: The shoot was commissioned by Shields' mother, Teri Shields, for a publication titled Sugar 'n' Spice Legal Controversy and Outcome Privacy Lawsuit
The shoot took place in 1975 with the consent of Shields’s mother and manager, Teri Shields, who received $450 for the session.
Prince re-photographed one of Gross's most striking images of Brooke Shields—the almost-full-frontal view of her posed in the bathtub—and presented it as his own work, giving it the title . The title was itself an appropriation, taken from a famous 1923 photograph by Alfred Stieglitz depicting the rear flank of a gelded horse. By giving his piece this name, Prince created a powerful, ironic, and deeply unsettling commentary on the sexualization of the child-woman in American culture.
Today, the images are widely viewed through the lens of child exploitation, regardless of their artistic pretensions at the time.
: In 1981, at age 17, Shields sued Gross in New York to stop the distribution and sale of the images, citing an invasion of privacy and personal embarrassment. Court Ruling
The case reached New York State’s highest court, the Court of Appeals. In a , the court ruled that Shields could not break the contract signed by her mother. The court declared that a child is bound by the valid, unrestricted consents executed by a guardian. The presiding judge famously stated: ”The issue on this appeal is whether an infant model may disaffirm a prior unrestricted consent executed on her behalf by her parent.” The court determined that she could not.
The repercussions of the photoshoot had lasting effects on the individuals involved and the legal landscape: Sugar and Spice and all things not so nice - The Guardian
Brooke Shields has since shared her perspective on the era, discussing the pressure of the industry and the complex relationship between parental ambition and child welfare, as detailed in The Times .
The images show Shields “standing and sitting in a bathtub while wearing makeup and oil,” and even at a glance they evoke the conventions of soft‑core photography—right down to the telephone by the tub, a classic pin‑up prop. As one critic at the time wrote, “For all their supposed playfulness, the photographs had the trappings of a standard soft‑core porn shoot.”
Gross claimed the shoot was inspired by the "Pre-Raphaelite" style, aiming to explore the transition from childhood to womanhood.
The 1975 photoshoot titled , captured by fashion photographer Garry Gross and featuring a 10-year-old Brooke Shields , remains one of the most controversial events in modern cultural history. Undertaken with the full consent of Shields' mother, Teri Shields, for a $450 fee, the images depicted a prepubescent child in a highly sexualized, adult-like aesthetic. The series subsequently sparked a groundbreaking legal battle over child privacy, altered the trajectory of exploitation laws, and deeply challenged the boundaries of fine art. The Context and Conception of the Photoshoot
At the time, the context was ostensibly high fashion and art. Shields was bathed in heavy makeup and oil, posed against a steamy, atmospheric background. The styling was intended to evoke a sense of maturity far beyond the subject's age—a visual juxtaposition that gave the series its conceptual weight. Gross asserted that the photographs were meant to explore the dichotomy of a child thrust into the adult world of fame.