Renek Gaszewski [Blog]

There’s a fairly strong breeze rattling through the pine trees on the trek up to Haslemere Sun Club.
At the top of the two acre hillside site, neatly-mown lawns nudge up to rows of garden sheds converted to net-curtained chalets, complete with plaques naming weekend occupants.
Naturism, say enthusiasts, is all about relaxation, freedom, getting away from it all.
“We also do a bit of DIY,” says Haslemere’s chairman, Les Jarman.
To the side of the central pavilion, foundation trenches have been dug by club members keen to extend the site’s facilities.
Mr Jarman says: “Most naturist clubs carry out most on-site work themselves, it’s simply more cost efficient.
“In a few days from now there will be a few of us digging away, wearing just our boots. We need a new toilet and shower block, and we will build it ourselves.”
Indeed, British Naturism - the umbrella body representing naturism in the UK - offers insurance against power tool injury as part of its annual membership package.
Most of the UK’s 130+ naturism clubs are run cooperatively by their members - usually on a tight-ish budget.
Mr Jarman says the club’s atmosphere is very 1960s, and is typical of other clubs across the UK.
The former local council officer and his wife Hilary - the club’s secretary - were first attracted to naturism in the early 80s, when they encountered a nudist beach on holiday in Yugoslavia.
They eventually joined the club - which like all other clubs revolves around a swimming pool.
Mr Jarman said: “All naturists say this, but once you have tried swimming nude, you will never want to wear a swimming costume again.
“It is wonderfully de-stressing to come to the club, strip off and unwind. Our only regret is that we didn’t start sooner.”
“Clubs can be great,” says Mark Nisbet, the new editor of naturism magazine Health and Efficiency.
“But there are a growing number of people who are critical of them, because they are seen as being too cliquey and bureaucratic - and because, quite frankly, many of them are downright dowdy.”
One of the things that naturists find exasperating about “textiles” (their word for people who prefer clothes) is that they have difficulty dissociating nudity and sex.
“I think people imagine that there are big orgies going on, but it couldn’t be further from the truth,” says Mr Jarman.
But it’s easy to see how the seaside postcard/Carry on Camping view of naturism persists.
“Clubs need to have a make do and mend mentality to survive on members’ subscriptions,” says Mr Nesbit.
“They are a white middle-class establishement, they can be extremely bureaucratic and unwelcoming to prospective members - especially if they are single.”
Haslemere Sun Club actually accepts single men and women, but tries to keep a balance of sexes - though Mr and Mrs Jarman are aware of places with much more rigorous rules and regulations.
While clubs are in decline nationally, other faces of naturism have been emerging.
Growing numbers of men, women and children are seeking out remote or designated naturist beaches, where they can enjoy the freedoms of not packing a swimming costume.
“I call them independent or free-range naturists or nudists,” says the Health and Efficiency editor.
“They do not want the strictures of a club, with its committees and rules - they want social nudity on the beach or out walking with their friends in the Lake District, and they are doing it in increasing numbers.”
As well as these “free range” or “independent” nudists, there are what can only be described as militant nudists - individuals who view nakedness as a political issue.
A small group, headed by Coventry-based Vincent Bethell, has been campaigning in London throughout the summer.
Mr Bethell was hauled out of a fountain by police after he chose to take his clothes off outside Buckingham Palace.
And he has posters up at tube stations urging the public to “go naked” outside the Royal Courts of Justice on 28 July.
“Being naked is a right,” Mr Bethell told BBC News Online. “We cover so much up - our feelings and our inclinations, clothing is another part of that.
“We are forced to do things that are not only against our will but against our natural desires.
“We are suppressing our rights to be free - and that includes our right to be free of clothing.
“People, especially young people, are not offended by nakedness, but the system tells them that they ought to be. I am aware that many people do not want to take their clothes off, and that is fine. But it should be fine for people to take their clothes off in public if they want to as well.”
Mr Bethell’s campaign has certainly led to media interest - and sports company Puma even wanted him to appear in an ad for their trainers. He declined.
British Naturism too is campaigning for rights to strip on all of Britain’s beaches.
Mr Nisbet said: “I certainly think this is a boom time for nudity. It is getting a high profile and there are people who are demanding their rights as they see them, and that is great.”
Mr and Mrs Jarman, like many club members up and down the country, are sceptical about politicising the issue.
“Clubs are fine - we know that we don’t offer a lot to young people, we don’t really expect to. Club life is sedate and ideal for older people or families,” said Mr Jarman.
“But we hope that those people will return to us at some point, when they have kids to look after or they want to slow down a bit.”

Who Carries? Even in an age of prequels, sequels and remakes, is anyone out there really eager for a second version of Carrie? Brian De Palma’s 1976 version of Carrie is not just well known and readily available, it’s as good a film version of the Stephen King book as you’re likely to see. So why see another one?
It can’t be for the surprise. NBC clearly assumes we all know how the story ends or it wouldn’t be running promos that spill every major plot point, including the bucket of blood and Carrie’s post-prom tantrum. And even without the ads, the remake itself removes all suspense by using a police investigation framing device that gives away upcoming events as it movies along.
Beyond that, the only new idea the movie has is a bad one: an ending that is far less satisfying than the original.
Still, artistic endeavors have to stand or fall on their own — and on that count, Carrie’s problem is less redundancy than duration. King’s tale of a wronged teenage girl overflows with metaphorical themes: the suffering of outcasts, the evils of twisted religiosity, the cruelty of children and the power of the onslaught of teenage sexuality. But when it comes to plot, Carrie is one simple, straight line: Kids are mean to Carrie, and she gets them back.
While that was adequate for 90 big-screen minutes, it’s too thin to support three hours. You get some added background information and some 21st-century updates, but otherwise, it’s a long march to the climax. We’re introduced to the story by Sue Snell (Kandyse McClure), who is telling David Keith’s cop about Carrie (Angela Bettis). Abused by her insanely strict mother (Patricia Clarkson), Carrie has no concept of a normal sexual life — and no idea what is happening to her when she gets her first period in the gym’s shower.
Her classmates torture her, a scene that might resonate more if the girls didn’t all look as if they had wandered over from a WB soap. Granted, Carrie would be out of place in almost any high school. But who would fit in with these kids? It’s as if she’s attending Satan’s School for Teenage Models.
Carrie, however, has hidden resources: telekinetic powers. Eventually those powers will get away from her and in ways that may strike some parents as less entertaining than they once seemed, considering that the new ending blunts the moral of the story.
Clarkson makes for an excellent, understated psychotic, and Bettis is a sympathetically convincing Carrie, but neither performance does much to justify the movie’s existence. They should have filmed the Broadway musical Carrie, a failure that has become the standard against which all flops are measured.
At least that, we haven’t seen.

Cate Blanchett has defended an artist whose portraits of nude children have sparked a censorship row in Australia.
Police shut down photographer Bill Henson’s exhibition, seized images and are also considering charging him.
His work, featuring naked 13-year-olds, was condemned by Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd as “revolting”.
But in an open letter, Blanchett and 42 other leading arts figures said the action risked damaging Australia’s cultural reputation.
‘Social freedom’
“The potential prosecution of one of our most respected artists is no way to build a creative Australia and does untold damage to our cultural reputation,” the letter said, addressed to Australia’s environment minister and the premier of New South Wales state.
“We should remember that an important index of social freedom, in earlier times or in repressive regimes elsewhere in the world, is how artists and art are treated by the state.
“We wish to make absolutely clear that none of us endorses, in any way, the abuse of children,” they said.
“Henson’s work has nothing to do with child pornography and, according to the judgment of some of the most respected curators and critics in the world, it is certainly art.”
The exhibition at the Roslyn Oxley9 Gallery in Sydney was shut down by police before it could even open last week after some people complained about photographs of naked 12 and 13-year-old boys and girls.
Police seized 20 photographs from the gallery, most of them of a 13-year-old girl.
They said were seeking to interview the subjects of the photos and their parents and were still investigating whether the photographs violate obscenity laws.
‘Innocence‘
Prime Minister Rudd has stood by his criticism saying: “I gave my reaction, I stand by that reaction and I don’t apologise for it and I won’t be changing it.”
“I am passionate about children having innocence in their childhood,” he said.
Australian child advocacy group Bravehearts labelled the photographs as child pornography and exploitation and have called for Henson and the gallery to be prosecuted.
Two other galleries in New South Wales state have since removed works by Henson from their walls.
Henson, 52, has not spoken publicly since the controversy erupted.

A child pictured naked on the cover of an Australian arts magazine has said she is “offended” by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s criticism of the photo.
Mr Rudd re-ignited a row over children in art when he criticised the July cover of Art Monthly Australia.
The girl, Olympia Nelson, 11, has said she is proud of the image taken by her mother, a photographer, in 2003.
The magazine’s editor said the cover was in protest at the closing of a photo exhibition of naked children.
Childhood innocence
Mr Rudd had reacted strongly to the front cover image, saying: “Frankly, I can’t stand this stuff.”
He added: “We’re talking about the innocence of little children here. A little child cannot answer for themselves about whether they wish to be depicted in this way.”
He was supported by opposition Liberal Party leader Brendan Nelson, who described the image as a “two-fingered salute to the rest of society”.
Officials have said they will review the magazine’s public funding.
Editor Maurice O’Riordan wrote in the magazine that he knew the photograph would be controversial, but that he hoped to “restore some dignity to the debate… and validate nudity and childhood as subjects for art“.
In May, an exhibition of pictures of naked children by photographer Bill Henson was closed before it opened, in a case that provoked a nationwide debate over censorship.
‘Part of art‘
However, Olympia Nelson appeared at a press conference with her father, the art critic Robert Nelson, and said the picture was her favourite image.
It shows her sitting naked in front of a painted landscape. The photograph was taken by her mother, Melbourne photographer Polixeni Papapetrou, when she was six years old.
“I’m really, really offended by what Kevin Rudd had to say about this picture,” she told reporters.
“I love the photo so much,” she aded. “I think that the picture my mum took of me had nothing to do with being abused and I think nudity can be a part of art.”
The Australian Childhood Foundation said that parents had no ethical right to consent to nude photographs being taken of their children, as it could have psychological effects in later years.
Child protection activist Hetty Johnston told told Nine Network Television that the photographs amounted to the “sexual exploitation of children” and called for new laws against the use of photographs of naked children for exhibition, sale or publication.
“We need to put a line in the sand - because clearly some of those in the arts world can’t do that - and say this is where you don’t go, this is a no-go zone,” she said.
The debate has provoked a strong debate in the Australian media. In an editorial entitled “Art stunt betrays our children“, the Australian daily newspaper The Daily Telegraph said it saw the need to protect artistic expression but said some of the images of children published in Art Monthly Australia were “highly sexualised“.

One of Austria’s main art houses, the Kunsthalle in Vienna, is on the lookout for 50 young women, prepared to pose naked during the official opening of the museum’s new complex.
The controversial New York artist Vanessa Beecroft was commissioned to come up with a performance piece for the opening.
She wants the models to stand naked in carefully arranged poses for three hours.
The idea is that the models will start to weaken as time goes on and the perfectly choreographed arrangement will begin to fall apart.
Perfectly proportioned
The Kunsthalle has already started advertising for the women - they must all be aged between 18 and 35, on top of that they have to be slim and between 175 and 185 centimetres tall.
A spokesman for the museum says the most important quality is that the women must not be shy about appearing naked in front of strangers.
Despite her strict demands about age, weight and height, Ms Beecroft claims her work tries to oppose the conventional ideals of beauty and to emphasise the individuality of the body.
The naked models will not speak or move and will make no contact with the public.
Museum metropolis
The performance will mark the presentation of the new Kunsthalle building in the so-called museum quarter of the city.
Austria, which has more museums per head than anywhere else in the world, has invested millions of dollars in the museum quarter, which lies in the grounds of the old Imperial stables.
Those behind the project claim it will be the largest museum and art complex on the planet.