If there's something on your mind that just doesn't seem to fall into any of the other categories, well, it quite likely belongs inside Joe Finneman's marketplace. Think of it as a general store for general discussions!
July 27, 2006 — A controversial new art exhibit displays toddlers with tear-streaked cheeks as they howl and cry as if the world were ending, but that's the point.
"I'm just trying to convey that the children, if they knew, would be really upset about the way the world is going," photographer Jill Greenberg said.
To elicit such emotion, Greenberg did the unthinkable: She took away their lollipops.
That seemingly simple act stirred enormous controversy when her exhibit "End Times" opened at the Paul Kopeikin Gallery in Los Angeles. On the first day the gallery posted the photos on its Web site, it received 14,000 e-mails, the gallery said.
Bloggers have also joined the tirade with Thomas Hawk and the Thinking Pictures blog, calling Greenberg a "sick woman" and a child abuser.
American Photo magazine published the images in this month's issue and received a greater response than for any article it has published since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
"I was just astounded to see hundreds of e-mails coming in and letters pouring in. People [are] really furious," said David Schonauer, editor in chief of American Photo.
Greenberg's daugther appears in some of the photographs, and the other children's parents were present when the photos were taken, the photographer said.
"If I thought that would have caused any harm to a child then I wouldn't have done it," she said. "And as soon as their lollipop was returned they were happy little campers."
Greenberg's next exhibit features photographs of monkeys in similar poses. She said the monkeys were not harmed in the process.
Oh, my! She's taking away lollipops! In my humble opinion, people are seriously overreacting. In the words of Steve White, a photo dealer, "Taking away a lollipop is not child abuse."
I saw an ABC 2020 on this, *(I think)
Frankly, I think it's funny, because while I was going to school, I worked in a daycare. Believe me, this isn't child abuse.
When I say funny, I mean the outcry. People allow their kids to do and be exposed to all types of ugliness, why should this be a problem?
Any child, whether spoiled or not, I believe, will probably cry when you take away it's favorite candy or toy. So really, I don't think they're spoiled brats. It's just stupid for the outrage, but on the other hands, kids really are selfish at times, so, it's to be expected.
Dr. Watson wrote:The main reason for the Civil War was so that rednecks can drive around with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks.
The kids are acting like kids. And with the extremely broad range of "art" these days, I find it weird when people allow certain things and then looking at face value, rage against this woman artist for her art.
Her own daughter is in one of those pictures. The parents are giving permission and are PRESENT for the picture. And the artist says that right after the picture, the kids get the candy back.
*rolls eyes*
“God grant me the courage not to give up what I think is right even though I think it is hopeless.” Chester W. Nimitz
That's really weird. I think when I was a child and had my lollipop taken away I'd just sit there and try to act like I didn't care. Come to think of it, I'd probably do that today.. Either that or I would take their heads off.
my best friend is pink jeans!
"I don't pretend to be Captain Weird. I just am."
-Johnny Depp
I wouldn't even come close to calling it child abuse, but I do wonder if some of the outrage stems from the seeming exploitation; it's not that a lollipop was taken away from the kids that upsets people, per se, but that they were given something, then denied it for no reason other than to get a picture of them wailing. It's not a very flattering image, and I can't say much of the art. I do think the whole thing somewhat distasteful.
Last edited by Clodius Albinus on Fri Aug 11, 2006 9:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Yeah. I kind of agree with Zedekiah. It's not abuse, but I wouldn't purposely make a child cry just to paint a picture of it.
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof; is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." -Douglas Adams, Mostly Harmless
These kids do not have to be spoiled brats to cry if something is taken. Anything shocking and unexplained will do that, and such a thing can also tend to hurt the more sensitive ones. On top of that, it's probably rather painful for a child if they realize their emotions are being mocked or used or treated insensitively. Of course, this happens to most children from time to time anyway. I think the presence of the parents probably would tend to make everything worse. The kids were probably crying TO their parents after having been allowed to be so wronged by a stranger.
The intent was to make them cry, so they were made to cry. Taking a lollipop away from a kid is not inherently evil, but perhaps most people don't realize how many ways something can be taken from a kid. Obviously, they were not kindly explained that the lollipops would be returned as the candy was gently taken from them. Depending on the way this was done, the emotional damage could be anything from nothing to quite considerable.
I don't think it's anything for people to get worked up about, but neither do I think children are anything to be taken lightly or manipulated. I pretty much think that unless one has their own children and treats them absolutely perfectly, never making any mistakes in guaging the negetive emotional impact of any given event, one should refrain from condemning such an incident as child abuse.
She's taking away lollipops! 
In my humble opinion, people are seriously overreacting. In the words of Steve White, a photo dealer, "Taking away a lollipop is not child abuse."
WHO WOULD DO SUCH A BARBARIC ACT!!??? 
Either that or I would take their heads off.
](./images/smilies/eusa_wall.gif "Brick wall"){kind=small}
