View Full Version : Don't take MY lollypop!
http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e375/Exfangman/Smiler-Fred.jpg
Could you take this little chap's lolly to make him cry for the sake of art like Jill Greenberg?
Article in Times supliment in UK and thousands of emails to her Gallery it seems.
http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/6990/picture2il0.jpg
OMG i couldnt look at those pictures on her website....how terrible. Making a child cry is horrible...it makes me go all funny inside just to think of it.
Im assuming she isnt a mother?
There's enough for them to cry about in this big bad world, without making them do it for purpose. :(
minimeeze
27-08-2006, 16:43
What a little cutie :) There's nothing worse than the sight of a crying child.
Jill Greenberg's excuse seems a bit lame to me, and the kids are all butt naked which scares me rather....
Marianne
28-08-2006, 05:17
tell you what, I can't think that those amount of tears were simply provoked by removing a lollipop, not one of them looks shocked, which is more of the reaction I would have thought we'd see, they looked frightened, like someone was saying horrid things to them whilst they were eating their lollipops, the only thing stopping them from crying was the lollipop and then to have it taken off them just caused these distressing scenes. That woman is asking for trouble, I love art, I love diverse art but this appalls me.....
Oh but your photo is pure delight Phil, lovely stuff ;)
Oh yes, I forgot to say, I love your photo! Arent little boys just fantastic! :thumbs:
you have caught the little monkey inside every child. and i can honestly say i hate that woman for doing that to the children how dare she :cuckoo:
Conversely, I think her photography (what I've seen of it) is fantastic.
Kids spend half their lives crying - they'll get over it.
Then again, I'm not a parent.
Marianne
29-08-2006, 17:21
Hoodi......her photography is boring and samey, perfect and gruesome....as for the art side of it, she has done well, we are reacting to her work which is what she intended. You might not be a parent but you were once a child....
Fangman, I love your shot. Just sums up a childs playful and happy innocence :thumbs:. I bet he's a right cheeky little chappy :D
As for this Jill....I'm normally not that fussed about what people do to get their 'art', but I think this is a step too far.
Sure, kids do cry, and they'll certainly get over it, but to me I think actually deliberately making a child cry in the name of getting a photo is a bit too much.
You see, topics like this are quite interesting, because it's usually easy to spot the parents from the non parents.
The non parents aren't that fussed by something like this, yet the parents tend to be on the complete opposite end of the spectrum, and want to protect every single child out there from this cruel world....lol It's easy to understand either point of view though....
I wouldn't say I hate her, but I really don't think she should be given any gallery 'space' or press for this exhibition at all. I think, there are sometimes you can just go too far and cross the line into 'unacceptable', and this is one of those times.
Like Marianne says, I think this is more than just a takeaway of a lollipop...quick snap...and return it.
Children don't cry that much straight away...I would say there's been some time from the taking of the lolly to the taking of the photo, with a few tears inbetween.
Besides, the photos all look crap and badly overprocessed....lol
(oooh hark at me...I'd better put my nails away :p)
Hoodi......her photography is boring and samey, perfect and gruesome....as for the art side of it, she has done well, we are reacting to her work which is what she intended. You might not be a parent but you were once a child....
But what you don't like about it, I do.
As much as I hark on about liking gritty, grainy, unpredictable images, I also have a hankering for extremely clean, staged shots.
Sure, I was once a child - and I can tell ya I had far worse stuff happen to me than a lady making me cry by whatever methods for a few snaps.
Well I am a parent and I think it's very disturbing to see that she is doing this just for a "pic". Get a new job if you've resorted to this, come on! Where are the parents in all of this though? I know I wouldn't let a photographer do that to my kid without getting a good swift kick in the family jewels,lol :D
I wouldn't be too quick to judge in saying more is being done here than a simple lollipop being taken away though. With kids and you can go from normal to this extreme in seconds, or maybe I just have a little drama queen,lol :lol:
Anyways it's just wrong all around!
Oh, and cute pic too. :D
Jewel
Marianne
29-08-2006, 19:14
perhaps I should have added the words 'in my opinion' , I just can't get my head round the distress of those children that's all, it does worry me that you actually like them, but there must be plenty of others that do too or she wouldn't get an audience.
Don't get me wrong Hoodi, I could wander round the Tate Modern and have the best time ever, prefering to be on my own as I like diverse stuff and would rather make my own mind up about the art I am looking at, rather than be with someone else that keeps giving me their opinion even if the person I am with is a loved one, I love art, its just this is not good 'in my opinion',
I suppose it just goes to show...(ignoring the child crying bits), that art (and indeed photography) is very very subjective. One mans picasso is another mans spillage, so to speak.
I don't begrudge anyone the right to find these interesting or such. I onlyhave a problem with making a child cry in the name of getting a photo.
Jewel, I didn't mean that I was suggesting there was someething else going on. I meant I didn't think she had taken the lolly and isntantly took the photo (hence an instant reaction), I think there is a longer time involved...ie give the child time to get more upset and maybe cry before taking the photo.
chuckles
29-08-2006, 19:45
I was keeping out of this one until I saw how upsetting this has become to Marianne. She is, Hoodi, quite upset that you suffered worse than this. Not from the art or photography angle but SIMPLY the cruelty that has been meted out to these children.... no way has this been caused by the simple removal of a lollipop! Each shot shows, quite graphically, the trauma in each and every one of these children.
I fail to see the need to take and portray shots like these for pure entertainment or recreational value - for surely that is what art is mostly about. Maybe, there is some sort of physchological study going on but, to publish? The woman is deranged!
Marianne has just explained to me that art can used to shock as well as give pleasure... but not in my book! We do have interesting conversations here at times! :lol:
I wish I could say her photography was good but I can't! (Greenwood woman, not Marianne's). They seemed to look like plasticised figures out of the MAD comic.
My tuppence worth.......
i have to say i think this woman has got some sort of mental instability, and probably should be reported to the NSPCC, some of the kids in those photos look nothing short of terrified, what sort of sick b*****d takes photos like these in the name of art,bordering on the myra hindley i would say, and i really think she should'ent even be given any sort of art space on this forum eithier, mods please note !
oh and excellent pic of the little lad fangman.
Hmmm. Clearly I'm the only one here who likes her work, and more specifically, this particular set of images - moreso, I also seem to be the only one who doesn't think she should be burnt at the stake for commiting such atrocities.
Having just spent the last 15 minutes perusing her portfolio website, I can now firmly say that I do like her work & style. Some of it (this especially) is very edgy, and I can certainly understand why some don't like it - but it's often the edgy stuff that people really love [or hate] and don't ever have middling feelings about.
I'm sorry, Barry, to hear that Marianne is upset by these images, and perhaps what brief connotations I made about my own childhood - but to be honest, if you can't honestly say you had worse times than this as a child, then I think you had a pretty peachy & iddylic upbringing.
Marianne
29-08-2006, 22:25
nuff said!
Please keep it civil luvvies :)
Bear in mind that everyone has the right to either like these images or dislike them. I don't like them and that's my choice, but Hoodi does, and that's his choice. We think the photographer is wrong for doing what she did, for why she did it, Hoodi is putting what she did into perspective against other things that children go through.
We're all entitled to our own opinions on this woman and her work, but we're all big and daft enough to respectably note that other people have valid points too even if they don't agree with us. So please lets not resort to insulting comments :)
As someone once said "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it". :)
only just re-stumbled across this thread, and I have to say, I am curious to know what you had to say, Marianne - I'm not trying to start a slanging match etc. - I'm just curious to know your further opinion of what I've said. Regardless, the public forum is perhaps not the best place for it, so if you feel inclined, please feel free to PM me.
IMO Marcel has it down to a tee, though - I like both this set of images and the rest of this photographers work, but I can both appreciate & understand people not feeling the same way.
I've kept right out of this thread as well but I'm with Hoodi on this one. Most of her work is actually pretty straight stuff, the monkey series is very unusual and viewable. I'm not too keen on this series mind you, a bit disturbing to say the least.
I'd compare these to another thread recently with a horrific subject, I didn't think it should have been allowed to remain on the forum but it was and the photographer commended. That's fine, everybody is entitled to have their opinion.
I don't think she should be condemned either. The people who should be slated are the parents, on the presumption that she explained what she would be doing and, that if they didn't fully understand the situation, they had the opportunity to remove the children before the photographs were taken. Or were they simply interested in the cash.........:shrug:
Anyone who's had kids has seen them pull every one of those expressions in the space of about ten seconds, just because it's time for bed and they can't watch the movie. ;)
only just re-stumbled across this thread, and I have to say, I am curious to know what you had to say
Sorry :bonk: that was me misinterpreting things....
I thoughtthings were getting heated, so felt the need to just post a 'lets keep things in perspective, and be nice about it' type comment :)
i think the point that is most disturbing about it all, is not so much the physical photos but the sort of tactics she or the parents have had to resort to so as to get the kids into this state of distress.
Sean_Mcr
30-08-2006, 16:01
I've seen these images before, and took part in a debate on it on Fred Miranda, which got nowhere.
I'm not mad on the images, and it's not because the kids are crying. I'm simply not in to them.
But anybody that's ever seen a kid cry on film and TV, surely must realise that this kind of method has been used to get a reaction from children for decades.
The emotional impact of loosing a sweet is not going to result in the need for therapy.
Wow - away for a week or so and I really started something.
We all see and sometimes take pictures of children when they are upset or in a temper as part of a record of their lives . . . but I did not like the idea of setting out to upset them for a commercial return - even if called "art" and then dramatising the image by its treatment and caption.
I have to say that I agree with the person above who said that the parents of the kids are as much to blame as anyone. THEY presumably were happy enough for the shoot to proceed, and considering it is their kids who are the subject, is it really our place to judge and effectively call them bad parents?
It seems to me to be a bit of a fuss about nothing. Kids to get themselves into a terrible state over nothing very much sometimes - and I would imagine just about all of them will go through worse before they hit 16. I have no reason to believe that the photographer did anything more than she said she did, and I'd hazard a guess that there were other people there at the time so had she of done then it would have emerged by now. I've certainly seen kids have tantrums over the silliest things - had you taken shots of some of them at the time you would have assumed that they were being tortured at the very least, not just let go of a balloon and had it float away, or had their ice cream fall off the cone.....!
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.