Jock Sturges: Photographer or Pornographer?
The Story Of Jock Sturges and Problems he Faced with Child Pornography Charges:
Jock Sturges is a world renowned photographer. His reputation straddles the invisible line separating fine art from lewd porn. Sturges is well known as a photographer of nudists (naturists). He concentrated his efforts on creating images of largely women and girls. The subjects ranged in age from adults to young kids.
It was the pictures of naked young kids that first began the legal firestorm. Many people in society now are still divided about the depiction of minors in nude photography.
Is Sturges a true visual artist and pioneer? Or has he actually transgressed into the universe of child pornography?
For the younger folks who might be reading this, back in the day people needed to take rolls of film to be developed which was exactly what Jock did. Sadly for Jock, some technician saw the photos and alerted the FBI to the possibility of child pornography / endangerment.
In July of 1990 numerous pictures and photography equipment belonging to Sturges were seized by the authorities and held as evidence. At the time, the pictures were discovered to be sexually explicit in nature. Therefore a wide-scale child pornography case was looming on the horizon.
Politicians, analysts and some members of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors declared that these images were forms of art. They also insisted that since these weren't pornographic images of under age kids, Sturges was shielded by the First Amendment. They argued that he had the Constitutional right to freely express himself through his choice of artistic endeavors.
Following a drawn out investigation that cost him $100,000 in legal fees, Sturges necessarily won the conflict in September of 1991. After seventeen months of legal wrangling and obscenity charges, a federal grand jury declined to indite Jock Sturges as he was not guilty of any crime. Prosecutors were shocked when they discovered the decision.
The "naturist" photos of women and children taken by Sturges could be discovered in publications being sold through major retailers across the country (one of these retailers was Barnes & Noble). During the previously mentioned investigation some people had gone to local bookstores and took it upon themselves to ruin any of these books they could find.
Following this landmark legal decision, the drama continued for quite some time. There was It is tough to know precisely when or where my first bare experience was like except being very youthful playing in the water. sustained push by certain people to have these photography books branded or at the minimum, labeled as obscene content.
We all have friends, some are close friends, some are acquaintances. Maybe you're buddies with a society or an organization that doesn't mean you know them personally. You are merely associated with that specific organization. was made to have two of his novels classified as child pornography - "The Last Day of Summer" as well as "Radiant Identities." This attempt to ban his novels in Alabama and Tennessee was unsuccessful.
Regrettably, the FBI had a way of forever censoring artists like Jock. He says in an interview, "There are pictures I do not take now that I formerly would have shot without any thought at all. I had photograph anything. Now I understand there are certain positions and angles which make folks see red, which are evidence of original sin or something, and I avoid that. But it's difficult." And who can blame him for restricting himself as an artist when one innocent photograph can turn someone into a child pornographer?
Even some parents were taken in for investigation in the 90s after picture laboratory technicians reported a photo of a nude child in their own roll of film (the parents' own children of course). Perhaps this still happens to parents today, but the digital age has made it much easier to keep family pictures private. However, things have gotten more absurd since nowadays children themselves are facing child pornography charges from "sexting"!
Regardless, we have included a couple of images of Sturges' work below. In our view, these pictures and his other works aren't pornographic or sexual by any stretch of the imagination. The scandal seems to have been the result of a prevalent anxiety and paranoia surrounding pedophiles and child pornography. Sturges also imputes it to the way American society is so hung-up about sex and the manner it refuses to recognize children as sexual beings. He states in precisely the same interview: "Western civilization insists on these concrete demarcations. Before 18, you do not exist sexually; after 18, you exist like crazy. It is preposterous. The truth is that from birth on, Homo sapiens is, to one extent or another, a fairly lusty species."
Photograph by Jock Sturges Young Girl Nude
Nude Mommy and Child By Jock Sturges
Christina, Misty, & Alisa 1989, by Jock Sturges
Radiant Identities: Photos by Jock Sturges
Jock Sturges is a world renowned photographer. His reputation straddles the invisible line separating fine art from lewd porn. Sturges is well known as a photographer of nudists (naturists). He concentrated his efforts on creating images of largely women and girls. The subjects ranged in age from adults to young kids.
It was the pictures of naked young kids that first began the legal firestorm. Many people in society now are still divided about the depiction of minors in nude photography.
Is Sturges a true visual artist and pioneer? Or has he actually transgressed into the universe of child pornography?
For the younger folks who might be reading this, back in the day people needed to take rolls of film to be developed which was exactly what Jock did. Sadly for Jock, some technician saw the photos and alerted the FBI to the possibility of child pornography / endangerment.
In July of 1990 numerous pictures and photography equipment belonging to Sturges were seized by the authorities and held as evidence. At the time, the pictures were discovered to be sexually explicit in nature. Therefore a wide-scale child pornography case was looming on the horizon.
Politicians, analysts and some members of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors declared that these images were forms of art. They also insisted that since these weren't pornographic images of under age kids, Sturges was shielded by the First Amendment. They argued that he had the Constitutional right to freely express himself through his choice of artistic endeavors.
Following a drawn out investigation that cost him $100,000 in legal fees, Sturges necessarily won the conflict in September of 1991. After seventeen months of legal wrangling and obscenity charges, a federal grand jury declined to indite Jock Sturges as he was not guilty of any crime. Prosecutors were shocked when they discovered the decision.
The "naturist" photos of women and children taken by Sturges could be discovered in publications being sold through major retailers across the country (one of these retailers was Barnes & Noble). During the previously mentioned investigation some people had gone to local bookstores and took it upon themselves to ruin any of these books they could find.
Following this landmark legal decision, the drama continued for quite some time. There was It is tough to know precisely when or where my first bare experience was like except being very youthful playing in the water. sustained push by certain people to have these photography books branded or at the minimum, labeled as obscene content.
We all have friends, some are close friends, some are acquaintances. Maybe you're buddies with a society or an organization that doesn't mean you know them personally. You are merely associated with that specific organization. was made to have two of his novels classified as child pornography - "The Last Day of Summer" as well as "Radiant Identities." This attempt to ban his novels in Alabama and Tennessee was unsuccessful.
Regrettably, the FBI had a way of forever censoring artists like Jock. He says in an interview, "There are pictures I do not take now that I formerly would have shot without any thought at all. I had photograph anything. Now I understand there are certain positions and angles which make folks see red, which are evidence of original sin or something, and I avoid that. But it's difficult." And who can blame him for restricting himself as an artist when one innocent photograph can turn someone into a child pornographer?
Even some parents were taken in for investigation in the 90s after picture laboratory technicians reported a photo of a nude child in their own roll of film (the parents' own children of course). Perhaps this still happens to parents today, but the digital age has made it much easier to keep family pictures private. However, things have gotten more absurd since nowadays children themselves are facing child pornography charges from "sexting"!
Regardless, we have included a couple of images of Sturges' work below. In our view, these pictures and his other works aren't pornographic or sexual by any stretch of the imagination. The scandal seems to have been the result of a prevalent anxiety and paranoia surrounding pedophiles and child pornography. Sturges also imputes it to the way American society is so hung-up about sex and the manner it refuses to recognize children as sexual beings. He states in precisely the same interview: "Western civilization insists on these concrete demarcations. Before 18, you do not exist sexually; after 18, you exist like crazy. It is preposterous. The truth is that from birth on, Homo sapiens is, to one extent or another, a fairly lusty species."
Photograph by Jock Sturges Young Girl Nude
Nude Mommy and Child By Jock Sturges
Christina, Misty, & Alisa 1989, by Jock Sturges
Radiant Identities: Photos by Jock Sturges
