Comments on: Jill Greenberg

By: Crrg

Crrg — Thu, 18 Nov 2010 02:26:38 +0000

Parents need to know that this is not exploitation and is actually kind of getting them ready for the real world. Things will not be handed to them and things will be taken away from them but they need to get over it and get on with their lives. Some will grow up living easy other not as much. Things are not going too turn out right all the time and they need to get use to it

By: Alix

Alix — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 01:43:45 +0000

Surely anybody who has children would understand the raw emotion shown in this image, and that that is all it is, emotion not exploitation. Or is it that people would prefer their children to grow up under a veil, hidden from the world and unable to express anything that may be considered by others to be contentious? Viewers of work like this are now unable to separate the images from their own social/political agenda and see only two possible relationships between an adult and a child, that of loving parental authority or sexual exploitation. Other photographers such as Bill Henson, Polixeni Papapetrou and Sally Mann have faced the same criticism for their works from a misinformed public who like to have an opinion without necessarily doing their homework on the situation. Yet there is a startling lack of controversy about advertising featuring young girls posed in a sexualised manner in adult styled clothing, or magazines Barbie and Total Girl which regularly feature sexualised content yet are aimed at girls as young as six. Perhaps it is not contemporary artists which needs reporting to the authorities, but instead a re-evaluation of our own social and moral values.

By: Lorelei

Lorelei — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 08:16:58 +0000

This photography promotes child exploitation and must be reported to the authorities. What a shame that kids can be used for such form of abuse. How dare she display these kids in such a horrendous state. If you think this is art, then there is something dangerously and insanely wrong with you.

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 16:08:38 +0000

Maybe I am missing something, but I don’t see how this artist is at all angry or cynical. I read that she has a great sense of humor. Not seeing the negative, negative that you apparently see. Can you explain what the hell you are talking about?

By: KVB

KVB — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 10:15:45 +0000

I certainly appreciate beautiful art; she is obviously talented. Yet, this woman is angry, cynical, and mentally ill. Aside from what she did with these children, what she recently did with McCain’s photograph is appauling, disgusting, and twisted. She’s part of the crazy, radical establishment which reflects democrats in a very bad light (no pun intended). Negative, negative, negative……it’s always doomsday and the glass is always half empty. Jeez, find some peace and smell some roses!!

By: c

Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:44:06 +0000

wow- this in an intense photo. with the abundance of new digital art out there it is refreshing to see work that isn’t the sterile “lone shopping cart in a parking lot under green lighting that i over saturated in photoshop” look.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 22:47:22 +0000

Check out the Animal Tales video!

By: justin

justin — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 19:12:20 +0000

that’s an incredibly emotional and tense photo. i feel like it shows that, no matter what our age, there are times when we all experience intense longing — whether for peace, love or candy.

By: Michael

Michael — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 07:24:37 +0000

Wow, there is something very Christ-like about this child.