[Steve]

A photograph at the centre of a child pornography investigation belongs to Sir Elton John, his website states.

"Klara and Edda belly-dancing" by Nan Goldin was seized by police from Gateshead's Baltic Centre on 20 September, the singer's spokesman said.

The image of two naked young girls is part of an exhibition owned by Sir Elton, which is on loan to the Baltic. A spokesman for the singer said the photograph had been exhibited around the world without objections.

Northumbria Police were alerted by Baltic managers the day before five collections were due to be unveiled.

A statement on the singer's website said the image, part of the Thanksgiving exhibition, was from a monograph of the American photographer's works entitled "The Devil's Playground".

Item assessed
It was offered for sale at Sotheby's New York in 2002 and 2004, and exhibited in Houston, London, Madrid, New York, Portugal, Warsaw and Zurich.

The statement added: "Elton John is known as one of the world's foremost collectors of photographic art and has several thousand photographs in his collection, including works by Man Ray, Richard Avedon, Irving Penn, Diane Arbus and Ansel Adams."

Goldin, 54, who is well known for her shots of young, semi-clothed girls, was not available to comment.

In March 2001, police were called to the Saatchi Gallery in north London after complaints that controversial photographs of naked children, taken by Goldin, were indecent and would appeal to paedophiles. But the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said that after careful consideration there was no realistic prospect of any conviction under the Protection of Children Act 1978.

On Wednesday a CPS spokeswoman said it was offering preliminary advice in the Baltic investigation, but would not be directly involved until a file had been received from police officers. A Northumbria Police spokeswoman said: "We attended the Baltic last Thursday at the invitation of management, who were seeking advice about an item from an exhibition prior to it going on public display.
"This item is being assessed and Northumbria Police, in consultation with the CPS, is investigating the circumstances surrounding it."

A gallery spokeswoman said no exhibitions were being removed as a result.

Original source BBC

------------------

Is this political correctness gone completely wrong or do we have to treat this serious in order to protect our children? There are many example photos of semi clothed or naked children taken by so called credible photographers, these obviously end up in either private collection or as in the case above, displayed in public at galleries etc. At what point do you think the line is crossed, I notice that the article above also states that this photo has been exhibited previously in many galleries all over the world…what are your views?

[Dave]

PC gone mad

[silkstone]

I can see why the Baltic Centre managers were concerned, because (given the current concern about paedophilia) they would not want to be accused of displaying indecent images.

There are two issues here. One is whether the children were abused. If they were perfectly happy to be photographed, were not asked to do anything that made them uncomfortable and are willing for the photo to be displayed to the world at large, then no harm has been done to them.

The second is whether such photos would appeal to paedophiles, and the answer to that is probably yes. However, if you take that to its logical conclusion, you would have to stop children playing on the beach in swimsuits in case they attracted perverts. That would involve a loss of freedom for the children which, I suggest, is out of proportion to the risk.

[Les Meehan]

Nudity of any sort, be it of children or adults both male and female, will always be a sensitive issue for people for all sorts of reasons. The fact that we cannot celebrate our own bodies or appreciate others bodies as a thing of beauty is merely a sad reflection of the warped minds of a relatively few individuals.

I for one believe that it is impossible to control what thoughts a person will have on viewing an image showing nudity but that does not mean it shouldn't be displayed publicly as a vision of beauty and of nature. Oh, and before anyone picks me up for the use of the word 'beauty' let me state that I use the word in the context of 'an appreciation of the human form in all it's miriad manifestations' and not in the 'fashion model/sexual titillation' context.

The whole problem with this issue of 'pornography' is who can possible decide what is and what is not to be labeled as pornographic? There are so many factors involved: first and foremost must be the intent of the artist/photographer (which is often only guessed at when it is obviously NOT an overtly seductive image, i.e. kids playing naked in the garden pool on a hot day taken innocently by an adoring parent).

It has often been said that a dirty picture is more the product of a viewers dirty mind rather than the content of the picture and I think this has much value in the current climate, especially in the UK and USA.

It is so refreshing to see the way other Europeans, I live in Spain, react to adult themes and the natural interaction of human beings. I can for instance buy adult DVDs with my groceries from the supermarket without anyone batting an eyelid at the checkout. I also kiss my female friends and their children on each cheek when greeting them. My friends male children also kiss me on the cheek as a mark of respect (this took a bit of getting used to at first because of the way we have been screwed up by UK society telling us that males only kiss when they are gay).

Basically, it all comes down to censorship, either from officials or from 'do gooders' and it is putting a strangle-hold on our ability to be 'normal' interactive human beings. Is it any wonder that so many leave the UK for other countries in an attempt to escape this kind of rubbish.

If the main concern is protecting children then they either have to ban ALL photographs and photography of children, whether for public or private view, and DO SOMETHING SERIOUS about child sex offenders (and ALL sex offenders). Or do both! So where will it end?

Getting myself really p***ed off with this now so better go...

Les

[Sonsey]

Very well said Les, pretty much the same way I feel about it myself.

[Les Meehan]

Thanks Sonsey, good to know I'm not alone in thinking the UK is going bonkers on this issue.

The stupidity of censorship in general is that, referring to whether an image evokes sexually oriented thoughts in the viewer, you can never know! Unless a person expresses their thoughts one can only speculate. I know my partner is usually wrong about my thoughts when she sees me looking at another female (I am usually wondering if they would photograph well ).

Another incorrect connection made by most people (the do gooders) is that gay men must be paedophiles. I once had a very good neighbor who happened to be gay and who also worked as a teacher in a private boys school. He was as much against sex offenders, especially child molesters, as the rest of us.

I wonder if the issue in the report above would have made the headlines had it not been for the fact that Sir Elton John is a gay man!

Cheers

Les

[Sonsey]

Originally Posted by Les Meehan

Another incorrect connection made by most people (the do gooders) is that gay men must be paedophiles. I once had a very good neighbor who happened to be gay and who also worked as a teacher in a private boys school. He was as much against sex offenders, especially child molesters, as the rest of us.

I wonder if the issue in the report above would have made the headlines had it not been for the fact that Sir Elton John is a gay man!

I don't really understand how some people could be that closed minded

In regards to the story being big because of Elton's sexuality, I'm not sure about that. Tbh I think the fact that it is involving someone as famous as Elton is reason enough for the publicity it's getting. Besides, it's two young girls in the pic, not boys... or am I not understanding it again?, maybe so... or maybe I'm just choosing not to think the way the press likes to think we should