This is not art... This is SICK!
Oct. 23rd, 2007 @ 09:22 pm
Anybody who thinks THIS
is art is a heartless monster with appreciation for life or art!
Oh yeah, I saw that a couple days ago. I was too disgusted to even post it on my own LJ.
I hope I didn't disturb you with it, I did say it was sick... :(
Oh no, I saw it once before. I just didn't want to post it on my LJ at the time. I might link to yours for other people to see. It doesn't enrage me or disgust me as much now. Now it's just like, "Man...what the hell's wrong with this guy?".
FYI: I finally decided to go sign the petition. I had to do some research on what "PaÃs" was, since I wasn't familiar with that one. But I did sign it correctly.
Was he trying to show the state of dogs in that country? It seems to me that they have a huge problem with starving animals in that country. People just ignore it. Its a lot harder to ignore when you see it so up close and in person. I'm not arguing his case for him, there has to be a better way to show this without starving the dog to death, but feeding one dog isn't going to point out to others how many others are starving in the country. The "art" is disgusting, but so is the state of things with starving animals in many South American countries.
But committing an atrocity to show the world how atrocious something can be doesn't make sense at all!
Let me just say that this kind of thing is not art.
BUT, I spent many years on this kind of a topic in school and the idea would be very popular to talk about, since it asks the question "at a request, you would deny something to someone?" Its very conceptual and being a "live" installation "art piece" makes it very gruesome and cruel to the animal that was involved... But it proves a point of the artist that all he had to do was request them to n feed the dog and they obeyed.
People wanted the dog freed, I don't know why they let the dog die, I'm assuming the gallery was on the "artist's" side and didn't let anybody free it?
i can only assume its that or they liked the attention they were getting because of it.
Well I'm hoping people will remember it after the incident as the gallery where they let dogs die... ¬_¬
BAD BAD BAD. Almost as bad as the chick that sticks mice on her fingers as puppets.
Ugh... do I even want to know? :(
I'll have to admit it looked cool (I know - negative points for me) but there's always a way around something like that. She [Nathalia Edenmont] http://www.bigshinything.com/nathalia-edenmont
got a lot of slack but not as much as this. This is just disgusting. :( ........ people do some dumb shit for attention.
I think some other "artist" displayed dead people and animals recently, some to think of it? I think the controversy is that he didn't really have consent to modify the corpses?
Yeah why can't you just ... make one out of stuffing? Poor little mice. :(
Wait - dead people? Oh now that's just way way WAY out there.
I don't even want to google this, but I remember some guy would take a corpse, cut a section, like half the head, or something like that and display it like that... It was on the news, so I don't have a links and I don't want to google for corpses.... Specially after my family loss... :(
I fully agree with you. I won't look either.
I'll look at YOUR art instead. It's colorful and happy!
My latest comic has a demonic egg, but yeah, it's cute and colorful! ^_^;
How cruel can some people be?
Very cruel, apparently... :(
|Date:||October 23rd, 2007 08:24 pm (UTC)|| |
o my god thats awful I'm sitting here with two dogs and two cats asleep in front of the fire and I couldn't imagine ever hurting them.
I hope I didn't disturb you, I did say it was sick... :(
Something this inhumane and cruel doesn't even deserve to be called bad art.
I hope that guy gets eaten by hungry dogs someday.