trevor brown

rec|use · Post by **rec|use** » Thu Aug 28, 2003 9:33 am

http://www.babyart.nu/pix/black.jpg
enjoy
http://www.babyart.nu/

Edit:
Changed from an inline image to a link - yeah, I know, it's art - but it's art with pubes in it.

DV

Onibubba · Post by **Onibubba** » Thu Aug 28, 2003 10:46 am

Trevor is an interesting artist. I read an interview with him somewhere (in conjunction with John Zorn I think) talking about his experiences in Japan and his interest in foot binding and his difficulties in having his art exhibited.

Mostly familiar with his work through Zorn and Whitehouse. As his work centers around wounded naked children in bondage and / or pain, I can completely understand why people would find his art offensive, because it is. As for as it being pornographic, I am going against the accepted term as defined. Pornography is said to have no social merit or artistic value. I think of pornography more in terms of the appropriate audience, and think that any artist's works should be available to persons of age who want to view it.

That being said, while I certainly appreciate his talent and his work, I think a link would have been more appropriate maybe?

I am probably just jumping to conclusions about what people here find acceptable, as I don't know anyone here.

Hardcoregirl · Post by **Hardcoregirl** » Thu Aug 28, 2003 4:47 pm

Onibubba wrote:.

That being said, while I certainly appreciate his talent and his work, I think a link would have been more appropriate maybe?

I agree. I believe Arkady shared this site a long time ago and I thought it to be a little sick for me (and I want to play with dead things!). He is talented...and creative...but...ick.

I guess I'm of the opinion that its simply artsy kiddie porn, and as a mom, and friend of many who were abused/exploited as children...I find it in poor taste.

Thanks for sharing though recluse...

keep the nifty links comin'.

rec|use · Post by **rec|use** » Thu Aug 28, 2003 6:40 pm

i try not to take trevor browns work to much at face value
i cant speak for mr brown but im pretty sure he himself is not pro child exploitation neither am i

i see the works as more than paintings of kiddie porn personally

and a great body of his work also portrays grown japanese women
not just "baby dolls" or little girls

The Stormstress · Post by **The Stormstress** » Fri Aug 29, 2003 3:40 am

I do find sum of it a bit creepy, but not offensive. Nsofar az the kiddie porn aspect, I think that it could b viewed az such by sum, while otherz may find it 2 simply b humor, all 4 shock value, or even something deeper... like pointing out the societal impact of child abuse & objectification thru th' baby dolls... dunno.

Onibubba · Post by **Onibubba** » Fri Aug 29, 2003 7:28 am

Got a big surprise from his website...I knew that TB had done a lot of work with Whitehouse and John Zorn, but I had no idea that he had done the artwork for the cover of Coil's Hellraiser CD. It is so different from most of what I have seen from him in style if not subject matter.

JaNell · Post by **JaNell** » Fri Aug 29, 2003 8:16 am

Short opinion:
Beautiful technique, distasteful subject matter with dubious intent.

I surely hope the artist intends more than shock value, which is sort of the Jr. High school of art to me. Shock? Easy. Make somebody think? THAT takes insight and maturity and skill.

Maybe the artist intended that, but the images don't show any humanity to me - maybe foregoing a bit of the perfection, showing a human intelligence in the eyes, a bit of real skin under the plastic, would have conveyed some sort of statement against objectifying women and children. The feeling I get is more of an ad for it. Those dolls don't feel.

Even worse, the little girl depicted with pierced nipples ( http://www.babyart.nu/treville.htm ) looks particularly willing as a sex object, right down to the wink.

At least there's hope - the schoolgirl with the gun ( http://www.babyart.nu/gift.htm ) looks ready to settle a few debts.

So, I'm with Buttercup on this one. As a mother and abuse victim, as an observer of how women dehumanize themselves, physically and intellectually, just to be hot for the guys - Ick.

rec|use · Post by **rec|use** » Fri Aug 29, 2003 11:27 am

i dont think it's supposed to be hot
or again
pro exploitation
for even shock material for that matter

i think there's a lot of messages involved in his work
and even beyond the obvious
"child abuse" and or "exlpoitation" is bad and very present in our society
of couse this just my opinion obviously

and for the record
he does a lot of album art
and i really didnt realize that i had most of it untill i looked at his webpage

so obviously he has invoked a lot of reaction from you guys
so he is a true artistic genius

JaNell · Post by **JaNell** » Fri Aug 29, 2003 2:41 pm

Provoking a reaction does not equal being any sort of genius, but it beats the hell out of no comment at all.

rec|use · Post by **rec|use** » Fri Aug 29, 2003 3:10 pm

i simply do not agree with you
and i'll leave it at that

AuralFixation · Post by **AuralFixation** » Wed Sep 03, 2003 10:38 pm

i hate sinsationalism.
its so shallow and trite.
any substance in his work is completely drowned by some kind of contrived angst.
im not at all offended by the imagry, infact i enjoy similar thingsand they have invoked amazement and joy from me, but ofcourse they had some sort of poiniancy, most of this does not.
not all however. "girl with machine gun", "the gift", "chemical", "fetus in head" all were great but i had to wade through so much shit to find them.
i have no doubt that he will go down in the annals of art, but in the same way as geiger. and though im sure im dancing on the line of goth sacaralige, i will say.... geiger is terrible... he has has no clout in the art world, but youll see a geiger poster in every trailer park in america. i mean dont get me wrong...i liked him in highschool too, but after seeing the same imagery for the hundreth time witout anysort of altered content...it got old. TB is the same i fear, as are the chapman brothers and nearly everyoune comming out of the british contemporary art world. they are overly concerned with reaction and point is completely secondary. herst is one of the exceptions to this, and he was exploring this type of imagry 10 years ago..he moved on..they should too.

this isnt a personal attak on you btw Rec...ive bitched about this for a wile now, you just happened to step infront of it :P~

...we all have out own tastes....that was mine

Hardcoregirl · Post by **Hardcoregirl** » Thu Sep 04, 2003 7:08 am

AuralFixation wrote:i hate sinsationalism.
its so shallow and trite.
any substance in his work is completely drowned by some kind of contrived angst.
im not at all offended by the imagry, infact i enjoy similar thingsand they have invoked amazement and joy from me, but ofcourse they had some sort of poiniancy, most of this does not.
not all however. "girl with machine gun", "the gift", "chemical", "fetus in head" all were great but i had to wade through so much shit to find them.
i have no doubt that he will go down in the annals of art, but in the same way as geiger. and though im sure im dancing on the line of goth sacaralige, i will say.... geiger is terrible... he has has no clout in the art world, but youll see a geiger poster in every trailer park in america. i mean dont get me wrong...i liked him in highschool too, but after seeing the same imagery for the hundreth time witout anysort of altered content...it got old. TB is the same i fear, as are the chapman brothers and nearly everyoune comming out of the british contemporary art world. they are overly concerned with reaction and point is completely secondary. herst is one of the exceptions to this, and he was exploring this type of imagry 10 years ago..he moved on..they should too.

this isnt a personal attak on you btw Rec...ive bitched about this for a wile now, you just happened to step infront of it
...we all have out own tastes....that was mine

Wow, you go off to kollege and get all schnobby on us. You sound weird. Give me back my Chris that sings about his balls and dancin'.