The Post About Where Jill Greenberg Thinks She Can Intimidate Me by Contacting My Employer
Update: New York Times.
Jill Greenberg. Artist. Advocate of free speech and expression. Except when someone disagrees with her and is critical of her work and methods.
You will recall that recently I have been upset by the methods of photographer Jill Greenberg in dealing with and photographing children. Jill is the one who strips kids down and then works them up into a state of emotional distress and then shoots them distraught and in anguish, tears running down their little face, and calls it some kind of protest art against the Bush administration.
In my mind what she is doing is abuse. It’s emotionally abusing children and it’s wrong. So she doesn’t agree with me. Fine. Her husband wrote a comment on my original blog post on the matter and in fairness I elevated the comment to the actual article itself. I fully admit that I very well may be reacting emotionally on this matter having four little ones of my own at home. I believed that two sides deserve to be heard and was more than happy to allow Jill or her husband or her gallery owner or any of her supporters or friends to voice an opinon on my blog — even to the point of including her husband’s comment in my original post.
But how does Jill respond?
First she tries to discredit me as an insane person with personal problems who she doesn’t even think has kids (even though in my blog post about her I clearly state I’ve got four children, have photos of my four children up on flickr and elsewhere on my blog etc.) She tells this to a professional publication American Photo (whom I’ve asked for a retraction from and who never contacted me to verify her claims even though they pulled quotes from my same post that referenced that I had four kids).
Next, Jill tracks down my employer, an unrelated third party who has absolutely zero to do with my personal views and opinions and tries to apply pressure to get me to pull my post. She literally calls my boss this morning who has absolutely zero to do with any of my blogging. (By the way Jill, I blog from my own laptop on my own time). The last company who thought that they could intimidate me by involving my employer, an unrelated third party, went by the name PriceRitePhoto. I don’t think they are in business anymore but feel free to Google them to read the story.
And then her husband tells me that in his opinion I’m committing libel. I’m committing libel for having an opinion that what Jill is doing to these kids constitutes abuse. That to emotionally work these kids up is abusive. My opinion Robert Green. He goes on to tell me that if I want to discuss this further that I get a lawyer.
So this is how the great artist Jill Greenberg decides free speech ought to work in this country? This is how someone who disagrees with her methods ought to be intimidated — by threats of lawsuits and calling unrelated third parties to try and pressure someone? To try to discredit someone and make blatantly untrue accusations in a National magazine?
Jill, your husband writes on his blog that I’m a “crazy asshole with a blog.” He uses an illustration likening me to a child molester. Do I threaten to sue him? No. Because speech is and should remain free in this country. Do I try to do research on the internet and track down the people in Hollywood that he’s worked with and threaten to sue them? No. Again, they have nothing to do with his opinion and again it’s a free country. Believe it or not freedom of speech is actually something that is constitutionally guaranteed. I am in fact, and I know this is a stretch for you here, allowed to have the opinon and speak my opinion that what you are doing to these children is abuse. And I’m not just some crazy guy with a blog. There have been other bloggers who have been critical of your methods as well. I’d encourage you to read these posts by Joe Wilcox and Charlie Owen. And you know what Jill? Joe and Charlie are fathers too. Imagine that, the shock, actual real life fathers outside of Hollywood could possibly object to your behavior. Are you going to call their employers and try to intimidate them as well?
You do not intimidate me Jill Greenberg. You are IN MY OPINION a morally bankrupt individual who has no problem manipulating children (interesting how your website is called The Manipulator) and trying to intimidate others from expressing their opinion and excersising their constitutional right to free speech. You are in short, IN MY OPINION, a bully. But what else might I expect from someone that treats children as lovingly as you do. Oh my, how fun, tears running down a boys naked chest.
You call your lawyer Jill Greenberg. He/She will explain to you that opinions contrary to your own are actually allowed to be thought and are actually allowed to be spoken and written. He or she will also explain to you that when you put yourself up as a celebrity and an artist in the art community that you are even held to a higher degree of scrutiny and potential criticism — as am I within my realm as a blogger.
I am all for free speech. I believe in the free form expression of ideas. I’m actually pretty open to almost all art. With the exception of things that I think are harmful to children.
And to all you parents who allowed Jill to photograph your children this way. Tears running down their precious little faces. Shame on you. These photographs may end up haunting you, they may have and may in the future hurt your children and you should be ashamed of yourselves. These so called “paid models” that you sold out for a buck. It will be interesting to see how these children feel about these photographs when they are older. When they are adults and able to speak for themselves. Somehow I doubt that they will see the legitimacy of making a statement against the Bush administration as having been worth it.
Jill and Robert. These are my opinions. I’m allowed to have them. Your intimidation won’t work. This is my computer. My blog. And thanks to the City of San Francisco free wi-fi access. Maybe you should threaten the City of San Francisco with a lawsuit by the way. I’m expressing my opinion on their public wi-fi right now.
The writer of that article missed one key source, though – he should have called Thomas Hawk for comment. By doing that, he paints him as frothing and irrational, kind of like Bill O’Reilly or Matt Drudge. I’m sure that he is a reasonable person with reasonable concerns about the exhibit, and I think that angle was really missed.
I do take Mrs. Greenberg’s side in the matter that nothing was done wrong, but the article missed a point that needed to be said.
Doing something to a child to cause distress, photographing them and calling it “art” is not “art”. It’s just plain stupid. What kind of a parent would put up with that garbage? Perhaps the same kind that would send there little ones the Michell Jackson’s for a sleep-over? Just stupid, not art.
Doing something to a child to cause distress, photographing them and calling it “art” is not “art”. It’s just plain stupid. What kind of a parent would put up with that garbage? Perhaps the same kind that would send there little ones the Michell Jackson’s for a sleep-over? Just stupid, not art.
I think it would have been more aristically challenging to portray adults crying like that, and they would’ve been savvy to what was going on.
Then there would be no hassles.
It’s obvious this “lady” has a twisted and deep seated hatred for President Bush. She also has a deep seated hatred for little kids, as I’ve seen both “photo-essays” and she could have easily used the same captions for the “monkey” pics.
She choose to torture little kids instead.
No ambiguity here, all you “anonymous” chickenshit bastards.
Step up and post your name you gutless pieces of dreck.
Thomas,
I agree with you on this, but isn’t there some way to remove the “Anonymous” option from comments. Seriously it’s hard to follow the discussion when every other commenter is anonymous.
I cant believe this broad – she has barbara striesand’s disease evidently, the one where everything you say is free speech but everything the other guy says that you disagree with is hate speech, yeah that disease. Its most commonly found among well healed left coasters. I like how her hubby THINKS you may have libeled him. I am guessing he isnt a lawyer or he would KNOW if he were libeled. I guess he wants to play “my lawyer can beat up your lawyer” They sound like two elitist whack-jobs to me and she should DEFINATELY be investigated for Child Abuse or any other possible related criminal charges. I dont know whats funnier her childish fit over the President being in office or the fact that she comes across just like one of her photos. In any case its just another example of sick, sophomoric “transgressive” art thats so cliche at this point it makes me want to say “will the last transgressive pop artist to place a revered symbol of any kind in a mason jar of filled with urine please turn out the lights as you leave, its over already – walk away”. Of course the ral kicker is that this flap has now been picked up by michellemalkin.com and/or drudge so the real sh1t storm should break sometime around Monday Morning. Someone needs to mail her a box of lollipops and tell he to get over it.
I love the irony of all you babies crying about this supposed abuse.
I am attaching each of your comments to one of Ms. Greenbergs’s photos mentally as I read them.
Hawk = Hack
Greenberg = Art
Ha Ha Ha Loosers.
Hawk,
Stand your ground – these wimps don’t have a snowball’s chance in Hell of silencing you.
I would love to see her face when (eventually) a judge makes her cry. Of course she won’t understand why (like these little tikes didn’t understand why). And she will probably try not to shed tears (it will only make it worse when they finally do come out. She should ask her victims, they know).
I can’t imagine the flips and twists that will go through her head the first time she hears the rumblings of a “Victim Class Action Suit” headed her way. Oh, it may be years down the road. But I trust our bumper crop of litigators and victim’s attorneys to put her on the list of “fish in a barrel” defendants. I mean, she has so proudly presented the evidence of her miss-deeds. Even to the point of going on cable news and other interview type shows (can you say “taped confession”) and telling all the nice little details about her forethought and intentioned “stripping to the waist”, “making the children cry”.
But the one that will cinch the monetary judgment against her will be the quote from this ScarboroughCountry interview wherein she says “I’ve gotten some, actually some great jobs as a result” of stripping these kids to the waist and then making them cry, and then selling the photos that I took of them in that emotionally distressed and vulnerable state.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I26UhE1njFc&search;=Jill%20Greenberg
If you watch this interview please watch her eyes… She can’t even look into the camera as she answers the questions.
Jill Greenberg successfully exposes raw emotion! If only adults knew such open expression, but no, adults hide their anguish, anger, and despair behind cloaks of smiles. That’s how serial killers are born: hide it, hide it. We can learn from these photos: Express yourself as only children can- let it go in the moment; don’t keep it bottled up inside!!!
Amy
Keep up the good fight. I cannot believe (well, sadly, I CAN) that someone would exploit children to make a political “statement.” It’s sad when crying becomes a political arguement.
Did you know that the advertisement for Paint Shop on your sidebar has a picture of a crying baby? I am disgusted and outraged by that abuse of an innocent child.
Give me a break…
hiya thomas,
maureen here from london, england where we dont do that much sueing so everyone has an opinion on everything! am always shocked that the luxury of free speech isnt respected in a western country. erm mother of two myself and i must confess to taking a picture of my oldest son when he was two and had long hair which had knotted and he wouldnt let me comb and went into a strop, so i photographed him crying in an manufactured situation, dont know if that makes me as bad as jill greenberg or not. i think i have two questions though, does anyone know how she got them to cry? and are they part animation, because they dont look like straightforward or natural lifelike images, could it be they are made to look like they are crying? what do you think?
I am renaming a few of Jill’s “End Times” photos. Let’s see what sticks. Perhaps her attempt to tar Bush and the GOP with this sick work of hers can be pinned more firmly upon the true perp here; Jill Greenberg.
Remember that not a single one of these kids was thinking about the current problems of the world while they were crying for Jill. They were crying because of, well, Jill and her aspirations for fame, fortune, and artistic recognition.
So… here goes.
The photo titled “four more years” gets added to and becomes… “no, not four more years of Jill…”
“angry country” that shows a little boy in an apparent nazi salute is now… “Yes Jill… I’ll cry for you”
“shock”… “why are you doing this to me Jill”
“the truth” is “Jill Greenberg did this to me.”
“the rapture index”… “what did I ever do to you Jill?”
“nucular (sic)” “Yes, it is Jill.”
“spin”… “But I don’t want Jill to baby-sit.”
And the one that should worry her the most… “big brother”… Or, as it shall be named if justice is to be served… “I’ll be back Jill… With my lawyers.”
Funny comment, Ralphyboy
but please donnot slander the poor little boy who lifts up his arm. He is a courageous boy trying to ward off the shooting.
i actually think calling your employer for disliking your opinion is a lot worse than taking a lollipop away and capture the tears.
i think she is on the track of “he spoils my business, i spoil his”. if the revealing of her work methods is something she cannot stand up for to open public without having to harm the other party, leads to the presence of a bad conscience. And with that, enough said.
I’m going to say I openly support Greenberg, because I honestly believe she hasn’t done anything wrong as an artist. But that is not what I’m posting about.
Greenberg has indeed put herself on a difficult position by talking to your boss. But has she ever had to deal with a torrent of abuse and accusations of child abuse about her art before? This mob attitude to Greenberg only started once bloggers started preaching how sick and immorral she is. No newspaper or official authority previously made a comment about Greenburg because she understood the role of an artist and her ethical limitations. Only the people who saw her out of context made complaints, blogs and now this. So, Greenberg reacted angrily, with out thinking and innappropriately. I’d feel pretty pissed off too.
Misunderstanding is the sad thing I see here, not child abuse.
These photos are BEAUTIFUL.
Its pretty pathetic how much time you’ve wasted hating her.
“Kid models aren’t very expensive—not as expensive as monkeys, for example.”
Greenberg
Jill Greenberg is the best. You are sick. These photos are so great. Go get a life.
these photos are amazing!
I think Greenberg’s photographs are beautiful. It is absolutely hilarious how many people are so upset about this. Is is child abuse every time a parent tells a child that they can’t get a puppy at the pet store? Or take away a toy that they pick up in a store? Does anyone honestly think that these kids are going to be “emotionally scarred” by having a lollipop taken away from them? I’m sure they’d completely forgotten about it within 10 minutes. Relax, people, and admire the beautiful display of emotion in these children’s faces. It is hard to get a more honest response than that.
In all fairness you did acuse her of being a roothless child abuser before you had any idea of her actual methoods. Ohhhh ya… and you called her a child pornographer…because they cried? or because we saw todler nipples (as if toddlers didn’t run around with out shirts half the time anyway.) I too, personally would want to defend myself and my reputation. I would be completely hurt if someone completely and utterly misinterpreted her. She is, in fact, a person and much like you has feelings.
Did she overreact by calling your boss? Probably.
Did she overreact by telling the press you were some insignificant who has no idea what is going on? I don’t think so.
She may not have handled this perfectly well, but frankly, neither have you. It seams to me like you picked a fight, and now that you realize your emotions-though genuine- were founded on misconceptions YOU ARE TOO PROUD TO BACK OFF, admit you too overreacted.
I’m sure at one point one of your children has taken something from one of there siblings, making them cry. Are they naughty? are they mean? yes, perhaps— but are they sick and disgusting and make you want to vomit? I hardly think so.
Would it be so hard to swallow your pride and say. “Although I do not (even to this day) agree with taking away a lollipop to make a child cry, I apologize for calling you a sick child abusing pornographer.”
While you made a point, you did take it way to far. I don’t mean to play psychologist with you, but this anger is obviously consuming you. Let it go, be the bigger man and admit you went overboard. -
right first of all, how long have you spent arguing this?? you just dont ever shut up do you?!? i mean come on you only got one life and you want to spend yours writing blogs complaining day in day out…your just some guy with a grudge and a very obsessive disorder..jesus christ man get a life, lose the internet, try reading a book…you are clearly no artist in any shape or form otherwise you would understand the deep concepts to creating art and the extent that artists go to. but just for your information there is a line for every artist that they will not cross and no artist has ever crossed it, take it from me, unlike you i am an artist.
look at andres serranos ‘piss christ’ from 1987. there are roughly 1.1 billion catholics, christians etc in the world and nothing…..i know it isnt child related but im pretty sure its offensive…as you say is Jill’s work…you are one man in 6.5 billion you are insignificant and nothing you say will ever make a difference so stop arguing an already lost battle.
get on with your life, if you care so much about children why dont you try spending some time with yours, before they become mentally scarred at the fact their daddy didnt care about them cause he’d rather spend all his time on the internet writing silly blogs that make him look really stupid and obsessive.
You have a problem with what i said my email address is
naap_rap@hotmail.com
im sick to death of stumbling across this god damned blog…
Jill greenberg fucking rocks!!!
Oh wow. Am I the only sane person left on the planet?
OMG!! That evil lady took away the lollypop!!!! ABUSE!
Um… it’s a lollypop. And they aren’t naked, they are shirtless. My toddler spends 99% of his life shirtless.
Wow people really need to read the news and learn what actual abuse is. If you must poke your ass into other people’s businesses, at least pick a worthwile cause.
I agree that you have the right to speak your mind. I support you for that.
On the other hand, I think her work is beautiful, she had a great idea to speak her mind and she just proceeded with it. I can’t think of a softer way to make a child cry than to give them a lollipop and then take it back.
I think you’re wrong when you say the photos will haunt them down: Do you remember the reasons for every single time you cried when you were a little kid?
I think you’re overrreacting.
OK, I didn’t read through every single comment, but almost all of the “anonymous” ones sure seem to be in support of Jill “nutty” Greenberg…and coincidentally written in the same voice. Could it be Jill again on the attack? Sounds like something a person of her caliber would stoop to.
what’s worse:
a) jill greenberg making 35 children cry and photographing them
b) jill greenberg making a bunch of adults cry
children cry. that she manipulated them into doing so is, to me, less important. the photographs are remarkable, and i’d venture as far as to say that no harm was done.
sure, her rationale is fairly shallow, but to me it’s not about the politics; the images are arresting.
so, do what you like. don’t have kids! have kids, but hide them indoors! have kids, but teach them that things you don’t agree with are ‘terrorism’! or, just post on a blog about how ’sick’ this person is. the world is your oyster.
I am a current year twelve student about to sit my photography exam and i have chosen Jill Greenberg as one of my artist for discussion, throughout the year i used her as inspiration as in the class of “studio art” my theme for my personal folio was expression. These photos of hers i found fascinating and thought provoking until now. After reading Hawk’s battle with not only Greenberg herself but her petty husband also, i am disgusted to think a person of her status could actually be dumb enough to think she can threaten to sue over personal opinions!Her photos prove similar to the ever continuous debate with Bill Hensons work. Both artists Henson and Greenberg display photos of naked children Hensons more forth coming than Greenbergs however both are unacceptable. I believe personally what happened to Henson should happen to Greenberg! Her photos should be seized and the parents of the children photographed should face real punishment for the neglect to understanding the capacity in which children are able to remember such distressing times as these!
I would also just like to thank Hawk for expressing his opinions so strongly and making me see the true ‘manpulator’ Jill Greenberg is. And to the rest of you that believe making a child cry is OK if its for art are PATHETIC! and i hope you never have children of your own as i fear the hurt they may be subjected to!
With thanks Jess from Australia
Oh jesus….oh lord, oh heaven’s to betsy, oh lord have mercy on me and you….sheeesshh….
I have read the articles and the reviews and the shameless attach of a gifted visionary by yourself and shrew of a man who is totally talentless and even more so…hates it when a women does oh so much much better than yourself….I bet the whole story is not here…she blew you off in a bar sometime ago in your past…and you in your self important whiny foaming at the mouth sneer…said….why that bitch…who does she think she is to ….omg…I mean really….dismiss me…..after all “I AM THE ARTIST HERE!”….
Yeah well get over it….This is so like Art School all over it…I could never understand those pityful souls…who felt it their stupid right to feel that those who work ten times harder than themselves, who get the sales while in art school, who get the grants and commissions, those who get the all paid tickets to Italy to stay at the sponsors art filled house, at their expense, who buy every single art piece of paper or canvas, and who are now wealthy…because they are constantly working…while the pity little ones…are artists in pose only…and whose hands have never seen graphite dust or oil paint, or who would never dare have their new fashionable clothes get dirty…..
Yeah…you go and hide your face behind your camera…good thing too.
shame on you….SHAME SHAME SHAME on you.
HEY…WHO PISSED IN YOUR DEVELOPER TRAY…