|
|
Rank: Newbie Groups: Member
Joined: 9/28/2007 Posts: 8 Points: 24 Location: England
|
Unsure where this fits, but after watching the news last evening, I am shocked by the picture that has been banned from an art exhibition and was found to be owned by Elton John.
Anyone who has young children would have seen them playing in this way. What upset me was why should this picture be considered "Art". By should a protographer take a picture of some children playing in this way and why would it be held up as "Art". Why does Elton John own such as picture of someone elses children naked in this way. This is not "Art" it is an intrusion into the innocence of 2 young children and should not be displayed to the general public.
|
|
Rank: Member Groups: Member
Joined: 1/13/2008 Posts: 12 Points: 36 Location: Manchester
|
Not seen the picture
|
|
 Rank: Newbie Groups: Member
Joined: 1/13/2008 Posts: 3 Points: 9 Location: england
|
bulldog you do know the photo I take it, therefor are aware that it is of little girls. Why should Elton John not own it as apposed to anyone else. Little boys and I could see why you might feel uneasy. Are you just being homophobic.
Free Cornwall
|
|
Rank: Newbie Groups: Member
Joined: 9/28/2007 Posts: 8 Points: 24 Location: England
|
arther,
I have 2 small children myself. I just dont see why a picture of 2 children playing (the photo if I remember also showed intimate areas of one of the children) should be seen as art and why Elton John needed it.
btw I did see the photo (or the bits that they didnt blank out on the television)
|
|
Rank: Newbie Groups: Member
Joined: 1/18/2008 Posts: 3 Points: 9
|
Show us the foto.
|
|
|
Guest |