The Bill Henson ‘Art versus Porn’ drama of the past few weeks seems to have come to an end. His photographs of nude children have been deemed not an offence under child pornography laws. In the intensity of debate, positions were expressed quickly and simply, often at the expense of subtlety of argument. I suspect that many people are still suspicious that ‘art’ has been given special treatment$$s$$ this is reason enough for the issues to be discussed more carefully in the calm light of day.
Henson’s pictures are clearly works of art, whether you like them or not. Just as clearly, they are not pornographic. However this doesn’t mean that ‘art’ and ‘porn’ are always mutually exclusive terms. This idea has been widely spread by journalists trying to simplify the issue. Unfortunately the ‘Art or porn?’ headline reinforces the myth that art is separate from everyday reality and that artists think anything goes. People then assume that Henson’s defenders are claiming: ‘It’s not porn because it’s art’.
