It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

For last year's words belong to last year's language,
And next year's words await another voice.
TS Eliot
Old Year and New Year by Christina Rossetti

New Year met me somewhat sad:
Old Year left me tired,
Stripped of favourite things I had
Baulked of much desired:
Yet further on my road to-day
God willing, further on my way.
Happy New Year

'@!~*' Moscow Photography Exhibition Closed Down After Protests

Practical_SeverardPractical_Severard Posts: 2,301 ✭✭✭✭
www . rferl. org /a/russia-photograhy-exhibition-moscow-sturges-closed-protests/28011647 .html (excerpt)
A controversial Moscow photography exhibition that critics say amounts to "child @!~*" has been closed down following a protest by conservative activists.

The exhibition at the Lumiere Brothers Photography center opened on September 8 and featured photographs by controversial U.S. photographer Jock Sturges. The exhibition included images of partially clad adolescents [It appears to be as well as totally nude, according to an advertisment webpage.]

Sturges has been extremely controversial in the United States, and in 1990 his studio was raided by the FBI. A grand jury later declined to indict him in that case.

On September 24, Russian Federation Council member Yelena Mizulina called for the Moscow exhibition to be closed down as a "public demonstration of materials containing child @!~*." She has reportedly asked the prosecutor-general to investigate the exhibition and its organizers.

Earlier, Russia's ombudswoman for the rights of children, Anna Kuznetsova, also called for an investigation aimed at closing the exhibition.

While I don't have the information which exactly pictures were presented, the advertisement http www. photographer. ru/ events/afisha/6912.htm contains the photo #2 which is, IMO a child @!~*, while googling for his pictures reveals some even more controversial material.

Do you think the Sturges's photos are child @!~* or not?


  • mheredgemheredge Posts: 41,400 ✭✭✭✭
    It is very interesting, the division between 'art' and what might be seen to cross the boundary and be classed as something else.

    I did find a website that showed several of his pictures. Whilst taken in isolation and in the right context, in my opinion they could be seen as artistic and innocent enough.

    However in the context of our times, with justifiable concern over minors and how photographs like these might be seen in a different light, I can understand the response to his subject matter.

    A much less controversial side to Sturge might be found on this website:
This discussion has been closed.