Do You Call That Art?
Is this art? A man ties a starving dog just out of reach of food, and displays it in an art gallery. What is your view on this kind of art?
Did you hear about the so called artist in Nicaragua who displayed a starving dog as art? He tethered the dog just out of reach of food and called it conceptual art. I cannot see a gallery displaying such “art” but display it they did. Can you imagine walking into an art gallery and finding a starving dog tied up as a work of art? I cannot. It sounds more like a nightmare. Animal rights demanded the artist, Guillermo Vargas be banned from the Central American Biennial art exhibition. In my opinion he is mentally disturbed.
Another artist, Aliza Shvart claims to have made attempts to impregnate herself and induce abortions as a work of art. Yale administrators banned Shvart’s exhibit which is bloody sheeting which she says is her blood. Shvart refused to talk to the media except the Yale Daily News, She says the idea behind it was the impossibility of accurately identifying if the blood is from a miscarriage or her menstrual cycle. “Doctors say the blood can be tested to answer that question.”
Image via Wikipedia
When Yale refused to exhibit Shvart’s so called art, some critics have said it was a blow against free speech. Seth Kim-Cohen wrote, “the university has decided not to allow us to make up our own minds. I am considerably more disturbed by their actions than hers.”
Gregor Schnieder planned to put dying patients in cages for an exhibit but gallery owners were quick to nip that one in the bud. If galleries refuse to show these works, the art community are likely to protest. They consider all art, no matter how offensive, as a means of fostering conversation and free speech.
Image via Wikipedia
What do you think about this kind of “art”? Do you feel it is free speech to torture a dog or for someone to impregnate themselves and abort to make an object of art? And how about exhibiting dying patients in cages for people to stare at. I cannot conceive of anything so outrageous.
Liked it
32 Comments
Phill Senters, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
Some folks sure have strange ideas about art. Animal cruelty and abortion certainly can never be what I would call art.
Phill Senters, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
Some folks sure have strange ideas about art. Animal cruelty and abortion certainly can never be what I would call art.
Betty Carew, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
Ruby these actions are totally insane what in the world are people thinking to began with.This goes far beyond art and shows what some people will do for money and fame.Most art today or what their calling art is just for shock value and nothing else.
CHAN LEE PENG, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
This idea is weird. And I think it’s totally wrong to torture animal in this way.
Joe Dorish, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
What would PETA say about the dog? Would they protest or let it go as “art”?
Kate Smedley, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
I am totally with you on this Ruby, this is not art, how anyone thinks it is in any way, shape or form is beyond me, great article.
NA Staffieri, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
Where is moral ethics and dignity in this? Art should follow these codes of conduct.
Daisy Peasblossom, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
Ruby, these examples are extreme, and I believe the university to be quite right in refusing to display them. However, having said that, protest art is always extreme. And all too frequently, the line between “protest” and “offense” is very fine indeed. My personal belief is that the individuals rights cease when they inflict pain and suffering on another.
Darla Smith, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
No, it is not a work of art!
papaleng, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
Definitely not an art. These people have sick minds.
Christine Ramsay, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
These particular pieces of ‘art’ are quite sick but I do agree with Daisy about the fact that exteme pieces could be called ‘art’ if they don’t inflict pain or suffering on others.
A thought provoking article.
Christine
Annie Hintsala, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
I went through something similar in art school when a male student did a boxed mock up of a girl getting raped with a beer bottle. At the time, there was no outcry when the teacher asked him not only to take the thing away, but to leave his class. I don’t think its art-it might come under free-speech, but if it is offensive to those who are forced to endure it-can’t avoid it-or if it would hurt the business-no one coming into the gallery-I think it is a legitimate concern. Take your crap and display it in your own home. Excellent article.
Lady Sunshine, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
Definition of what is considered “art” is subjective, but I don’t think anything stated in this article is art. I find in very disturbing what goes on in certain peoples heads. Inflicting pain and suffering on others is Not art.
Anne Lyken Garner, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
This is really sick. I don’t see it as art. What is the ‘I Voted’ picture about?
Jenny Heart, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
I agree with you. Torture isn’t art. Great writing!
Glynis Smy, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
I am disgusted by the idea of that kind of work. Excellent article!
Sheila, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
I think there is a difference in freedom of speech and outright cruelty. I’ll have to agree with you, it’s just sick. What kind of people actually think that is art??!!
HatedNation, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
Art is like beauty, it lies in the eye of the beholder. Basically, by all of us choosing to support it, it dies, as it should. We all know that we can write all day but if nobody reads or sees what we write its almost pointless.
Katien, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
Good article. I hadn’t heard about these examples of so-called art. It sounds more like people are trying to do something outrageous just to get attention, presumably because they have no real talent.
Ruby Hawk, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
Thank you all for your opinions. I appreciate your kindness.To me this stuff is gross, cruel and no part of free speach. I don’t think we should have to put up with it. We can stay away from any gallery that exhabits such horrors and they will stop such nonsense.
Eunice Tan, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
I think freedom of speech must also pay attention to good norm and ethic. We cannot hide behind the word ‘art’.
Jo Oliver, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
Ruby,
What an excellent article. I had’nt heard of any of these so called “art” exhibits.
It is pathetic that anyone could lack the compassion, moral decency, respect for life, etc.. to even create these atrocities.
I hate to say it, but it is their right to create this crap. The only exception being the one about harming the animal. The animals have rights, and there are laws against abusing animals. Their free speech rights do not out weigh the rights of the animals. Otherwise, as long as they are not breaking any laws, they have the right to create this garbage. BUT, we have the right to not buy it, display it, etc.. We might not be able to protest their free speech, but we certainly can protest anyone displaying, buying, or even mentioning it. If something is ignored and boycotted…..it will stop. If there isn’t anyone willing to show or buy this crap….then it will not get made!
Karen Gross, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
There are some incredibly twisted individuals out there calling themselves artists. I recall a news story (perhaps it was a fictional tv show) where a fellow had a rat in a cage with a clock counting down the minutes until the artist would kill the rat.
trinket, posted this comment on May 1st, 2009
Very sad to see that things like this are actually looked at as art by some messed up people. If people could create things that invoke good things in this world. We would be alot better off.
It’s all a way to try and draw attention to themselves only in a negative way. I agree with you Ruby, it is very wrong.
Anne McNew, posted this comment on May 1st, 2009
that was weird and people doing it should stop their foolishness.
CA Johnson, posted this comment on May 1st, 2009
These are very sick people, Ruby. I know I wouldn’t consider torturing animals art. It is very wrong to do this to animals in the name of art. Great job on the article, Ruby.
Daghost413860, posted this comment on May 1st, 2009
Great article! i cant belive someone would do that…Id call it art when I kicked his arse all up and down the street…poetry in motion…I love animals 2 much to see that, then have someone try to corrupt the name of “art”
Alexa Gates, posted this comment on May 1st, 2009
nope…
PR Mace, posted this comment on May 1st, 2009
I am with you on this one, Ruby. It is not a work of art but an inhuman display. I am shocked each day at what goes on our in world.
OhSugar, posted this comment on May 6th, 2009
This news is so very heartbreaking. I think humans can be so cruel to animals. Excellent article.
CutestPrincess, posted this comment on May 18th, 2009
those people are so weird and out of their mind! art is beauty!
Leave a Response
-
Follow Us
-
-
-
-
Popular Articles
JohnKing, posted this comment on Apr 30th, 2009
Ruby, some people are just sick in the mind and there’s nothing artistic about it, people can whine about “free speech” all day long, but nonetheless there is a line between art and offensiveness. I am appalled by some people’s definition of “artistic freedom”