Photographer Gives Children Candy Then Takes It Away (Updated)
Jill Greenberg’s exhibition End Times show portraits of children crying as if they had undergone something terrible. According to adelaidenow, photographer had provoked the tears of the two and three-year-olds by giving them a lollipop then quickly taking it away.
The photographs have kick-started heated debate about whether it is ethical to make children cry for the sake of art. Some argue that it’s rather sadistic, others, however, say it doesn’t harm kids at all – children cry all the time, and it’s their way of manipulating parents. Emeritus Professor of child development at the University of SA, Frida Briggs say “it did no long-term damage to the children.” It’s the issue of ethics rather than child development. What do you think?
Website: jillgreenberg.com
UPDATE: Unfortunately, photographer requested to remove the pictures. You can still find them on google.
UPDATE 2: The photographer didn’t give the kids candy herself. Their parents did all of it. Jill says she didn’t interact with them at all.
Got wisdom to pour?
I may not like when my son cries but it is part of life. Sometimes he cries at next to nothing. Yes it saddens me but sometimes you do just have to laugh because it can be funny. Sometimes he laughs then suddenly cries (usually when tired.) As a mother I would love to have that face captured as eloquently as these photos do. Children crying is very normal and although they were set them up for this one I think when they grow up they will be happy to have it captured too.
There’s a big difference between a kid crying in natural environment over an environment being created to make a kid cry – in the name of art.
Why do people say ‘in the name of art’ as if art is somehow exclusive to aesthetics, or to privileged people, or to people who are trying to be famous? What about the times we make our spouses cry because we can’t make it to a birthday party because we are writing our dissertation? And then you say, ‘a PhD is not worth some rough weekends’.
My point is that the work people do for the ultimate service they wish to provide the world is worth a little bit of selfishness. The result here is something we can engage with, so everyone benefits. I mean everyone- these children will laugh at these photos later in life, and I bet you a dollar they were showered with love and sympathy and lollipops the second after a few photos were taken.
What pains me more than these photographs is the fact discussion about the subject is being censored. My previous post was obviously not approved (I have no idea why) leaving my above comment somewhat out of context. What’s the point in having a discussion forum if you then censor people’s comments leaving half an argument on public display? I didn’t say anything wrong, just gave my opinion. This is the last post I’ll ever be making here!
My photographer daughter sent this to me and says “there is no purpose” … no thesis behind this to prove or show anything … other than how children are dependent on sugar. But for me, a trauma therapist, these reactions to lollipop are NOT about the lollipop, per se. It’s pretty safe to say that people who would allow their child to participate in this are people who are unlikely to be in touch with their child as a real, emotional, learning, experiencing human who is impacted by EVERY moment. What I find in trauma therapy is that events that our family held as funny … stories told over and over .. where everyone laughs, hold the deepest of grief, loss, abandonment, shame, and boundary violation.
Janel, I think you are WAY over-thinking this. This is not trauma. This is not abuse. To think that these toddlers are going to be negatively affected by this for more than the five minutes (or less) it took them to recover from this “trauma” is an example of how our society has almost completely lost its grip.
I agree Todd. These children will probably look back at these pictures in 10 years and laugh, and hopefully feel honored to have participated in such a cool shoot. If you don’t have a sense of humor about silly tantrums, good luck raising a child.
You’re a therapist?
“It’s pretty safe to say that people who would allow their child to
participate in this are people who are unlikely to be in touch with
their child as a real, emotional, learning, experiencing human who is
impacted by EVERY moment”.
No, it’s not “pretty safe to say” that at all. You’d be hard pressed to find any real therapist who would haphazardly make such a baseless, biased collection of nonsense & gibberish.
That’s the phrasing I was looking for! About every single on of your comments:
“baseless, biased collection of nonsense & gibberish.”
That’s the phrasing I was looking for! About every single on of your comments:
“baseless, biased collection of nonsense & gibberish.”
I know someone just like that.
These are disturbing on several levels. It’s sadistic on the part of the photographer who just wants to make them cry and, other than child abusers, who wants to see a child cry? I’m also disturbed that in addition to them crying, they all appear to be unclothed – WHY???? I have a REAL problem with that as far as pedophiles go. Why would a parent allow something like this be published of their children?
Seriously? It’s just a photo idea. The kids aren’t naked and surely weren’t molested. Chill
Yes, the children are naked. Go on the street, the beach, you see more undressed children than this. This is not child pornography at all, showing a glimpse of a child’s chest… And I’m sure they’re not sitting totally naked in front of the camera, just without shirt. Which is perfectly normal. If somebody can get pleasure out of watching this, they could just as well look at their own thighs or something.
Anon, are you for real? This is what art is about – evoking a feeling in those who look at it. It looks like you got hit lol.
That’s it? The primary objective is to evoke a feeling in the observer? No matter the cost? So, you would have no problem if we had someone punch you and photograph your “raw response”? It would be OK, as long as the puncher didn’t really mean it, they were just manipulating you? Especially OK if they give you a hug afterward? I mean, compared to somebody with a gunshot or stab wound, your pain could be called “trivial.”
And we can’t really justify our manipulation as adults by saying that kids manipulate us, can we? Really? I mean, adults are supposed to know better – that’s what makes us the adults and caretakers.
My guess is the “nudity” is to accentuate the focal point of the art — no distractions of clothing, backgrounds, etc.
And I think there’s a huge difference between documenting the realities of war, and setting up a violent act just to get the photos. Probably if mom or dad had snapped a photo of these emotions while they were displayed in the course of a normal day, most of us wouldn’t have a problem with it. Kids do cry all the time, and we as adults with our “omniscient” perspective can distance ourselves from it (and must to an extent, to do our job), but not sure we should be setting anyone up for any additional pain, no matter how trivial it seems to us. It’s real to the kids, and in reality, senseless — for adult speculation.
i think you are repressed… and possibly pedophiliac yourself ? I think you have probably abused children, because thats the first thing you saw…. What I saw first was my own memory of being able to cry at will and being able to manipulate my folks with fake emotions… Other honest adults would often admit the same as Ive queried many. We need to start getting honest about who we humans are and what we are doing here. This crying child, sometimes real, sometimes fake, sometimes ambiguous… walks within us…
You are deranged.
Why can’t I upvote this multiple times?
Listen, I understand about ‘artistic license’ in the form of trying to appear ‘avant guarde’ via shock format, but this falls far from that. I don’t find it ‘creative’ at all.
The artist succeeded. It’s “End Times”. Tell a child “No” and you get the same reaction.
Who wants to see children cry? I don’t!
i do. It’s made my day.
thats because you are a dick
Coming from you?
That cracked me up… Quick wit!!!
And so says Dicky Fosterberger!
I want to put you on a plane with 200 crying babies then. :D
You’d be responsible for the consequences though…
No one would expect you to be responsible for anything.
No one would expect you to be responsible for anything.
No one would expect you to be responsible for anything.
Then don’t look. Problem, solved.
That’s like saying don’t think about starving children in Africa if you don’t like it. If you disagree with something and do not act upon it, what kind of person are you?
The kind of person who actually allows other people to live their lives.
Know why there are starving children in Africa? I’m sure I don’t, but I don’t think I’m sticking my neck out too far to suggest that the loving, personal god in whom so many people claim belief is either evidence of mass hysteria, or that this loving, personal god can’t be bothered to send rain when the people don’t tithe sufficently.
It’s beautiful and the kids got all the candy they wanted afterwards.
These are horrible. There’s enough grief these tykes will have to contend with in life, to exploit them for a ‘photo-op’ is nothing short of heinous. Plus the photo’s themselves are awful, they look like they’ve been smeared with glossy bronzing cream. Makes no sense at all.
BIG DISLIKE! Hurting children for art is just not right!
Terrible! Making a child cry just so you can take a photo? Shame on you.