There is no disputing the fact, art and shock value go hand in hand. The most famous and impactful of them (artists) have been the ones who have been the most notorious, absolutely controversial(or at least considered so) during their lives. One of my favorites include Marquis de Sade, the French aristocrat, philosopher, revolutionary and the writer or pornography who was violently obsessed with the his ideas. The term "sadism" finds its origins in his name - something that saves me from saying any further about me. Furthermore, the above portrait of him explains anything additional I might have to about his image during his time.Then of course, the 1955 novel "Lolita" by Vladimir Nabokov created quite a stir in the more conservative period. However, not all who have been subject to controversies have made it to feature in history, such as Pietro Aretino, an Italian author, playwright, poet and satirist who wielded immense influence on contemporary art and politics and invented modern literate pornography; though he was immensely both criticized and idolized in his time.
In the modern times, one is far from being affected by controversies that make rounds in the news. Be it Pablo Picasso for his shocking abstracts during the 60s or M.F. Husain sacred deities in nudes, controversy of any kind has, as is demonstrated from the cited examples, worked largely in favor of the one subjected to. Nonetheless, the artists mentioned above were of unquestionable talent which definitely is not saying that it was controversies alone that increased their market and resale value.
It is interesting to note, that if you look up the meaning of the word "controversy", one cannot not help but wonder at the ideas people can conceive and entertain. Controversy and art, as I have mentioned and cited through the various examples I have given, go hand in hand. People take liberties with their execution of the things they imagine because that is what being an artist signifies. People who buy into the expression, express their approval and agreement to the executor. Art isn't just restricted to a medium or frame; it is as far as the mind can go. People find themselves amused by a great variety of things. They own anything that they find the most appealing to their senses - abstracts, ivory sculptures, photographs of landscapes or people. Be it beauty or ugliness in any form, anything that is able to make an impact in the minds of the people is accepted as art. Life is an art, so is death. But, as many forms of it has been captured on canvas, stone or film, has art deemed it acceptable to let someone play God in the literal sense?
No one, they say, has the authority to take the life of any other being for the simple reason that they cannot do the reverse. However, we find ourselves at times killing animals for a necessity as vital as food and at other times, we find ourselves acting out of rage and sadism to watch not only animals but our kind killed too. Though killing animals for sport and entertainment has not been a foreign idea one has come across, one has been far from redeeming the poignant misery from the sight of it, how much it has been depicted on any media, far from an art form. That is, until Guillermo Vargas and the directors of the art gallery who showcase it,decided it was one.
In times like these, where man is thirsty for another man's blood, animal sacrifice in the name of the very medium that is to put an end to the miseries that we find around ourselves only increasing over time was JUST what one needed. Those accustomed to forwards must have become aware of what I am speaking of. The particular exhibit in question was Costa Rican artist's brainchild who probably didn't have enough time to complete the sculpture/artwork that he was supposed to turn to the art exhibition he was supposed to prepare for or maybe he just wasn't as talented to do the whole thing. So, instead of pulling out, he decided to keep his place and get some publicity at the expense of a stray who would have "died anyway of hunger" to let it die publicly and slowly. Surprisingly, through the exhibition, apparently no one protested the sight of misery under the nose. Though the fate of the dog (despite being reportedly fatal) remains a misery amidst claims varying significantly between the various authorities and the artist himself. Another shocking incident came across in the form of the news of a pregnant pit bull being tortured death and then left hanged to a fence outside an abandoned school fence in Philadelphia.
What better is the kind of art that makes one to have thoughts revulsion at the thought of people who either cannot have enough of the millions dying in extreme conditions or their own fantasies of sadism. What is left to be thought of the mute creature when man rejoices in the miseries of man?
© Hartmut Schwarzbach / Still Pictures / UNEP
FAMINE, SUDAN. Starving children looking for ants to eat.
"Eres Lo Que lees"/"You are what you read" (Stray dog starved to death as art):
http://www.thetimes.co.za/News/Article.aspx?id=752465
Abortion art (Pregnant dog tortured and left to die on schoolyard fence) :
http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=8&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxnews.com%2Fstory%2F0%2C2933%2C322085%2C00.html&ei=W9UQSM7jB5eiswLFiJWNCQ&usg=AFQjCNH2MJidcXg2DjBdtpiHHMy5tTM_cw&sig2=bBBBeE4TTsXDlEToz2SpDg
more detailed report (warning: graphic photos):
http://www.myfoxphilly.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail;jsessionid=95D6093A16C2E6F9D27467F073F81A20?contentId=5452724&version=4&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=1.1.1&sflg=1
0 comments:
Post a Comment