Artistic Statement? (effect, quote, Ching, Computer)

sleepy jack · 04-13-2008, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The-Starving-Artless

The whole point of the exhibit was to show you that no one gives a **** about a starving dog when you see it wandering around, but all of a sudden it's in an art gallery and it's animal cruelty. People live with food and resources in their homes and there are animals starving in the town you live in, probably... is that animal cruelty?

Apparently the artist doesn't really give a **** either. Tying it up and letting it starve and preventing it from scavenging is murder. The artist also said it died of natural causes, getting involved basically ruins the natural cause factor.

bruise_violet · 04-13-2008, 07:27 PM

'artist' said dog didn't want to eat anyway so was definitely going to die whether he starved him or not...

whatever, I have seen dogs about to die and were rescued. This man is no artist, he is a torturer.

~~CAPTAIN CAVEMAN~~ · 04-13-2008, 07:29 PM

its art, whether you like it or not

~~The Unfan~~ · 04-13-2008, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bruise_violet

This man is no artist

See page 2 of this thread.

bruise_violet · 04-13-2008, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The-Starving-Artless

how so?

he couldn't just take a picture because people see pictures all the time. big deal. its the idea that you go into the art gallery and actually see the dog starving in front of you. the very idea that the dog was chained up in an art gallery is enough for it to be cruelty, just seeing a picture of some starving dog on the street is "sad", but not "cruelty"... so no one gets uppity about it and the artist doesn't get his point across

HOW is he being a hypocrite? Are you pretending to be stupid?

He is trying to show how no one cares about a starving dog so he, himself, starves a dog? I can think of a hundred other ways to get across a similar message. How about he invites people to an animal shelter to show off all the animals there?

Anything can be ****ing art these days. Ridiculous. Let's slaughter some babies and called it anti abortionist.

~~The Unfan~~ · 04-13-2008, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bruise_violet

He is trying to show how no one cares about a starving dog so he, himself, starves a dog?

He's part of everyone.

~~CAPTAIN CAVEMAN~~ · 04-13-2008, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bruise violet

He is trying to show how no one cares about a starving dog so he, himself, starves a dog? I can think of a hundred other ways to get across a similar message. How about he invites people to an animal shelter to show off all the animals there?

are YOU pretending to be stupid?

that would be nowhere near as effective.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bruise violet

Anything can be ****ing art these days. Ridiculous. Let's slaughter some babies and called it anti abortionist.

making mountains out of molehills here

bruise_violet · 04-13-2008, 07:40 PM

I don't honestly care about the effectiveness of art when a dying dog is concerned. Like I said, I used to see that stuff every day when I worked in an animal shelter. So obviously, if you can think logically that is, I would never, ever think that such a thing should be allowed, especially as 'art'.

Mountains out of molehills, really now is killing babies a step over the line or is that still allowed to be art?

sleepy jack · 04-13-2008, 07:41 PM

lol, taking a life to prove taking a life is wrong is counterproductive. No amount of "LOLS IM INTERNET CONTROVERSIAL!" is really going to change that.

~~The Unfan~~ · 04-13-2008, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bruise_violet

I don't honestly care about the effectiveness of art when a dying dog is concerned. Like I said, I used to see that stuff every day when I worked in an animal shelter. So obviously, if you can think logically that is, I would never, ever think that such a thing should be allowed, especially as 'art'.

Mountains out of molehills, really now is killing babies a step over the line or is that still allowed to be art?

Again see page 2 of this thread. Killing babies is art as long as we consider killing to be altering, and babies to be natural.

04-13-2008, 07:27 PM	#32 (permalink)
bruise_violet we became a carcass! Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 383	'artist' said dog didn't want to eat anyway so was definitely going to die whether he starved him or not... whatever, I have seen dogs about to die and were rescued. This man is no artist, he is a torturer. __________________ in love with the stumps, in love with the bleeding! in love with the pain that you now feel...

04-13-2008, 07:40 PM	#38 (permalink)
bruise_violet we became a carcass! Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 383	I don't honestly care about the effectiveness of art when a dying dog is concerned. Like I said, I used to see that stuff every day when I worked in an animal shelter. So obviously, if you can think logically that is, I would never, ever think that such a thing should be allowed, especially as 'art'. Mountains out of molehills, really now is killing babies a step over the line or is that still allowed to be art? __________________ in love with the stumps, in love with the bleeding! in love with the pain that you now feel...

04-13-2008, 07:29 PM	#33 (permalink)
~~CAPTAIN CAVEMAN~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: VAN Posts: 2,530	its art, whether you like it or not