Rating: 
Summary: very good!
Review: David Hamilton touches on the heart of innonence with this book. Their will always be people who think that nudity in any form is bad. I feel if you have an open mind for art and the beauty of a nude{no matter what the age}, you will love this book.
Rating: 
Summary: The best art book I have ever seen.
Review: I wish there were more photographers who covered this kind of subject, but thank our Gracious Lord that David Hamilton does so, and to popular acclaim. This book is a must have for any coffee table, whether you have children or not.
Rating:
Summary: But is it art? Yes. A review adapted from the TLS
Review: The following is adapted from my review of David Hamilton's The Age of Innocence, from the Times Literary Supplement (London): ... Even by the self- consciously sophisticated standards of Manhattan, The Age of Innocence is a transgressive book (among Americans, anyway, for it would be otherwise in France and in its place of publication, the United Kingdom, which while also subject to child abuse hysteria, has at least sensibly taken the position, so I understand the law, that no part of the body can in and of itself be considered obscene). My wife carelessly left the book out, however, at a brunch for parents from our daughter's day care, a group of magazine editors, Legal Aid lawyers, academics, doctors, and entertainment industry consultants - elites, that is, not easily shocked by consumables, at least in the form of handsome, $50 coffee table books - and it is safe to say that their reactions to two hundred pages of photographs of gauzily adorned nude young teenage girls ranged from disturbed to shocked. Too embarrassed to examine it closely, they did not see that it had an underlying project if anything still more transgressive, to illustrate pictorially, in chapters, the progression from virginity to defloration, passing through staged pictures of young girls masturbating, kissing in lesbian scenes, and finally a girl being carried and laid naked upon a bed by a frontally naked young man - a boy, perhaps? - nothing gynecological, in the terminology of the men's magazines, but still more explicit than most. The artistic project, the illumination of the psychology of virginity and innocence (and the fact that in the most ordinary course of things and yet often with great moment for an individual, they both come to an end) through photographs and a text mixing contemporary commentary with much historical quotation on the beauty and desirability of innocence, fails badly. This is not to say that the project is illegitimate, aesthetically or morally, but The Age of Innocence's rea! ch greatly exceeds its grasp. The text is alas insipid, perhaps inevitably on this topic in this day and age but perhaps not, and the photographs, as a collection; well, I asked my wife, a former photojournalist, to characterize Hamilton's reputation as a photographer and she said delicately but accurately, vulgar. And yet, for all that, I am glad of the book. The reason is simply that if one ignores the faulty project, the faulty aesthetic; indeed, if one ignores the photographs as "works of art," in the way that, for example, Sturges' work must be regarded, to concentrate solely on the preservation of beauty, the beauty not of the photograph as artefact, but simply the beauty of the girl, then Hamilton's achievement is real. Hamilton seems to recognize momentarily that this is the value of his work, in the one bit of text that moved me, a line of dedication that reads "and to all my little ones between these pages they stay forever young." For these photographs range across many years' work, and many of the girls in them are women now, some perhaps no longer beautiful, some perhaps no longer young. There are other forms of beauty, including that etched across the face of fifty years, but is it finally so transgressive to preserve the fleeting beauty of a new breast or a pubis only recently covered in fleece, when we all grow old so soon? Hamilton's photographs skirt the edge of high art; their appeal is that they are not high art and thus, unlike, say, Jock Sturges' work, invoke desire directly because they are not about the photograph but about the girl ... * * *
Rating:
Summary: Amazing beautiful work
Review: Being a fotographer too, I consider this Hammilton work wonderfull. This is a controversial theme but it's always beautiful. Did you already thought how hard the autor works to get the models, break the prejudices, and still make a very professional work? It's incredible like you North Americans are pseudo-moralists.
Rating:
Summary: Get past American culture's views on sex to see the art
Review: ...While this set of photography is at once not the best collection, it is by no means overfocused on any kind of sexualization. Instead, it portrays the prepubescent human body in natural, honest terms. If you can get beyond the cultural stereotypes and fundamentalist hypercriticism (whose legitimacy is far louder than the numbers of its adherents might alone otherwise bespeak) about nudity which our post-Victorian American prudishness has imbued us with, you may well find artistic inspiration from the texts art. I doubt very much there is a German or a Swede who, in viewing this text, would regard this text as anything but art.
Rating: 
Summary: While not offensive, the work missed the mark.
Review: I ordered this controversial title from Amazon.com so I could respond as a mature reader to opportunities for informed responses and reviews. In answer to the question, What did you read?, I now may answer, A monotonal collection of poetic sentiments extolling virginity. What did you see? A collection of portrait photographs-not art, unless any and every photograph (like any and every painting?) is art; not pornography, unless any and every representation of a nude person is pornography. What did you feel? The lack of energy and intensity that occurs with overstatement. I was disappointed; and I felt uncertain I had given the work ample opportunity, uncertain I had given the photographer his due. What did you learn, and what has it given you to teach? Nothing truly new or novel. Did you have esthetic, cerebral, or sensual pleasure? The work missed the mark. While not offensive, the work is not likely to edify, increase sensibility (sensitivity), heighten awareness, or make others gentler and more responsive. It is a sign of Hamilton's mastery with his subjects (models) that all appear relaxed and at ease, and that none appear to attack the camera. Hamilton's work is successful where his aim is simply to establish a unique body of work embracing as the subject very young girls that are no longer small children, and women who are very young adults. The work falls short of loftier goals; and by no means does it constitute a "how to", or supply a clear standard defining the genre for photography of very young nudes. It is legitimate to use the vocabulary of our own experience and awareness to communicate our wonder and appreciation of the realities in life. Nevertheless, where a work, any work, makes its statement by layers of nuance, or levels of subtlety, many miss the intent of the artist. The fullness of what he has experienced, and hopes to capture or extend, can not be obtained by a casual glance. The vision he offers, or seeks to call forth, may only be gained by pro! longed or repeated viewing. Psychological and other dimensions of a work may demand study, examination of detail, and careful analysis. However, photography is a dynamic medium. Visual experience is animate, immediate, and motile: The eye moves, refocuses, or shifts; angle, perspective and point of view are altered; or the subject and object viewed is lifted, turned, and realigned. We rarely stare fixedly to get the picture. It strikes the eye-the mind, the heart, and the places where image and emotion carom one against another-and bullets in a straight line to the soul. Or it does not. A high school year book is a collection of photographs, also. Where unpretentious, it delivers a broad and rich panorama of youth, beauty, innocency, and joie de vivre. Both the bitterness and the sweetness in a precious stage of development appear: There are depth, diversity and variety in attitudes shown; in postures and gestures employed; in expressions of character, commitment, and growth. Unlike with Hamilton's work, responsibility for what is finally shown or viewed is located as much with the subjects as with the photographer. Virginity-the spiritual attribute of purity with meekness (an appetite for measured and ordered growth; a disposition and readiness to learn; a teachable spirit)-are abundantly evidenced, even where the full form of the subjects are not fully shown; even where the subjects are fully clothed. Age of Innocence does not deliver images that evoke the circumspection, restraint, balance, and excitement in the peace of right knowledge and reconciliation. While the work does not offend, it fails-as true virginity would do-to arouse or manifest the depth of love for truth. Perhaps, the work should have borrowed more from those who still regard holding hands as a sexual act. Jesus is the Lord.
Rating:
Summary: Very artfully done
Review: In an artistic sense, very well done, but it did at times seem like I was looking at pictures of naked girls and not nude subjects..Still a well done work. Unfortunately, the other works by the author are a little difficult to find.
Rating: 
Summary: (yawn)
Review: I couldn't call David Hamilton's "Age of Innocence" an exceptional or even adequate piece of either erotica or pornography. What we are given is a book of pictures featuring nude and seminude pubescent females. The book is sparsely embellished with literary references that insist on inflating an otherwise unremarkable work with the semblance of insight. They come across as laughable attempts to infuse the photography with the depth the photographer himself fails to capture in his own work. It is only in the existance of controversy that a work like this could gain any sort of notoriety. Even if given that the subject matter might have the potential for decent, healthy(?) erotica, this work falls terribly short. The camera doesn't so much explore, reveal or develop its subject so much as it seems to oafishly leer. It amounts to too many pages of unarousing, mind-numbing redundancy. This work isn't good enough to call itself erotica.
Nor is it good pornography. It is a much too weak piece of visual fluff to even deal with pubescent sexuality as it would like to claim it does.
I direct the potential buyer to the works of Jock Sturges and Sally Mann - each of whom treat their subjects with far more sensitivity, intelligence and respect - and, in the process, have created works with far greater power and character.
Rating:
Summary: Beautiful teen nudes
Review: Hamilton wonderfully captures the beauty of the young nude female. Make no mistake, these pictures are erotic and very compelling. Hamilton has a knack for capturing the essence of young teenage and pre-teen girls precisely at their "Age of Innocence." The photos are very alluring and sensuous. The book does have drawbacks, however. The text is, for the most part, pure drivel (but let's face it, no one buys a Hamilton book to read the words!). Also, I feel Hamilton should have included a few more full-nudes. But other than that, this is an excellent book and one well worth picking up. I can hardly wait for the next Hamilton book!
Rating:
Summary: Exquisite erotic photos, but don't read a word he writes.
Review: It helps to know that Hamilton is English born and for many years now a resident of France. None of his work would play well at a library committee meeting of the of the typical American PTA. His subject matter, the flowering of young girls into women, is too edgy for a society consumed with fear about child pornography and pedophilia. America's puritan roots have nourished a broad notion that pubescence should remain hidden. Apparently no one told Hamilton, and I expect that he is more easily accepted and appreciated in Europe than he is here. This writer finds Hamilton's work to be neither obscene nor pornographic. His photographs are beautifully organized, painterly and mature, and capture well his romantic personal vision of private, sensuous moments in the physical metamorphosis of girls into women. Be prepared for his frankly sexual artistry. His work is stunning, powerful and beautiful. But his writing, of which there is mercifully little in this and all his books, is smarmy beyond belief. He does himself an amazing disservice with his commentary. Fuhgedaboudit. Let the work speak for itself, Monsieur Hamilton. It is exquisite.
|
