‘Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one.’

Friedrich Nietzsche

The world is such a filthy place and I love it that way ... it's a wonderful, grand adventure. It's not a matter of whether I approve of the filth - I don't, and if I could have a clean, glistening perfect world, perhaps I would ... I don't know.

But things being the way they are, it's at the very least interesting ... it's great

I don’t mind the filth of advertising and the Hollywood pornography of violence in the films, computer games and on DVD’s; the filth of bad music and signs everywhere; the filth of clear-felled forests, genetically altered sheep and caged chickens; the filth of corporate greed and pollution; the filth of arguing, ineffectual politicians, of war and starvation when I have so much to eat; the filth of the so called drug war and prisons which only create more of what they profess to ameliorate. The filth of hypocritical moralizers and religious freaks trying to stamp their ruined, black and white world view over the gorgeous rainbow of life.

Like everybody else, I live in all this filth and I am, as each of us are, even responsible for some of it. It’s not a perfect world. It’s chaotic ... and, as I said, it's wonderful because it's chaotic.

I accept that.

And for that reason, I do not approve of censorship of any kind especially of the arts which, of all the 'filths' of the world, even at its most obnoxious and obscene, always massages the spirit.

But I understand that bucket-heads everywhere will take exception to what artists get up to, and start prattling about 'sending a messge' by trying to ban it and publically crucify the artist. A notable example if this was a photo called 'Piss Christ' by Andres Serrano - it wasn't my cup of tea, but I loved the fact that it exists, my reasoning being, of all the 'filths' of the world, at least 'Piss Chirst' had a sense of humor.

But bucket-heads will keep on being bucket-heads, and recently they all put on their buckets and did it again ... out with their pursed lips, complaints, paranoid rationale and dirty minds, trying to ban another artist and his work.

It's a lethal cocktail of judgement, hysteria, fear and interference that is becoming much too common in the world ... and now it's happening here in Australia, yet again. IO had hoped we would have grown up a bit since 'Piss Christ' but we haven't.

And one of the most amazing things about all this is it's my generation - the baby boomers - who are behind it - we were the ones who experimented with everything from bad moustaches,'mutton-chops' and mescaline to free sex and nakedness, so one would have thought the massive amount of experimentation we indulged in throughout the 60's, 70's and 80's would have put paid to our silliness with regard to sex and nakedness now we're all grown up.

But no ... like reformed alcoholics, we've gone all self righteously prim in our old age and nakedness, making love and genitalia are back on the ban-agenda - signatures of evil, but with a new spin.

So what am I referring to. Well ... Bill Henson of course.

Coming out of the very serious revelations of child abuse and paedophilia that have been piling up recently, the latest triggerpoint for our ageing paranoia is this photo - CLICK HERE - and the artist who created it, Bill Henson.

Though the photo was made many years ago, it was recently a part of an exhibition, and used on the cover of a circular, which elicited complaints ... and yada yada yada, as they say.

Bill Henson's photographs have been a quiet, but extremely influential part of our public aesthetic for decades, and his photos and their subject matter have been well known for years, all over the world. Hes one of our greatest artists, yet now, because of the wording of a particular law, called 'The obscenity law', he’s being charged and hounded in the press, accused of creating pornographic images of naked 12 year old girls and boys for the purpose of exhibition. Not only him, but the galleries who exhibit his work are also being prosecuted, and the works in question impounded as evidence.

"It's filth!" they all cry. A newspapers spinning the issue out for everything it can make of it.

Now, bear in mind that the particular image in contention has been around for over a decade - in fact, the 13 year old girl in the photo is now a 30 year old mother who has said publicly that she had no problem with the sessions all those years ago - that Henson was wonderful to model for, and her mother sanctioned the shoot.

The public reaction has been shrill and hysterical, all to do with the notion that the images are pornographic because they portray naked adolescence - and that the subjects of the photos have been abused by being photographed naked.

Social workers are building horror stories of all the terrible possibilities - that these images could spread to the web where pedophiles sitting in the light of computer screens in darkened rooms will have their horrid ways (as if they’d bother, with the plethora of much more overt pornography spattered all over the web) - all in a sudden fit of protectiveness for the ‘victim’ - who as I said, has already stated that she has no problem with the images.

This furor is so hysterical it's become ridiculous, particularly considering the photos themselves. I mean, aside from obvious nakedness, whatever sexual connotations they may have are clothed and largely overpowered by more aesthetic qualities of mood, light and the magically infinite resonance of a perfectly suspended moment.

So what is it that deserves a charge of obscenity? The bare fact of adolescent nakedness?

Well then ... if that's the issue, why not get out the hammers and smash up Michelangelo’s ‘David’, slash Michelangelo de Caravaggio - ‘St. John with Ram’, a blatant testament of adolescent bestiality as ever I’ve seen - not to mention all the naked bare budded cupids that float all throughout the sentimental heavens of Rococo art?

St John with Ram

And what about all the statues from Renaissance, Classic Greek, Roman, of pre-pubescent boys and girls - are we to secret them all away as well, lest some stray pedophile use them for a covert wank?

And what about all the dogs penises and cats bumholes all around the place ... they’re everywhere. Surely if we are to spirit away the photos of Bill Henson, we should also be running around putting underpants on dogs and cats. In fact, we should put underpants on the entire world. It's all filthy.

Yes I know I'm being ridiculous, but no more than the hysterical reactions to Henson's work.

All this silliness reminds me of a story in Zen Buddhism which goes like this:

‘An old monk and young monk, on approaching a flooded river saw a gorgeous woman in rich attire standing on the bank wondering how to cross to the other side.
Now, it is a strict rule of the Vinaya (code by which Buddhist monks live) that physical contact with a woman is forbidden for a monk. The young monk, mindful of this rule, ignored the woman and, walking right past her, waded across to the other side.
The old monk however, stopped and asked the woman if she'd like him to carry her across. She said she would appreciate the assistance, so he lifted her up and carried her across the water to the other side where she continued on her way.
The two monks continued their journey for some hours before the younger monk finally gave voice to what was concerning him greatly.
"We are monks," he said. "You know the rues .. we shouldn't be close to a woman, let along touch her. Yet you, a venerable old monk, in clear breach of the rules, touched a woman! Why did you do that?"
The older monk laughed."What woman?" he said. "I put her down hours ago. Why are you still holding her?"

So I suppose what this says is, the obscenity is not with the photos, or Bill Henson. It's in the minds of those who see it in these exquisite photos - the ones screaming and pointing their fingers.

I think, in this wonderfully toxic world, the one thing we have that protects us is choice.
We do not have to look, or participate, or be influenced by what we find objectionable ... if we don't want to.

We all have choice.

So ...if you don’t like Henson’s works, the answer is easy ... don’t look. If you see it on the internet, change the page.

"Ahh," comes the predictable cry. "But what about the kids who were the subjects of these obscene photos? And the manipulative predator with a camera who conned them into it ... did the kids have choice? After all, they have to live with these pictures of their nakedness blah blah blah ..."

Of course they had choice, as did their parents, who gave permission for these images to be shot.

Can't be bothered with this anymore .. it's too stupid for words.

CU later with other things ...

--------------------------------------------------------------
PS ... It's now a week later and finally we've have come to our senses --- with the rueful headline: 'Henson porn prosecution unlikely'.