Firstly I chose to post here because of the hidden politics behind the issue, I doubt entertainment was suitable nor general chat... I was astounded when I received an email recently asking me to sign a petition to stop future exhibitions of a dog (allegedly) starved to death in the name of art. After seeing the pictures and reading the email I did not hesitate to sign or voice my opinion. Though I can see some points of the artists dilemma I found it foul and disgraceful that the exhibition centre even let it happen. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cBBudN0_-E&feature=related http://guillermohabacucvargas.blogspot.com/ Even though it happened in 2007 , the point now is that they are allegedly thinking of doing it again in 2008. There is many allegations, and difference of opinions - the artist saying no animal cruelty was done to the dog, merely he was trying to make a point of society's reaction and acknowledgment if it was to happen in a confined and public space / awareness. To me regardless of the point it seems wrong and distasteful.
I'd have a hard time not just snapping the neck of this piece of filth were I to get within arm's length. If "Art" and onanism in the name of art are polar opposites, sheer cruelty to a defenseless living thing is off the map. Art is generous; and it is moral. Not in any kind of theological sense, but in that though it is unflinching in seeing the darkness, it isn't the darkness itself. This is sheer depravity of the worst kind. I am speechless. Why isn't this guy being charged? Is this taking place in Honduras, and this kind of thing is allowed???
That is beautiful, you're words are like a piece of art. Hey, not sure if you would be interested in looking at this gallery or not. I am a big fan of Clayton Bailey. One time I even wrote to him, because I thought I must tell him how wonderful his art is. He emailed back and was super nice and down to earth. Somehow, I just think you would appreciate his work. Check out his robot gallery.
Well, thank you, Rebecca. If you haven't read it, I do love John Gardner's book, On Moral Fiction, which talks about this some. He died too young. Wow, on the Clayton pieces, fantastic - thanks for sharing his work. Wonderful, too, that the two of you exchanged like this. Edited to add: Just saw "Bailey arms...." LOL!
I was speechless when I saw these images. The people watching it as art are just as bad as him. Despicable.
We just exchanged a few emails because I wanted to write about him as well. I'm sure no big deal for him, but for me I was so excited. I seriously considered framing his emails. LOL I guess it is just that his art is so touchable and makes me feel something. Normally though, things like oil paintings and so forth do absolutely nothing for me. When I am rich, I will buy a big robot for my livingroom.
He could have chosen a better way to make his point, such as instead of letting the dog die, he could have given him life instead. Cruel and unnecessary, one does not need to resort to such extremes to make a point, and passing it is ART is just plain wrong on so many different levels.
Yes would have been more rewarding to watch the dog become healthy than that of an empty shell.... But in general art has gone a little insane in times and instead of doing it for the love it is becoming more so for the opportunity to be noticed, no matter how distasteful and disgraceful it is. The link below is another artist doing (or looking for volunteers) to do the same thing but in a human perspective, to show the beauty in dying he suggests having a human die in a exhibition http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/visual_arts/article3797440.ece
These so called "artists" in my view are nothing more than opportunists that have failed miserably at creating TRUE meaningful Art, so they resort to such extreme, brutal and cold endeavours simply to make an obvious point. It is a sad state of affairs when one commits the equivalent of assisted murder in the name of so called "ART". Shame on them for failing at their craft so badly.
Hahahah - that would be a blast. Any idea which robot? I think it's great you contacted him - I do it all the time, when I am moved by something, and like you, I find it really rewarding to get a connection in this way. Two of note over the last few years for me were Pema Chodron, Abbess (I believe, though this might of changed) of Gampo Abbey, Nova Scotia (a Tibetan lineage buddhist monastery) (I wrote to her of a connection I found between Shakespeare's Richard II, final scene, his words, and the buddhist path...she very kindly sent a letter in reply) and (Sir) Max Hastings, who wrote Armageddon: The Battle for Germany, 1944-1945, about the endgame in WWII. Clayton's pieces are great. I love the "tipsy" robots....he really is fun. I love paintings - big fan of 19th century landscape artists, especially Alfred Sisley - his paintings are really alive, often with an uncanny ability to get wind into his landscapes; Jean-Baptiste-Camille Corot, and John Constable. Other Impressionists, the "Neo-Classists", such as Jacques-Louis David (Napoleon's Fave), and the Romantics. Basically, if I was unlimitedly loaded, I'd be buying up art. That, and subscriptions to the Chicago Symphony Orchestra, the American Ballet Theatre, and a host of others.
Thanks for sharing those artists with me. I had fun looking at all of the paintings. Out of those artists, I would say John Constable is my favorite by a landslide.
Sure...the landscape artists, I was introduced to them by an author I love, John Fowles. He discussed them in his Journals. The Constable piece linked to above, "Wivenhoe Park," is unbelievably beautiful, in my book. Also a big fan of his Salisbury Cathedral, from the Bishop's Grounds - I think the device of the trees framing both the cathedral tower and sky really nailed an intensity, drama. Yep, love his work - if Sisley's work screams a kind of electric life, I think Constable's has such drama, esp. in the skyscapes of his paintings. ....the landscape artist's landscapes winning by a landslide...funny
It's pretty horrific - but do you reckon this really happened? It seems like a publicity stunt to me (and it worked judging by the coverage it has received across the internet)
Well, one can't probably know, but I wouldn't doubt that it both happened, and it was a publicity stunt. When you have people performing bodily functions before a live audience, and calling it "art," anything is possible. Modernity has spawned a lot of horsemerde in the name of art, and the idea of "disintegration" is its battle cry. It will come around, as cycles of art always do, but right now, there is a lot of crap out there.