Daily Telegraph
February 3,2014
Cate Blanchett (c) seen here with former PM Lu Kewen aka.Kevin 07 (l) and and Hugh Jackman seen here mulling over Australia's future during the esteemed persons "2020
Festival of bright ideas"
Summit of the Smug Self Righteous
Festival of bright ideas"
Summit of the Smug Self Righteous
OSCAR nominee Cate Blanchett has been dragged into the growing storm circling Woody Allen following claims from Allen's adopted daughter Dylan that he molested her at the age of seven.
In an open letter, Dylan Farrow has called on Hollywood to address the claim and issued a
"What if it had been your child, Cate Blanchett? Louis CK? Alec Baldwin?" she said.
Blanchett, who stars in Allen's Blue Jasmine, last night said, "It's obviously been a long and painful situation for the family and I hope they find some resolution and peace."
Allen's lawyer has since released a statement responding to the claims of sexual abuse.
"It is tragic that after 20 years a story engineered by a vengeful lover resurfaces after it was fully vetted and rejected by independent authorities. The one to blame for Dylan's distress is neither Dylan nor Woody Allen", the filmmaker's attorney Elkan Abramowitz told Mother Jones.
Allen's publicist also released a statement: "Mr. Allen has read the article and found it untrue and disgraceful. He will be responding very soon ... At the time, a thorough investigation was conducted by court appointed independent experts. The experts concluded there was no credible evidence of molestation; that Dylan Farrow had an inability to distinguish between fantasy and reality; and that Dylan Farrow had likely been coached by her mother Mia Farrow. No charges were ever filed."
Blanchett's co-star Alec Baldwin took to Twitter to blast users for asking if the actor owed Dylan an apology.
"What the f&@% is wrong w u that u think we all need to b commenting on this family's personal struggle?" he wrote to one commenter.
In response to another, he wrote: "So you know who's guilty? Who's lying? You, personally, know that?"
He also tweeted: "You are mistaken if you think there is a place for me, or any outsider, in this family's issue."
Also overnight, the Connecticut prosecutor who investigated Woody Allen on child molestation claims said it was too late for the film director to be prosecuted.
Former Litchfield County state attorney Frank Maco said in a phone interview that the statute of limitations on adopted daughter Dylan Farrow's accusations ran out at least 15 years ago.
Maco had said in 1993 that he lacked evidence to prosecute Allen but suspected the abuse did occur. He retired in 2003.
READ DYLAN FARROW'S OPEN LETTER IN FULL
The open letter, written by Dylan Farrow and published in The New York Times, claims Allen assaulted her as a child.
"[W]hen I was seven years old, Woody Allen took me by the hand and led me into a dim, closet-like attic on the second floor of our house," Farrow wrote. "He told me to lay on my stomach and play with my brother's electric train set. Then he sexually assaulted me."
"He talked to me while he did it, whispering that I was a good girl, that this was our secret, promising that we'd go to Paris and I'd be a star in his movies. I remember staring at that toy train, focusing on it as it traveled in its circle around the attic. To this day, I find it difficult to look at toy trains."
In a note at the top of the blog post, Kristof justified running Farrow's letter, as it was "the first time that Dylan Farrow herself has written about it in public".
Speculation is growing that Cate Blanchett's best actress Oscar nomination for her performance in Blue Jasmine could be jeopardised as a result of the spotlight being focused on Allen.
The film was nominated for three Oscars - best actress (Cate Blanchett), best supporting actress (Sally Hawkins) and best original screenplay (Allen).
The final round of Oscar voting will take place from February 14-25.
"Woody Allen was never convicted of any crime. That he got away with what he did to me haunted me as I grew up," Dylan Farrow wrote, adding: "That torment was made worse by Hollywood. All but a precious few (my heroes) turned a blind eye. Most found it easier to accept the ambiguity, to say, 'who can say what happened,' to pretend that nothing was wrong. Actors praised him at awards shows. Networks put him on TV. Critics put him in magazines."
Farrow also wrote: "Woody Allen is a living testament to the way our society fails the survivors of sexual assault and abuse."
The director married Soon-Yi Previn, also an adopted daughter of Farrow, in 1997.
“If there is a yardstick to measure cultural decay, the child pornography epidemic must register.”
Blanchett responds to Woody Allen claims
Cate Blanchett backs photographer Bill Henson
Michelle Cazzulino and Neil Keene
The Daily Telegraph
May 28,2008
OSCAR-winning actress Cate Blanchett yesterday mounted an impassioned defence of Bill Henson, urging Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and NSW Premier Morris Iemma to reconsider their comments on the controversial artist's work.
The mother-of-three was among more than 40 signatories, including writer Peter Goldsworthy and economist Saul Eslake, to an open letter by the Creative Australia 2020 Summit representatives.
The missive was released just hours after a third NSW gallery removed a number of Henson's works from display.
Mr Bill Henson below, I am unable to post the photographs that are the subject of the Cate Blanchett open letter of support for Bill Henson,due to child pornography / Paedophilia laws.
Why I photograph children: Henson on video Police last week raided the Roslyn Oxley9 Gallery in Paddington, closing down an exhibition of the artist's works just before it was due to open.
In depth: The Arts
On Friday, officers seized 20 of Henson's images, some featuring a naked girl, said to be aged just 13.
The artworks were criticised by a number of politicians, with Mr Rudd describing them as "revolting".
But the letter signed by Blanchett said the Prime Minister, along with Mr Iemma, should "rethink their public comments".
It also warned that pursuing criminal charges against Henson could harm the children depicted in the seized images.
"The potential prosecution of one of our most respected artists . . . does untold damage to our culture reputation," the letter said.
"We suggest that the. . . criminalisation of laying charges against Mr Henson, his gallery and the parents of the young people depicted in his work would be far more traumatic for the young people concerned than anything Mr Henson has done."
A spokesman for Mr Rudd last night said the Prime Minister did not resile from his remarks. "He was asked to express a personal opinion and he did that," the spokesman said.
Mr Iemma was also unrepentant: "My opinion is clear - these photographs crossed the line and they were inappropriate. I'm all for free speech but never at the expense of a child's safety and innocence."
NSW Police Commissioner Andrew Scipione yesterday told The Daily Telegraph the force's legal division was still considering whether criminal charges should be laid against Henson or the owners of the Roslyn Oxley9 Gallery.
He said he found the images objectionable.
"I've got my own personal view and it's one that's not inconsistent with those police who have been out and taken those pictures into their possession," he said.
" . . . I support the police in what they've done."
In Victoria, Adrian Maiolla, the acting president of the Life Models Society, said he, too, had found Henson's images distasteful. His organisation did not allow models aged under 18 to become members and would not supply them to artists, he added.
At the Newcastle Regional Art Gallery, staff yesterday removed a giant print by Henson, featuring a naked and seemingly unconscious female being carried by two other naked subjects. Detective Chief Inspector Peter Fox, from Newcastle police, said the images were regarded as suspicious.
TUESDAY, MAY 27, 2008
Open Letter of Support for Bill Henson
http://billhensonletterofsupport.blogspot.com.au/
PRESS RELEASE: MAY 27, 2008
Open Letter in support of Bill Henson
From Creative Australia 2020 Summit representatives
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
As members of the Creative Stream of the Australia 2020 Summit, we wish to express our dismay at the police raid on Bill Henson’s recent Sydney exhibition, the allegations that he is a child pornographer, and the subsequent reports that he and others may be charged with obscenity.
The potential prosecution of one of our most respected artists is no way to build a Creative Australia, and does untold damage to our cultural reputation.
The public debate prompted by the Henson exhibition is welcome and important. We need to discuss the ethics of art and the issues that it raises. That is one of the things art is for: it is valuable because it gives rise to such debate and difference, because it raises difficult, sometimes unanswerable, questions about who we are, as individuals and as members of society. However, this on-going discussion, which is crucial to the healthy functioning of our democracy, cannot take place in a court of law.
We invite the Prime Minister, Mr Rudd, and the NSW Premier, Mr Iemma, to rethink their public comments about Mr Henson’s work. We understand that they were made in the context of deep community concern about the sexual exploitation of children. We understand and respect also that they have every right to their personal opinions. However, as political leaders they are influential in forming public opinion, and we believe their words should be well considered.
We also call on the Minister for Environment Heritage and the Arts, Mr Garrett, to stand up for artists against a trend of encroaching censorship which has recently resulted in the closure of this and other exhibitions.
We wish to make absolutely clear that none of us endorses, in any way, the abuse of children.
Mr Henson’s work has nothing to do with child pornography and, according to the judgment of some of the most respected curators and critics in the world, it is certainly art. We ask for the following points to be fairly considered:
1. Mr Henson is a highly distinguished artist. His work is held in all major Australian collections including the Art Gallery of NSW, Art Gallery of SA, Art Gallery of WA, National Gallery of Victoria and the National Gallery of Australia.
Among international collections, his work is held in the Solomon R Guggenheim Museum, New York; the Victoria and Albert Museum, London; San Francisco Museum of Modern Art; the Los Angeles County Museum of Art; the Denver Art Museum; the Houston Museum of Fine Art; 21C Museum, Louisville; the Montreal Museum of Fine Art; Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris; the DG Bank Collection in Frankfurt and the Sammlung Volpinum and the Museum Moderner Kunst, Vienna.
Major retrospectives of Mr Henson’s work at the Art Galleries of NSW and Victoria attracted more than 115,000 people, and produced not one complaint of obscenity. His work has also been studied widely in schools for many years.
2. Mr Henson has been photographing young models for more than 15 years. Until now, there has been no suggestion by any of his subjects or their families of any abusive practices. On the contrary, his models have strongly defended his practice and the feeling of safety generated in his process, and have expressed pride in his work.
We suggest that the media sensationalism and the criminalisation of laying charges against Mr Henson, his gallery and the parents of the young people depicted in his work, would be far more traumatic for the young people concerned than anything Mr Henson has done.
3. The work itself is not pornographic, even though it includes depictions of naked human beings. It is more justly seen in a tradition of the nude in art that stretches back to the ancient Greeks, and which includes painters such as Caravaggio and Michelangelo. Many of Henson’s controversial images are not in fact sexual at all. Others depict the sexuality of young people, but in ways that are fundamentally different from how naked bodies are depicted in pornography. The intention of the art is not to titillate or to gratify perverse sexual desires, but rather to make the viewer consider the fragility, beauty, mystery and inviolabilty of the human body.
In contrast, the defining essence of pornography is that it endorses, condones or encourages abusive sexual practice. We respectfully suggest that Henson’s work, even when it is disturbing, does nothing of the sort. I would personally argue that, in its respect for the autonomy of its subjects, the work is a counter-argument to the exploitation and commodification of young people in both commercial media and in pornographic images.
Many of us have children of our own. The sexual abuse and exploitation of children fills us all with abhorrence. But it is equally damaging to deny the obvious fact that adolescents are sexual beings. This very denial contributes to abusive behaviour, because it is part of the denial of the personhood of the young. In my opinion, Mr Henson’s work shows the delicacy of the transition from childhood to adulthood, its troubledness and its beauty, in ways which do not violate the essential innocence of his subjects. It can be confronting, but that does not mean that it is pornography.
Legal opinion is that if charges were laid against Mr Henson, he would be unlikely to be found guilty. The seizure of the photographs, and the possible prosecution of Mr Henson, the Rosyln Oxley9 Gallery or the parents of Henson’s subjects, takes up valuable police and court time that would be much better spent pursuing those who actually do abuse children.
4. Perhaps the most distressing aspect of the trial-by-media to which Mr Henson and his work has been subject over the past few days, is how his art has been diminished and corrupted. The allegations that he is making child pornography have done more to promote his work to possible paedophiles than any art gallery, where the work is seen in its proper, contemplative context. It is notable that the attacks on Mr Henson’s work have, almost without exception, come from those who are unfamiliar with the photographs, or who have seen them in mutilated or reduced images on the internet.
If an example is made of Bill Henson, one of Australia’s most prominent artists, it is hard to believe that those who have sought to bring these charges will stop with him. Rather, this action will encourage a repressive climate of hysterical condemnation, backed by the threat of prosecution.
We are already seeing troubling signs in the pre-emptive self-censorship of some galleries. This is not the hallmark of an open democracy nor of a decent and civilised society. We should remember that an important index of social freedom, in earlier times or in repressive regimes elsewhere in the world, is how artists and art are treated by the state.
We urge our political leaders to follow the example of Neville Wran, when in 1982 a similar outcry greeted paintings by Juan Davila. At that time, Mr Wran said: “I do not believe that art has anything to do with the vice squad”. With Mr Wran, we believe the proper place for debate is outside the courts of law.
Alison Croggon
Writer
Signatories:
Louise Adler, CEO & Publisher-in-Chief, Melbourne University Publishing
Geoffery Atherden, Writer
Neil Armfield, Artistic director, Belvoir St Theatre
Stephen Armstrong, Executive Producer, Malthouse Theatre
James Baker, Tax advisor and accountant
Geraldine Barlow, Curator
Larissa Behrendt, Professor of Law, University of Technology Sydney
Cate Blanchett, Actor
Daryl Buckley, Musician
Leticia Cacares, Theatre Director
Karen Casey, Visual Artist
Kate Champion, Choreographer, Artistic Director Force Majeure
Rachel Dixon, New media developer
Phoebe Dunn, Chief Executive Officer, Australian Commercial Galleries Association
Jo Dyer, Executive Producer, Sydney Theatre Company
Kristy Edmunds, Artistic Director, Melbourne International Festival of the Arts
Saul Eslake, Economist
Richard Gill, Artistic Director, Victorian Opera
Peter Goldsworthy, Writer
Marieke Hardy, Writer and broadcaster
Sam Haren, Artistic Director, The Border Project
Frank Howarth
Cathy Hunt, Creative consultant
Nicholas Jose, Writer
Andrew Kay, Producer
Ana Kokkinos, Film maker
Sandra Levy
Matthew Lutton, Theatre director
Nick Marchand, Artistic Director, Griffin Theatre
Sue Maslin, Producer, Film Art Doco Pty Ltd
Elizabeth Ann Macgregor, Director, Museum of Contemporary Art
Callum Morton, Visual Artist
Rosemary Myers, Artistic Director, Windmill Performing Arts
Rachel Healy, Director Performing Arts, Sydney Opera House
Liza Lim, Composer
Jan Minchin, Director, Tolarno Galleries
Helen O’Neil, Executive producer
Charles Parkinson, Artistic Director, Tasmanian Theatre Company
David Pledger, Theatre director
Marion Potts, Theatre Director
Katrina Sedgwick, Festival Director, Adelaide Film Festival
David Throsby, Academic
Mary Vallentine, Arts manager
Additional signatories:
The following support the appeal contained in this letter without necessarily endorsing the detailed argument:
John Coetzee, Novelist
Anna Haebich, Writer
Ramona Koval, Writer and broadcaster
Julianne Schultz, Writer
Marcus Westbury, writer and broadcaster
Monday June 2: Those who would also like to sign this letter are invited to do so below. Please put your name, and location (but NOT your full private address) and position, if applicable. All comments on this page are moderated.
