Jock does takes legal action against anyone he discovers misusing his work. Pretty boring explanation I know, but there you have it! Personally, I was deeply disturbed by the Leibovitz cover of Cyrus — not because I have a young niece, and not because I think young people should never be seen as sexual — but because it was devoid void of emotion, complexity, or even wit. We decided to stop by Aperture and wandered into their back room where, tucked into what was essentially a chink in the wall, several photographs by the controversial Jock Sturges were on display. I think it may be inherently impossible to separate the creator from the creation. Sturges had an affair with one of his models when she was 14 and he 28, so what? Elizabeth Fleming is a photographer and mother of two young daughters.
And with easy distribution the porn industry was innovative in web-based developmentthe images are everywhere and often forever.
On Exhibit: portraits of mothers and daughters
As Laura Cumming, art critic of this newspaper, explains: Jonathan Blaustein, I am not trying to be disingenuous, but the argument suggests that someone would feel that the work is OK in a gallery but not OK online. Has any subject ever come forth accusing him from making passes at them during a photoshoot? But once his personal history is revealed, the work is tainted. His dalliance with Ms Montgomery casts a shadow on his work. Seems the US has found a new taboo in children nudity and is enforcing it beyond reason. At the time he was very very tired of the criticism of not his work but him as a person for doing that kind of work.