Skip to: Content
Skip to: Site Navigation
Skip to: Search

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 2009
| Subscribe to Newser's RSS feeds RSS | Follow Newser on Twitter Twitter


54

Photo of Nude Tween Brooke Shields Stokes Controversy

Critic slams display as 'magnet for pedophiles'

Share

(Newser) – A nude photo of 10-year-old Brooke Shields set to appear in an exhibition at the Tate Modern is drawing criticism from child-safety advocates. The photo, by Richard Prince, shows a heavily made-up Shields standing in a bathtub looking into the camera. Prince has said the work, Spiritual America, comments on Shields as an “abstract entity.”

She looks like "a body with two different sexes, maybe more, and a head that looks like it's got a different birthday,” Prince said. The social commentary was lost on child advocates, who slammed the photo: “Shields was 10 years old—she could not have given informed consent to it being used. It must be bordering on child pornography. It is certainly not art,” the founder of an advocacy group tells the Telegraph. “Putting the picture in a room with a warning outside really is a magnet for pedophiles."

Brooke Shields speaks at the memorial service for music legend Michael Jackson, at the Staples Center in Los Angeles, on Tuesday, July 7, 2009.
Brooke Shields speaks at the memorial service for music legend Michael Jackson, at the Staples Center in Los Angeles, on Tuesday, July 7, 2009.   (AP Photo/Gabriel Bouys, pool)
« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow

If you are using a picture of a naked child to bring people to your exhibition, then you are exploiting that child. It's as if they are using a 10-year-old girl for bait. I find it disturbing and they should be ashamed of themselves.
- Michele Elliot, Kidscape

« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow
54 comments
VIEWING:
 
Jayster999
Sep 29, 09 5:04 PM CDT
I like Brooke although she's kind of a nut job. The exploitation that she was subjected to was pretty surreal. There's no way that parents/agents would get away with that kind of stuff today. Reply
Vote up! Vote down!
+8
IN RESPONSE:
tran_tor
Sep 30, 09 8:55 AM CDT
And yet a nude pic of her at 10 is going on public display. Making child porn ok to look at, even admire, seems like the first step to creating a pedophile. I'm no expert, but dang, this is just stupid.
Vote up! Vote down!
+3
IN RESPONSE:
Aelius28
Sep 30, 09 9:57 AM CDT
Who cares if it pleases pedophiles? It certainly doesn't create them; pedophiles would already be aware of their sexual orientation long before seeing their first nude child photo.
Vote up! Vote down!
+3
IN RESPONSE:
paper
Oct 1, 09 1:24 PM CDT
Uh huh - - and no way are parents smearing lipstick and false eyelashes/fake little breasts and dentures on 4-10 year olds then parading them about infront of strangers in a skimpy bathing suit...so they can be judged on their PHYSICAL beauty in a "Beauty Paegant" ...yep. No way they could get away with that kind of stuff today. Prince's photographs are without a doubt art. You can tell good art because it engages the viewer and requires at least some thought. Pornography usually engages only the baser senses and is intended to be viewed and not ruminated upon or discussed for its intellectual value. I suggest we leave the artists alone and concentrate on the real creeps.
Vote up! Vote down!
+1
Dr.Y.Dino
Sep 29, 09 5:07 PM CDT
BUT, if he had given her drugs and raped her, then it would have been OK. Right?? Reply
Vote up! Vote down!
-6
LEAVE A
COMMENT
Comment Policy
Facebook ConnectPost this comment to Facebook?

After connecting you will have the option to post your comment on your Facebook profile.