Semi topless underage pics by Vanity Fair

[Jeff Canes]

So no one sell me the idea of poor naive girl being pushed into something here.

At less not one that is that is estimated to be worth a billion dollars

 

[Early]

I have nothing against photographs of youth in the raw for art's sake, or even to make a statement, but that photo is way too suggestive, and that makes it child porn. IMHO.

 

[Rick Waldroup]

I have nothing against photographs of youth in the raw for art's sake, or even to make a statement, but that photo is way too suggestive, and that makes it child porn. IMHO.

Okay, sure. Maybe it is suggestive to you, but to a lot of us it is simply a photo. Good grief, calm down.

 

[kellylindseyphotography]

This is a forum dedicated to discussing photography, in all styles and aspects. Your comment didn't add anything to the conversation, so why bother?

People can discuss what they want, within reason.

That being said, I think it's a bit too far... not OVERBOARD like the media has said. As a society we need to protect those younger, and here is failure.

True enough. I just think the obvious intention of publicity towards young starlets is rediculous. If we wanted to talk about the picture as a PICTURE, without it being miley cyrus, I'd be game for that. Its merit, composition, beuty and so on. But I just think its silly that a publicity stunt gets so much attention when there are far more important things happenening in the world.

 

[abraxas]

Okay, sure. Maybe it is suggestive to you, but to a lot of us it is simply a photo. Good grief, calm down.

That reminds me, what ever happened to the Coppertone Girl?

 

[Rick Waldroup]

That reminds me, what ever happened to the Coppertone Girl?

Why, Abraxas, the artist would be brought up on charges. You know, you can't have dogs running around pulling down the knickers of young girls now, can you?

What a screwed up world we live in.....

 

[Sirashley]

The debate shouldn't be about Miley Cyrus, the debate should be about what is art? The problem is, the photo is of Miley Cyrus. The fact remains, IMHO, this photo is artistic. There is nothing sexual about it. If Thomas Mapplethorpe's work is art, then surely, this is art.

I have seen many nude photos that do not imply anything sexual at all. This photo reveals nothing more than a teenagers back, have any of you ever been to the beach? You may see a teenage roll into the same position with a beach towel... Do you get sexually aroused??? If you do, then the problem lies with you, not with the teenager...

 

[usayit]

The debate shouldn't be about Miley Cyrus, the debate should be about what is art? The problem is, the photo is of Miley Cyrus.

I don't think you can seperate the photo from Miley Cyrus.... Here's what I am observing..

* Those that can seperate the photo from the person and publication see it as pure art.
* Those that cannot seperate the photo from the person and publication see it as a bad influence on impressionable minds AND a exploitation of art for publicity, career, and dollars.

I am in the middle. I like the photo it is artistic and well done. As a person who is a new father in an extended family with very impressionable young girls... a few of which are fans of Hannah Montana and Miley Cyrus, I have a problem with it. Perhaps it is different in other countries, but here in the states it has become increasingly more complex raising a child among all the media hype. Afterall, those young girls are not necessarily mature enough to see past the content and view it from a pure artistic standpoint. Here in this forum of artistic minds, we are more than capable. In another group, the focus is parenting... I'm actually the one fighting to convince that group that the photo is more than being explicit... that it is art.

In a previous post, I asked a couple "what ifs". First one asked if your opinion would change if it exposed a breast. Personally, my opinion on the photo itself would not change. I know it is illegal as she is 15 BUT I think it would still stand as a wonderful artistic portrait. History is full of works of art of young women in the height of their youth and beauty in the nude. A famous photographer was brought up on charges for that reason.. I think his work is worth noting.. and his works are nice.

The second "what if" asked if my opinion would change if Miley portrayed as Hannah in the exact same pose. I would have even more of a problem with that then Miley posed as is. Why... because of the status of that figure in the young minds of millions of fans.

No one really responded.. but I was wondering for those that sit on the other side of the fence would see as the photo crossing some boundary if a breast was exposed. I was also interested to see if the famous persona revered by many young minds, Hannah Montana, would also cause some boundary to be crossed by the same crowd.... I was interested to see if those in that crowd could still seperate the photo from the youth influencing character.


If the young woman in the photo was some unknown person, would Annie Leibovitz and Vanity Fair print a similar photo for artistic purposes? I think not... after all.. what would be the gain in publicity and $$$... hence I feel it is an exploitation of the character Miley plays, the young population that follows for the millions willing to purchase the magazine.

kinda off topic....

I'm a big Simpson's fan and in the show Itchy and Scratchy (the cartoon within a cartoon) watched by Lisa and Bart plays on a more wholesome version I grew up with... Tom and Jerry. It is a brilliant play on our society by the creators. This is along the same lines.... Take Tom and Jerry series back when I was a tike and replace it with Itchy and Scratchy. Its still a cartoon thus a form of art albeit a bit more violent than the original.... but a young mind watching really isn't capable of separating the art from the violence.


< I appreciate the respectful responses and discussion... I was getting it from one group (my attempts to show the art side) and I really didn't feel like dealing with it here as well>

 

[usayit]

kinda really off topic...

On tv today during lunch, there was a ticker scroller thingy (dont' know what they are called) at the bottom that said that schools were closed and on lock down in a city right next to ours due to S.WA.T. and police activity. My wife was in tears..... until I looked up the report's details on my phone. It turns out that the police were after an individual (armed robber) in a nearby home and took precautions by locking down the schools in the immediate area (nothing to do with the children).

This our society...

 

[kundalini]

Sorry usayit, but this is twice you have brought up the hypothetical, if she exposed a breast. The fact is that a breast wasn't exposed and you could argue until the cows come home, but it doesn't change the fact that a breast wasn't exposed. Since the event never happened, why should we postulate on an event that has never occured?

Whether the photos were under the guise of Miley or Hannah is insignificant due to the fact they are one in the same..and anybody with a semblance of grey matter between the ears should be able to see the indifference.

I understand your need to understand, but I question the reasons to promote an occurance that never happened. If Annie Leibovitz took a photo of an unkown individual, the controversy would definitely be much less opinionated, but the result would surely still be an exceptional photograph.

On aside...Itchy and Scratchy don't hold a candle to Tom and Jerry. They all owe homage to Wile E. Coyote and the Roadrunner.

 

[abraxas]

Why, Abraxas, the artist would be brought up on charges. You know, you can't have dogs running around pulling down the knickers of young girls now, can you?

What a screwed up world we live in.....

I figure she's in her early 60s now. Which to this old dog,... is kinda hot.

Sorry ...

... an exceptional photograph.

On aside...Itchy and Scratchy don't hold a candle to Tom and Jerry. They all owe homage to Wile E. Coyote and the Roadrunner.

I was looking for a gift for my 15 year old grandson who's coming to visit this summer. I'm going to buy a VF and throw it in the extra room for the young man's,... perusal.

I don't know if it were Beavis or Butthead, but I'm sure the quote the kid'll use is, "Uhuh-uh-uh-uhk."

 

[usayit]

Sorry usayit, but this is twice you have brought up the hypothetical, if she exposed a breast. The fact is that a breast wasn't exposed and you could argue until the cows come home, but it doesn't change the fact that a breast wasn't exposed. Since the event never happened, why should we postulate on an event that has never occured?

It matters to me and this is a discussion. I just wanted to see where the line is drawn for some people. It is easy to dismiss a hypothetical if your interest is who "wins" and "looses" in a debate rather than learning and taking something away from such a meaningful discussion.

Besides... if it weren't for me, you'd all be talking to the choir.... and this discussion would be flat out boring.

Whether the photos were under the guise of Miley or Hannah is insignificant due to the fact they are one in the same..and anybody with a semblance of grey matter between the ears should be able to see the indifference.

I do take insult to that... it does matter... Just like how fans of a particular movie/tv show tend to refer to the actor by their character's name in public, I'm sure there is a population of young minds that don't make the distinction.

In other news... Anne Leibovitz published an apology as well. Kinda sad as from the sound of it, she is really proud of that photo....

On aside...Itchy and Scratchy don't hold a candle to Tom and Jerry. They all owe homage to Wile E. Coyote and the Roadrunner.

Sure that's your opinion... but neither Itchy and Scratchy had the so called "knowledge" of Wile E. Coyote nor the the "cunning" of the Roadrunner.

 

[spiffybeth]

why wasnt this an issue when britney spears was on the cover of rolling stone when she was 16?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/13/BSpearsRstone99.jpg

 

[usayit]

IIRC, it was an issue.... with the former mickey mouse tike.

Unfortunately Brittany and Paris both continue to be issues... how young girls select them as a role models always confused the hell out of me.

Oh well.. lesson to be learned... sex.. and money are the short cut to stardom and greatness.

 

[Socrates]

I like to see where this story goes. If It were any of us taking "Art" Photos of a 15 year old how long before we get put in jail or sued, But I'm not Annie Leibovitz and don't shoot for Vanity Fair. Then again maybe there is no victim here other than Disney Channel.

Story here:
http://www.etonline.com/news/2008/04/61009/index.html

The photo is, of itself, not sex-oriented and actually quite tasteful. On the other hand, I can help being reminded of JonBenet Ramsey. I submit that the real issue is the effort to portray a child as if she were an adult.