I hate to make this post, because that is probably exactly the type of thing that said sociopathic publicity whore is after. There was an article in the paper today about a so-called photographer who is having an exhibit titled "End Times", and her technique is to make little kids, three years old and under, cry and photograph them. How do you make a little kid cry for a photo opportunity??? Steal candy from them!!! I'm not making this up, that's exactly what she did. Sounds like a Jethro Tull lyric!!!
I'm not going to link to it, because I find it reprehensible and tasteless, and a long long stretch to even call it art!!! It is findable out there if you really need to see it. Thomas Hawk has a nice thread going on about it on his blog, feel free to weigh in on it there, too!!! Of course, you have to include the parents of the children who are so anxious to make them into little stars that they sign them up with agencies and let them be tortured for this exploitation.
One part from the article that I felt deserved to be repeated so everyone could enjoy its stupidity was made by an art dealer named Stephen White: "People in the photography world, anyone who is sophisticated about photography, knows this is not offensive." Shut the fuck up, Stephen White!!! He did however redeem himself a tiny bit by following that comment up with "I'm just not sure there's any significance to the photographs, either."
5 comments:
ABSOLUTELY FUCKING AMAZING!! What the fuck is she thinking?? WTF are those parents thinking?? Grrrrrr!!
hahahaahaha..
thanks for the idea aye! east side needs some of THIS!
today i will embark on a new journey which will include making small children cry and take their pictures! she ROCKS! hahahaha!
i will have to see some of her work! hahahhahaha.
I saw her work. It sucked. Those photos didn't even look like photos. Why are those kids naked?
My crying kids pics will be cool.
Stay turned.
It seems I've come late to the conversation, but I have something important to say. On Thomas Hawk's Digital Connection (http://thomashawk.com/2006/04/jill-greenberg-is-sick-woman-who.html), someone says that Greenberg should be pen pals with Andrea Yates. And your Anne Coulter thing liberals have a thing for hyperbole. I don't agree with what Greenberg did. But that person has a very warped sense of proportion. Anyway, Andrea Yates was under the influence of a minister who taught, "the role of women is derived from the sin of Eve and that bad mothers who are going to hell create bad children who will go to hell." ( http://crime.about.com/od/current/p/andreayates.htm). In other words, if Andrea had voted in 2004, she would probably have been one of the "moral values" voters who put W. Bush over the top, and who don't seem to care how may Iraqi children Bush has hurt. And I think most of the people who kill their children are subscribing to the conservative view that one should have children but not have to have to deal with them acting like children and all this selfish put your marriage crap people like John Rosemond and James Dobson pump out. It's true, children didn't ask to be born. That thinking may not even be conscious. But it must be there.
Sorry, that should be "and your Anne Coulter thinks liberals have a thing for hyperbole."
And all that selfish put your marriage first crap that people like John Rosemond and James Dobson pump out.
Post a Comment