An attempt to raise the tone (warning - long post)

That's right, folks. After 5 posts that have oscillated between low-brown musings and general poor taste, for my second post today (and yes, clearly, I need to get out more) I'm going to try and shoot for an elevated, intellectual entry that reflects the kinds of issues that I, on occasion, feel like I should be grappling with here. How I'm going to achieve this aforesaid 'tone-raising' via the issue of child p_rnography (or, let's get it right, currently it's the 'possibility' of child p_rnography) is still not entirely clear.

Like every other arts aficiondo, over this weekend I've not only spent some quality time with the trashtactular extravanganza that is Eurovision, I've also been scouring the Australian media for reportage of the recent Bill Henson furore. Now, I'm not going to let the fact that a) I haven't seen the image/s in question, nor b) the fact that I'm currently not in the country (isn't that what Australian expats are supposed to do, anyway? Loudly bemoan the caveman tendencies of the mother country whilst equally loudly demanding that their 'neanderthal' compadres give them as much of their attention as they can spare from their attempts to make Magical Hot Flame Stick? And yes, Germaine, I'm talking to you ...) dissuade me from having an opinion on this one.

I'm familiar with a reasonable proportion of Henson's oeuvre, having studied/seen a considerable amount over the years in exhibitions. His work is many things: hauntingly beautfiful, luminous, provocative, challenging, and yes, on occassion, disturbing, but I cannot understand how someone would jump from this to labelling it 'p_rn'. In my (admittedly fairly limited) exposure to 'normal' (i.e. adult/adult) hetero p_rn, from what I've seen, it is mean, angry, and degrading in it's mechanical repetitions of the act, and if it weren't so boring, it would simply demean everyone concerned, including the viewer. That said, whatever floats your boat. If you're an avid fan of the flat-screen Big O and get a job as a pool boy in the belief that it's going to land you a whole lotta lady lovin', more power to you. However, when you end up on minimum wage and your frustration results in a nasty case of chlorine-induced dermatitis on your nether regions, you know who not to ask to pass the tube of aloe vera.

The Henson images I know, however, don't elicit this response. Rather, they are about asking questions, interrogating the image and our relationship to it, and forcing the viewer to enter a nebulous, liminal realm in which subject and object relationships are continually negotiated. Yes, this is the realm of fantasy, but not, I stress, 's_xual' fantasy. Instead, they seem to be more about trying to return to and reexperience what was, for me, anyway, a period in time which was defined by the same adjectives used earlier to describe the works: challenging, sometimes beautiful, often disturbing and disquieting. Remember, everyone? Adolescence is *fun*. By contrast, however, the very nature of p_rn seems to be that it provides a full-frontal, no-questions-asked, no-holds-barred, easy answer to the issue of human relationships and s_xual complexity.

I agree, that the issue of consent is a tricky one, but I think what is probably the greater issue at stake right now in regards to the current case is how the image itself has been referred to by both press and politicians, and how this will, in turn, affect the child/ren pictured. "Revolting", Kevin? Well, gee, I guess there's no better way of making someone feel dirty and used than by describing their decision to pose for one of our most well-regarded international artists like that.

My prevalent feeling over all of this is one of sadness: why do we live in an age where it's impossible to view kids (whether clothed or not) as something that has the potential to be 'dirty'. Why do some parents dress their seven-year old daughters in clothes that wouldn't look out of place in Pretty Woman? (Kid you not, in a homewares department recently I saw little-girls' bedlinen from the Playboy line that came equipped with an enormous, pink vinyl bunny-logo soft toy ... if nothing else, that's a crime against good taste.)

It's all very troubling, hence my double post, as I myself need to try and work out what I think here, too. One other case that's been in the news and was also ringing in my ears, of course, was that of the downgrading of public transport advocate and university lecturer Paul Mees' contract at the University of Melbourne. Supposedly demoted for his criticism of the State government, Dr Mees has since resigned from Melbourne University and is now working, hopefully in a more happy capacity, at RMIT. I just can't help wondering, if we stymie the voices of our artists and academics (and journalists, writers, poets, politicians, and anyone else trying to think slightly outside our 21st century, hyper-consumerist society), what will be left? Youtube?

Hmm. Difficult days.


P.S. My use of the underscore is not intended to be prudish - I'd just rather this blog didn't turn up when those of the Sticky Keyboard Society log onto google and type in the magic words.