Well not quite …the opening shot of the new ‘Forum’ program on the ABC showed a nervous Kevin Rudd in an office swivel chair facing the firing squad of a public audience, granted the freedom to unleash in any direction they wished while Host Tony Jones hovered behind a Jetson-esque podium ready to bark out the order to ‘Fire.’
Of course most of the answers returned by Rudd offered a rhetoric filled shield of policy that we have been hearing for the last few budget crazed months. The format complimented most of Rudd’s positive qualities, his photographic memory of government policy and it’s reasons for them, an ability to interact with people on a stage and through the ‘tube’ and the capability to do it while staying on message.
Predictably most of the questions asked by the audience had already been asked at some stage over the last month by one journalist or another, this left Chairman Rudd able to answer the audience’s critiques without hesitation.
Towards the end of the night the reserved nature of Rudd was broken down and the audience started taking the PM in the direction they wanted to take him. The banter between the audience, Rudd and the presenter actually got humorous, when questioned about the Liberal party’s policy to remove fuel excise Rudd asked ‘Is that the Nelson position or the Turnbull position?’ Jones shot back ‘We’ll stick with the current leader.’
Rudd started to look a bit shaky when confronted about more ideological issues. On Gay marriage, Rudd had to concede that his personal views are irrelevant and ‘what is relevant is what we took to the last election.’ Rudd was searching for the least damaging answer, no more so than when asked about the aboriginal intervention. In reply, Rudd said he had to honour his campaign promise and would review the intervention in 12 months.
The show itself offered a glimpse at the man behind the glasses, but for most of the program Rudd was on message and Jones offered us little more freedom than the heavily structured forums of Difference of Opinion and SBS’s Insight.
Your Opinion Counts. Click Here >>>> An artistic furore
It’s not often Australia’s modern artists share the limelight of our Hollywood actors but Bill Henson’s controversial work has received more coverage than an Australian Oscar winner.
Having seen his work at the Art Gallery of NSW in 2005, it seems a shame that he and artists of such a high quality only receive this type of attention when they approach such a controversial topic and what could turn out to be an expensive legal minefield for all concerned.
Maybe Bill Henson is a horny middle-aged man who has a thing about young girls. But on the other hand his work does carry artistic merit and so the obvious question arises: “where do the lines of pornography, art, expression and exploitation begin and end?”
In previous exhibitions he has often blurred these lines, showing his figures in between night and day, youth and adult hood, consciousness and unconsciousness. In one such exhibition a young woman is languid, floating above a cityscape, Henson asks us, is she awaking to a new day in twilight? Or ending her day falling from a drug induced high?
Another photograph shows a young woman sitting next to young man, both semi-clothed. The allusions to teenage-sex and the dangers associated with it are not lost in the photograph. Again the girl’s emotions are not clear, is she ashamed of what she has done or merely reflecting on a coming of age.
In other photographs Henson shows us neon lights, emergency services on scene, young adults wandering the streets. All alluding to a different aspect of our youth culture.
In the 90s these photographs reflected the landscape of youth culture: sex, drugs, urban sprawl, the mistakes and dangers of this world we have created. Fast forward ten years and there is a new message. In the last decade the exploitation of youth has become more and more profound and bold. Hollywood is producing younger and younger stars, the lives of Miley Cyrus, Hilary Duff, Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera are all media fodder. All of whom made their mark almost as soon as they hit puberty.
 
In a pose reminiscent of Hiram Powers, The Greek Slave, Henson shows us a girl at a similar age to the newest generation of Hollywood stars. Similar to the age most advertisers are pitching their Alco-Pops or tween lingerie. Similar to the age most teenagers are starting to become adults.
While there maybe method to his madness should Henson have portrayed this exploitation by exploiting a young girl himself? It is a question that will probably be asked in courts, family rooms, around water coolers and parliament and maybe that was the point of this exhibition. And maybe that is the true definition of art, something that reflects, subverts and even changes society.
Your Opinion Counts. Click Here >>>> | 
