia Margaret Cameron did not take overtly sexualised images of children. She was primarily a portrait photographer who stylistically specialised in theatrical imagery.
In today's climate, many people do not want their pictures taken, period.Or perhaps more accurately, if you don't wish to come to the attention of the authorities, don't take photos of naked family members if others might see them.
My comment about the Mann picture in my post 510 said: "I think the DA should return photos after the Exhibition is over and move on. It's not clear Texas law was violated."
But Julia Margaret Cameron did not take overtly sexualised images of children. She was primarily a portrait photographer who stylistically specialised in theatrical imagery.
Do you believe that Sally Mann and Wynn Bullock created "overtly sexualized" images of their children?
Is it possible that some members of this forum might have been abused during childhood and are transferring that to Ms Mann's photos? Something repressed, maybe?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?