Artistic Statement? (member, quote, Hang, Computer)

04-13-2008, 06:36 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, 06:40 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?

04-13-2008, 06:43 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.

sleepy jack · 04-13-2008, 06:41 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.

04-13-2008, 06:44 PM

you are equating a group of dead human babies to one dying dog, and you are calling me illogical?

and i'm not trying to be "internet controversial", ethan.

bruise_violet · 04-13-2008, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The-Starving-Artless

you are equating a group of dead human babies to one dying dog, and you are calling me illogical?

and i'm not trying to be "internet controversial", ethan.

what can i say, i like dogs.

lol ethan <3

sleepy jack · 04-13-2008, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The-Starving-Artless

you are equating a group of dead human babies to one dying dog, and you are calling me illogical?

"Taking a life to prove taking a life is counterproductive." Counter-productivity is a pretty shitty way to get a point across since no matter how hard to take extreme it's hypocritical. That is why another way to illustrate the point would actually have been more effective because you're not doing the same thing you're condemning.

04-13-2008, 06:54 PM

yes... but if people see or hear about a starving dog in an art gallery, or hear about all this "animal cruelty" uproar about it, if they actually cared about the welfare of animals they would realize that animals are starving in the city they live in (most likely) - and then may do something about it. It's not counter-productive because he isn't catching and starving all the dogs he can find... just making a point.

the dog was already starving. he didn't make it starve any more than it already was, just moved it from one place to another.

04-13-2008, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The-Starving-Artless

the dog was already starving. he didn't make it starve any more than it already was, just moved it from one place to another.

and denied it access to food.

04-13-2008, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Unfan

and denied it access to food.

and all the people sitting in front of their computer monitors crying about animal cruelty are neglecting the starving animals in their very own cities just as much. THEY are the hypocrites.

don't tell me the all the 117,757 people in the facebook "petition" volunteer at an animal shelter, or even do a thing to help the situation

why not try to save it? to make a point.

lol, starving heartless

people should stop making a big deal of things such as this unless they are willing to try and fix the problem.

besides, one starving dog in an art gallery is a huge uproar, but people in poverty in your own cities who go unnoticed aren't cried about to this degree.

04-13-2008, 06:40 PM	#2 (permalink)
bruise_violet we became a carcass! Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 384	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...

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

04-13-2008, 06:44 PM	#5 (permalink)
CAPTAIN CAVEMAN Guest Posts: n/a	you are equating a group of dead human babies to one dying dog, and you are calling me illogical? and i'm not trying to be "internet controversial", ethan.

04-13-2008, 06:54 PM	#8 (permalink)
CAPTAIN CAVEMAN Guest Posts: n/a	yes... but if people see or hear about a starving dog in an art gallery, or hear about all this "animal cruelty" uproar about it, if they actually cared about the welfare of animals they would realize that animals are starving in the city they live in (most likely) - and then may do something about it. It's not counter-productive because he isn't catching and starving all the dogs he can find... just making a point. the dog was already starving. he didn't make it starve any more than it already was, just moved it from one place to another.