art? discuss...

[epistolize]

Dear Friends, I have just read and signed the online petition: "Boycott to the presence of Guillermo Vargas "Habacuc" at the Bienal Centroamericana Honduras 2008" hosted on the web by PetitionOnline.com, the free online petitionservice, at: http://www.PetitionOnline.com/ea6gk/ I personally agree with what this petition says, and I think you mightagree, too. If you can spare a moment, please take a look, and considersigning yourself. Best wishes, Aorja Harris

[GILD]

As always, read the snopes.com article.

[epistolize]

Originally Posted by GILD

As always, read the snopes.com article.

thanks- makes for interesting reading.

if

(The artist's point was supposedly to highlight the hypocrisy demonstrated by people's making an apparently sick and ill-fed dog the center of attention when it was presented as an art exhibit, even though many of them would ignore the same dog if they encountered it roaming the streets.)

, i would think that were a valid point and the idea (just as a hypothetical) would be one worthy of consideration. nevertheless, i think using aimal cruelty to reveal animal cruelty and to expose hypocrisy by a hypocritical act is not cool at all, just cruel.

i don't think epxerimenting on other beings to prove a point is really cool.

[kington99]

Surely if you're worried about animal cruelty this is the least of your worries? It's rather like trying to stop country wide road deaths by banning one driver.

You're essentially trying to punish someone for doing something which is not illegal in the country in which he did it. That's right, punish. He's not going to do it again, you can't undo the suffering of the dog, banning him from this event will in no way decrease the suffering of animals, it only serves to ease in your mind the discomfort you feel in reading this tale.

By all means put presure on Nicaragua to introduce an animal cruelty act, some good may come of it. But this is just pointless.

To quote Stalin "The death of one is a tragedy, the death of millions just a statistic"

[johnfoss]

Originally Posted by kington99

Surely if you're worried about animal cruelty this is the least of your worries? It's rather like trying to stop country wide road deaths by banning one driver.

The question would not be whether everyone else is guilty, but whether that one driver was guilty of the crime. Speeders make the same excuse all the time.

In most or all American states, I'm pretty sure an exhibit like that would be an animal cruelty crime. Even if the dog is being fed and properly cared for when the exhibit is closed, it's wrong to leave it tied up for any extended period of time without at least access to water. Anyway that's what I learn from watching Animal Cops on the Animal Planet channel.

My short take on the subject:
A living thing should not be considered "art" unless it is voluntarily taking part in the exhibition. If you want social commentary, use a photo or video. A video of the same dog would be not nearly as controversial.

If the intent is to draw attention to the problems with stray and starving animals in that area, and not to the artist as an artist, there should be a larger movement to point peoples' attention, political will and money in the proper directions to make a difference.

[unisteve]

Originally Posted by johnfoss

My short take on the subject:
A living thing should not be considered "art" unless it is voluntarily taking part in the exhibition. If you want social commentary, use a photo or video.

Whether or not a thing is considered art is completely inconsequential. Whether you consider me or I consider you art has no bearing on the physical well-being or continued survival of either of us. The issue here is should not be what medium he used, but what he allegedly allowed happen to a dog in his care, I think; depriving a dog of food and water, for whatever purpose, is pretty uncool.