I can see you skipped-past the various links in my previous postsThen both sides show the concrete studies that support each claim. I'm with Mark on this one. I don't agree with either side that have posted.
Ahem... (not to be confused with "amen")... can I change the subject?... I mean, get back to the subject? Has anybody here ever heard of Jock Sturges?
Ahem... (not to be confused with "amen")... can I change the subject?... I mean, get back to the subject? Has anybody here ever heard of Jock Sturges?
[Note: This is my second attempt to kick-start the original thread ... and yes, excuse my hypocrisy 'cause I'm among those who participated in putting it off track .. but will someone pleeeease throw-in their opinion of Sturges?]
Great photographer of pubescent girls -- but his best pictures are often the ones where they have their clothes on, rather than off. If we're going to have a 'porn divide' I'd put Hamilton fractionally on the porn side and Sturges fractionally on the not-porn side.
Cheers,
R.
I find Hamilton is beautiful coming of age, in color, in a French cottage kind of thing and Sturges, coming of age in black and white, at the beach.
Neither porn.
Michael
Jock Sturges. I'm kinda torn.
It seems kind of like voyeurism to me....It sort of seems like a guy pushing the envelope and engaging our irrational fear of nudity and shame, that we in this country have about pictures of naked people including children....
Michael
"You see one, and you think, wow. And you see another, and you think, he's good. And by the tenth you say, what else can he do?"
That's why I've not bought another Hamilton book in 25-30 years.
I'm more partial to Sally Mann than Jock Sturges. If we're talking about budding youth in general, how about some of Bruce Weber's work he did for the Abercrombie & Fitch campaigns? it may not be technically pornographic, but to me it is more suggestive and intended to titillate than Jock's work. Or for yet another take, Reuven Afanador's Torero series, where he photographed some young toreadors in various countries in Latin America where the bullfighting tradition is still strong, in some homoerotic poses. I think some of the boys he photographed were in their late teens (16+), but from the scars some of them had, they were more "men" than most of us couch potatoes participating in this chat. How do you draw the dividing line between maturity and immaturity? Can someone who has faced down a 1000 lb bull with 18" horns be too young to decide to pose nude at 16?
What about Roy Stuart? Given that he uses precisely the visual conventions of pornography in his work, wherein would lie that fine line he wants us to make between porn and his work?
Dear Michael,
Once, I'd have agreed with you. But consider this comment from the younger sister of a girl I once fancied. She (the sister, not the girl) was maybe 14. When she heard I has a Hamilton book, she asked to borrow it.
"You see one, and you think, wow. And you see another, and you think, he's good. And by the tenth you say, what else can he do?"
That's why I've not bought another Hamilton book in 25-30 years.
Porn? Possibly; possibly not. I don't really care in either case. The main purpose was to draw a parallel with Sturges, where there is far less overt eroticism.
Cheers,
R.
Cher Nisp,Hey, Raj .. your right.
.
Jim French's stuff bores me to tears... I'd say regardless of how well lit it may or may not be, it firmly comes down on the side of porn - soft-core or medium-core, depending on your take on it, but nonetheless, porn. It's the gay equivalent of Penthouse (a bit raunchier than Playboy/Playgirl, but not Hustler-esque). The Bruce Weber stuff he did for Abercrombie & Fitch, to me, sidles right up against the porn limits, despite the mainstream distribution of the images, and the "artsy" composition, lighting and printing. BTW - did you know that Bruce owns a Littman? Knowing this, does that push him over the line one direction or the other???
It took a while, but I finally have been able to wade through much of the "proof" (n.b. quotation marks) presented on this site. After straining everything through my "Does it prove there is a significant relationship between cause and effect" filter, there isn't a lot left, and the greater part of all that really falls into the category of "everyone knows".The fact that there is a direct link between pornography and sexual assault in children and adults is well documented. Please go to this web site for a listing of studies concerning this topic. www.ktk.ru/~cm/stat2.htm http://www.ktk.ru/~cm/stat2.htm
Funny thing about Roy Stuart's work, I often get a feeling from it of commercial photography, rather (or more than) so-called fine art (ok, ok .. admitting the sometimes blurred line between the two). I mean, I can easily imagine some of his work serving as fashion shots in Vogue, even as crude/nude as some of it can be.
(speaking of which, don't forget a trend in fashion photography whose vestiges are still trailing around here and there, to imply pornography
in certain shoots)
It took a while, but I finally have been able to wade through much of the "proof" (n.b. quotation marks) presented on this site. After straining everything through my "Does it prove there is a significant relationship between cause and effect" filter, there isn't a lot left, and the greater part of all that really falls into the category of "everyone knows".
In the meantime -- I'll read some erotic literature - beautifully written: The Song of Solomon, in my King James Bible.
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?