John Hatzistergos

With so much of my time devoted to filtering, I haven’t had much of a chance to post about all the other stuff going on. Here’s a wrap up:

Art exhibitions: At a SCAG meeting today in Brisbane, NSW Attorney-General John Hatzistergos asked censorship ministers to ‘clarify and streamline the National Classification Scheme as it applies to artworks depicting children’ according to SMH.

“Recent events have indicated that the community could benefit from greater certainty and consistency in the application of the National Classification Scheme, particularly to art works,” Mr Hatzistergos said yesterday.

Filtering in New Zealand: Computer World NZ says the New Zealand government has ‘no current plan to follow Australia into compulsory filtering of internet connections by ISPs.’ ICT minister David Cunliffe told them that New Zealand’s response to undesirable online material emphasises education.

NZ is currently trialing voluntary blocking of known child abuse websites with some ISPs. Cunliffe said there are no plans for the programme to be expanded to other types of illegal material.

No plans now doesn’t mean no plans latter and naturally the nutter fringe wants it to go further and block legal hardcore pornography. The Society for Promotion of Community Standards Inc. said in a press release published November 13, 2007:

“Gay rights activists, paedophiles, homosexuals wanting to ‘hook up’ with underage school boys or view ‘bare-backing’ films, those addicted to hardcore pornography and all those who make a living from marketing such moral filth, have rubbished the Society’s suggestions for the implementation of such controls to prevent injury to the “public good”.”

Sounds like the same dirty tactics being used over here.

That same old ALP form letter: The ALP continues to send standard form letters to those demanding answers about their plans to censor the web. Simon Rumble writes:

Last week I wrote a letter to my local member, Anthony Albanese, detailing my concerns about the proposed internet censorship regime. I received a response last night. I won’t bother wasting electrons copying it in here, because I can just link to the letter Stilgerrian got because it’s exactly the fucking same.

View other MP letters and upload any you receive at the EFP Score Card wiki.

Fred Nile

There’s a trend amongst those calling for Bill Henson’s blood to link the artist’s photography to a slew of other unrelated issues in hope of validating their argument. Be it rape, raunchy t-shirts and music, or in Fred Nile’s case, ‘Homosexual Mardi Gras.’

“I congratulate his main defender, David Marr, for his consistency, because as patron of the indecent Homosexual Mardi Gras he is not offended by near-naked teenagers and topless lesbians parading through the streets of Sydney. Obviously he would not be offended by Bill Henson’s photographs which are really child pornography” said Rev Fred Nile MLC.

Christian Today – Thursday, 9 October 2008

If it was anyone else you’d think they’d forgotten to take their meds, but in old man Nile’s case it’s not really surprising is it. It’s offensive that he claims those who attend the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras would not be offended by child pornography, but not surprising.

Bill Muehlenberg’s no better. He asks what’s the difference between Henson and a paedophile. His answer ‘Not much.’ He also goes off about the fall of civilisation:

‘Indeed, it is we, the concerned parents and citizens of Australia, who are really at fault. After all, Craven informs us that we are nothing but “zealots,” “philistines,” “socially deranged,” and running on “hysteria”. Yes, we are the real monsters here. We are destroying society and bringing the West to ruin because we have so foolishly thought that children matter, that they are weak, vulnerable and easily exploited, and that they deserve our highest care and attention. Foolish us.’

[...]

‘So I have an idea. The next time I run a red light, punch out a foolish Age columnist, or take a few liberties with a toddler, I will just plead the excuse of “art”. I dare any judge or court to convict me in that case. If they refuse to do anything about Henson, then they should surely leave me alone.’

No Bill, what you just described is illegal. I dare say he or she would find it a joy convicting you. I know I would.

Thanks to Bob for the link.

Here we go again. Bill Bloody Henson and his “art”. I am damn sick of it and I am damn sick of the people who will always defend his photos and consider any negative reaction as being from uneducated, ignorant, non-art loving philistines.

[...]

Heads up, art world. Look around you. Our entire society is becoming more and more sexualised when it comes to children and Henson is part of that. Not “above” or “separate” from society but part of society.

T-shirts for children that read “Mummy’s Little Slut” and “Daddy Only Wanted A Blow Job”. Yes, they do exist and children are wearing them right now in our shopping and day-care centres.

[...]

Heads up, manufacturers, distributors and retailers of said clothes. Just stop. I know that some idiotic parents must be buying your filth, but do you think that makes it OK? Why don’t you donate a portion of your profit to the rape crisis centres or domestic violence campaigns and go see what happens in the real world when sex, power, abuse and children collide with devastating results.

In less than 400 words Brien managed to link t-shirts, the sexualisation of children AND rape crisis centres all to Bill Henson. Quite an effort. Not only that, she managed to tie it off with this ripper:

I am seriously thinking of becoming a bush Baptist. We are going to get a large block of land, hours from any “civilisation” and keep chickens, cows and guns. And if anyone comes within coo-ee of us, peddling this filth, watch out.

As if the threat of violence to other humans is some how a more nurturing environment for children to be raised in.

Meanwhile, Fairfax favourite Miranda Devine must have mistaken her article A Creepy Visit to the Playground for a horror novel:

Clearly, there are parents at St Kilda quite happy to have Henson run his eyes over their children’s ripening bodies with a view to photographing them naked, but you’d think they would have been asked first.

More disturbing than some of Bill’s work, no?

And in yesterday’s The Australian, Carly Crawford alerts readers to the fact Bill Henson’s photography is being studied in Victoria’s school art classes by children as young as 12.

Fancy that. While Crawford might be showing us that Henson is already present in our schools, her need to emphasise the age of children studying his work stinks of someone trying to kindle community outrage.

David Marr at State Library of Queensland, October 8, 2008.

Marr broke down the entire series of events into stages. From the tabloid feeding frenzy and the rhetoric bidding war played out by politicians, to the final realisation that no laws were broken and the return of some sane debate about the issue. But as we’ve seen this week, it’s unfortunately a never ending cycle.

Perhaps most revealing though are his conversations with the other major players in this controversy. Like his hilarious chat over the phone with Senator Bill Heffernan about ‘masturbation rules’ or his sobering discussion with senior police who said if people think Henson’s photographs are child pornography, they need to see the real stuff.

It’s also where Marr gets to the core of the censorship: Australian’s have a hard hard time separating things they don’t like with things they want banned. For too many they go hand in hand and don’t we know it all to well.

However, some might say consent is where these Bill Henson photographs begin and end. I’m sure one or two members of the audience suggested it tonight. Did the model have the knowledge, the authority, and the voice to consent to them being taken. To people like Hetty Johnston, the answer is no. She might be right, but Marr tells of the time he asked Johnston whether she had the right to announce to the public that her seven year old daughter had been molested. Who consented to that information being released. Her answer: But she wasn’t naked.

If your in Melbourne or Sydney, definitely head to one of David Marr’s talks. As for me, it’s late, I’ve had one too many Krispy Kreme’s and I better get started on reading the book.

Peter Craven- The Age

‘The Henson Case does not, for instance, constitute a savage and explicit denunciation of the anti-pedophile campaigner Hetty Johnston, who thinks that to take a photo of a young girl with her clothes off is necessarily pornographic.

Nor is there much in the way of criticism of the Prime Minister’s unrepentant revulsion. Marr says the Camelot moment with the arts community is over, but his book is not the cri de coeur that one might expect from Marr if the philistines in this case were conservative.’

Miranda Devine – SMH:

‘Marr told me it had been important to write the book fast, before the story had congealed into a version of the truth Henson supporters didn’t like. His publisher, Text Publishing, is owned by Michael Heyward, a friend of gallery owners Roslyn and Tony Oxley, heirs to the Walton and Bushell fortunes.

So it is ironic that the final draft of history Marr and Heyward set out to produce has now blown up in the faces of Henson’s apologists. The revelation that Henson had trawled for fresh models at a Melbourne primary school, after being invited by the principal to inspect her charges one lunchtime, has sparked understandable alarm from parent and teacher groups. The Victorian Premier, John Brumby, has ordered an investigation.’

Alison Croggon – Theatre Notes:

‘One can hope for sensible debate in the midst of the heat. I always do. In the meantime, I recommend Marr’s book for its clear, dispassionate analysis of how this great national uproar unfolded. It’s mandatory reading for anyone who seeks to discern the facts amid the fuss.’

David Marr's new book, out now.

David Marr is touring the east coast of Aus to discuss the Bill Henson controversy and his new book The Henson Case. He’ll be in Brisbane on Wednesday the 8th of October, in Melbourne Thursday the 9th of October, and Sydney Monday the 13th. Full details below.

Marr’s new book ‘examines the pornography/art debate with exclusive interviews with Bill Henson, members of the NSW police force, child abuse campaigners and important figures in the Australian arts scene.’

Looks like it’s definitely worth checking out.

Brisbane:
$16.50, 6:30PM 8/10/2008, SLQ Auditorium 1, State Library of QLD, South Bank
Bookings via QTIX

Melbourne:
Free, 7PM 9/10/2008, Cinema Nova, Lygon Court, Carlton
Bookings essential: Call 9347 6633 or visit here for email address

Sydney
$20.00, 6.30pm, 13/10/2008, The Seymour Theatre Centre, Cnr City Rd & Cleveland St, University of Sydney
Bookings online or Box Office on 9351 7940.

In the meantime, Marr has a brief audio visual presentation of the case here.

Here I was thinking Queensland was going to be the only State to flex its censorship muscles this month, but now Victoria has entered the ring.

Curators and owners of Melbourne City Council funded galleries will need to alert the council to potentially controversial pieces ahead of schedule for approval by a review panel before going on public display.

MCC wants art containing sex to be mild, violence to be non-threatening and drug use to be discreetly implied.

The Herald Sun writes:

The public artwork protocol report ruled depictions of sex should only be “mild”, drug use “discreetly implied” and violence should have only a “low sense of threat or menace”.

“What it does is give a clear direction to artists and management about what is acceptable and where it is acceptable,” Cr Brindley said.

“Politicians shouldn’t be moral guardians, they should just set standards and ensure they are adhered to.“

Setting standards is playing moral guardian when those standards are based on morals Cr Brindley.

Council minutes suggest the review panel will not require a complaint to investigate and can address controversial issues as they arise.

Their 2004-2007 art protocol stated that council in no way defines a role for itself as a censor, but after the Henson and Olympia Nelson cases, the Van Thanh Rudd rejection and pictures of a naked man near Flinders St Station, MCC looks to be worried.

Van Thanh was invited to submit his work for the Council's Ho Chi Minh City exhibition, but event organisers didn't approve.

I’ll leave you with a quote from John So.� In the meantime, keep it mild down south.

‘Melbourne is Living the Arts every day. The City of Melbourne is committed to fostering an environment where the people of Melbourne can participate in the arts, where artists and creative industries are encouraged and where Indigenous art and culture is valued and respected.’

- Lord Mayor John So

This sculpture by artist Antone Bruinsma (also from QLD) was removed from a park on Bribie Island on Wednesday because it was ‘not council’s job to deliberately go out and offend people.’ Yah…

Moreton Bay Regional Council mayor Allan Sutherland said the sculpture was even more “offensive” after being coloured in pink by vandals.

“The problem is that it, the sculpture, was probably borderline OK before it was vandalised,” he said. – News.com.au

God, the Italians must get sick of visiting Queenslanders.

Mi scusi! Where is the complaints box?

If anyone should be offended by this, it should be because the council considers the vagina offensive, not because the sculpture displays one.

When Bob Bain posted to the No Censorship mailing list that SBS would be airing a debate on the Bill Henson saga, I questioned whether their was anything left to add that print media hadn’t already covered. Bob reassured me that the people on the guest list could add more.

I feared it might turn out to be an hour of Hetty Johnston’s one trick pony objection to the Henson photographs, but put my trust in Jenny Brockie’s ability to never hold a one sided debate. I’m glad I tuned in.

The Guests

Hetty remained firmly grounded and didn’t sway from her previous criticisms of Bill Henson’s work. She called for the art industry to take responsibility and for a formal review system to be implemented to review and decide on artist’s intentions before they photograph children.

But like so many others who have called for censorship of a piece of artwork or film, Hetty too admitted she had not seen the Henson exhibit, nor did she have any desire to see it. As pointed out later in the show by another guest, not seeing the photographs in the exhibit means she cannot fully recognize or appreciate the context the photos were taken in.

Sandy Edwards spoke passionately about her experiences as an artist, as did Connie Petrillo, a Perth artist who faced charges in 1995 for taking naked photographs of her sons for coursework. She was found not guilty in two court battles. The relentless and unwarranted attack by authorities was evidently traumatising on her life and work.

Sandy found it unbelievable that a person could not take naked photographs in the right context.

Two former models also spoke of their experiences, neither regretting their decision. A number of other teenagers commented that they didn’t find the Henson images, or other images shown offensive. One (not a model) also commented that being the same age as the Henson model, she felt she would quite capable of making an informed decision and would say no.

David Marr believes many opponents of Henson’s work are trying to create a new taboo, which they believe is useful in fight against those who commit crimes against children.

Stephen Smallbone, a criminologist from Griffith University pointed out their was some belief that photographs like Henson’s may cause people to abuse children, but said that the assumption is not borne out by the evidence.

Adam Leek, a former police officer and now a gallery owner said the police failed to use discretion when dealing with the Henson case. He said the action taken was not needed.

Michael Bianchino got a laugh from the crowd when he explained his experience photographing his daughters netball team. He says the Henson incident has made sports clubs paranoid about photography at events.

Lindy Allan, Director of Regional Arts in Victoria, wasn’t opposed to the work of artists like Connie Petrillo, but found Henson’s ‘constructed vision’ disturbing. Vivian Gaston expressed concern over the model’s ability to give consent.

As per usual (and I’m not trying to be humorous or nasty),? Angela Conway from the Australian Family Association added nothing of value to the debate. She only further verified that her organisation gets way too much undeserved recognition.

The Internet did get a cop a minor flogging (it declined to appear on the show), but David Marr spoke in its defense. He pointed out we can’t limit what we do in the real world because of fears it will be misused in the cyber world.

The Result

All in all it was a decent episode, with a few top class moments. Such as the Unidentified woman yelling at Hetty – ‘You act as a moral guardian for the whole community!’

I wonder what value Hetty’s checks and balances plan offers artists and children. If the aim is stop a crime being committed, it’s a bit like asking a bank robber to get permission before he commits a robbery. Real artists are the only ones who are penalised with this sort of scheme, as real child abusers go on as normal. That doesn’t protect children, nor will it protect unwarranted public crucifixions of other artists in the future.

If one things for sure, Hetty remains firm and will continue to fight. She admitted if she was writing legislation, she’d make what Henson did illegal.

‘There is no censorship worth noting in Australia.‘ The words of former Australia Institute Executive Director, Clive Hamilton, at last nights Art Censorship debate in Sydney (video here).

Clive must be losing his memory. Did he forget that recent case where those nasty chaps at David Jones tried to silence The Australia Institute’s criticism of their advertising practices? Some might tag that corporate censorship. The ABC even reported Clive saying it was affront to free speech.

And that book he co-wrote, Silencing Dissent: how the Australian government is controlling public opinion and stifling debate. I take it that was merely an exercise in printing 279 blank pages? Nothing worth noting? Odd considering what Clive said in this interview around the time of the book’s launch:

‘Some of the laws restricting free speech that have been introduced recently go too far and represent a significant threat to our civil liberty.’

And this one:

‘Australia runs the risk of losing international standing and gaining a reputation for being intolerant and undemocratic. The most worrying long-term outcome is that Australia will become a democracy in name only. An uninformed citizenry trotting off to the ballot box every three or four years is not really democratic. If we don?t stop the erosion of our democratic institutions then the creeping authoritarianism we have witnessed over the past decade will inevitably escalate. ‘

Maybe it’s time Clive Hamilton was not worth noting.