---

@cee-dee wrote:

So, you've read the references at the bottom of the page or did you just skip over the first hundred words and dismiss it all as "fairly useless"?

---

Thanks CD........Some good reading here  and some good links..  Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children, generally age 11 years or younger. As a medical diagnosis, specific criteria for the disorder extends the cut-off point for prepubescence to age 13.[1][2][3][4] A person who is diagnosed with pedophilia must be at least 16 years of age, but adolescents who are 16 years of age or older must be at least five years older than the prepubescent child before the attraction can be diagnosed as pedophilia.[1][2]

Yes & quite important to read & goes along way to explaining the difference between the different ages etc, I found it very educational!

Well he got 5years and 9 months

I thought it would be more,,,do you think he will serve the full 5years and nine months?,,, i should jolly well hope so!!

---

@rose2008-2008 wrote:

I thought it would be more,,,do you think he will serve the full 5years and nine months?,,, i should jolly well hope so!!

---

No he may do 2 years..But other people are coming forward ..there could be another court case in the future.

I have the good feeling it may be lengthened definately as more are coming forward. Did not Stuart halls get lengthened?. Im not sure. It should be at least 10, and serve 10!!!!!!!!!!!. No remorse whatsoever shockingly,, that to me shows a sick mind!!!!. I wonder if he even apologized to his wife and daughter?. SICK!!!!!!!!!!!.

Yes i wonder if the Queen had her picture,,,,what she has done with it????. That would be interesting to know.

Leaving aside what RH has been convicted of and reading the criticisms of the Art as drawn and painted by him, I think that the same critical look should be taken at "Art" by Van Gogh, Picasso and even some of the "Impressionist" painters. Would Jones dare to level the same criticism at them if he applied his same criteria?

 

Really, what IS "Art"? That mess created by Tracey Emin isn't Art.

 

The daubs by Van Gogh are in the same category (or even several pegs below!) the art displayed on the walls of Nurseries and Primary schools. Some of the work by RH at least looks like what it's supposed to be.

Cee dee....I agree. Rolf Harris is a very accomplished artist, as was his father before him. Jones' criticism of him seems to be based on a personal dislike, and not on the quality of his Artwork, which is quite unfair. As an amateur artist,who has studied the history of Art, I find his serious paintings excellent. I have no opinion on what should happen to his work now that he has been convicted... I suppose it is entirely up to individuals whether they would like to purchase or display his Art.
As for the 'unmade bed' and the 'formaldehyde cow'......the phrase 'Emperors new clothes' comes to mind! But Van Gogh is a different quantity. His work appears to be very simple and childlike, but it is extremely difficult to reproduce in the same way.
Just my opinion......after all, good Art, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

Surely you can find paintings of similar ilk to these on the walls of Primary schools?

 

I would think you could find better on primary school walls!
I also think these so called experts are having a laugh when they stand & try & interpret this sort of painting into some deep emotional
Feeling!. I'd get a slap if I put down my interpretation . Yes I agree beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I can't help thinking some need glasses!. lol.

I don't think you would find paintings like these on Primary School walls! They may look similar, but in reality are not. There is great skill involved in laying down oil paint like Van Gogh. Also.... Van Gogh had some very severe mental health problems, so who knows what was going on in his mind when he painted them, or how he actually saw his subject. He may have had a deep emotional feeling looking at his subject......and these paintings were his attempt at conveying that feeling, even if he didn't succeed very well, and we don't understand them. But they are very sought after, and the prices have just escalated beyond any sense or reason. As those of Rolf Harris could also do at some date in the future!
I find it fascinating to find out what people's favourite piece of Art is......would you, Saasher and CeeDee like to share yours?

I like Van **bleep** Astro & a modern artist Pollyanna Pickering, but that's the difference & why we don't all like the same thing , I like to see soft lines & things I can recognise , I'm no expert but I wouldn't give pocket change for a Van Gogh it's pretty obvious to me that he was mad, why would you want to display that on your walls, surely you want to hang something that gives you pleasure, I do believe there is a lot of snobbery involved in art , paintings sold for astronomical sums & then hidden away in vaults never to be seen again , just to be able to say I have a blah! Blah!. I agree it is a skill but not much good if it doesn't appeal to the eye .

JHC, you can't even name an artist now without it getting bleeped, any how Astro , you know who I mean. lol.

But that is the point Saasher....Van Gogh's paintings do appeal to some people! It may be the subject, the colours, the brush strokes......many different things. They don't appeal to me one bit, but I do know people who love them.

I once saw a progamme on the Royal Academy's Summer Exibition.

 

One part was where the selectors were judging submissions, they were sitting in a large room with staff carrying the pictures in from one side, most of the pictures were judged so quickly the staff member didn't stop walking, just went straight out the other side.

 

I knew someone who was always peeved none of his stuff was ever selected.

I think I saw that programme....and I think I understand why they didn't hang about looking at the paintings. A good painting has to have many criteria that most people wouldn't necessarily know about. Also the subject matter has to be interesting. Most of all it has to grab your interest in some way.....have that WOW factor. Maybe the person you know who's paintings were'nt accepted hasn't managed that WOW factor. I love the RA and go to a lot of exhibitions there, but while I have learned a lot about painting a good picture, I know that Hell will freeze over before I would ever be good enough to be accepted there. But for some painters the pleasure is in the painting of the picture, and not in recognition. But Saasher is quite correct...there is an awful lot of snobbery in the Art world.

I quite like this but I'd better not post the full pic:-

 

http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/2624/delapoerdowning18851902.jpg

 

Perhaps I like it because it's because it's hanging on my wall?

Yes I agree they do appeal to some but why ? Is it the beauty, skill, or purely because it's VG & therefore it must be got at all cost no matter if it's a work of art or not. & because of the vast amounts of money they fetch & are never seen again one concludes it's the ownership not the the actual picture content, i say this about most of the famous artists not just VG , he was just an example. & yes I know it's the artists interpretation on canvas but even they had to eat & fell into the trap of selling for commercial gain, & all started of with amateur skill & also a lot of them studied under masters, so is it really their interpretation or the masters they followed. lol.
Sorry getting a bit deep there!. Tell me which artists do you like Astro.
Going back to RH I don't like his later art but I used to find his work with a decorating brush not only clever but fascinating to watch!.