|
Artistic Statement?
Well since we're a diverse community, I'd thought I'd post this and ask you all your views on the subject.
Artist Starves Dog to Death It is an immensely controversial thing to do, but it also has people question their morals and force them to see their own hypocrisy about starving animals/homeless/human ethics, and also forces people to look at other cultures' perspectives, but thats just my opinion- I want to hear yours! |
I'm all for art and expression but starving a dog is just cruel.
|
That's not art that's animal cruelty.
|
That's cruel and disgusting. I can't believe people like that exist in this world. Is that to imply you could do anything with out any regard for its ethical implications, say it was an artistic statement, and that makes it OK?
|
Is so bad that he couldn't pick up a paint brush that he had to kill a dog? He should of just straved himself.
|
I joined a facebook group protesting against this very subject
You cant use 'artistic freedom' as a way to rationalize this. It's simply cruel and disgusting. |
What Guillermo Habacuc Vargas has done in the name of art (starving and killing the dog) is absolutely insane.
"He is a criminally insane sadist and enjoys inflicting prolonged suffering upon his innocent victims. He is a danger to all of society, as it is well-documented that those with the capacity to intentionally cause harm to an animal have the same capacity to harm humans. To state that this animal would have died eventually of natural causes is unjustifiable and defies logical, rational thought." - The letter sample from "Artist" starves a dog to death as a work of art | AMP: Artists' Meeting Place & Resource Collective I agree with this. That makes me ill. |
let the public be damned
|
This is ridiculous... you can't justify starving an animal in the name of art, no matter how far your head is up your arse.
|
it's one thing to starve yourself. it's another to deny food to a dependent living being.
i effing hate idealists who pass themselves off as artists because they're both often seen as social outcasts. the person who starved a dog was NOT an artist. |
Maybe I should go kick the shit out of him & call it art , it might help me get away with it.
|
I think a lot of people have the desire to really hurt this man.
|
This reminds me of that company that puts kitties into jars for whatever reason, Bonsai Kittens or somthing.
****ing sick. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
However, I'm unfamiliar with Costa Rican law and therefore can't say what legal action would or should take place. American law isn't applicable here because this isn't a case of international affairs nor did it happen in the U.S. |
Quote:
putting cats on scanners and uploading the images was far more cruel, considering the cat didn't know to shut its eyes when the light went by. it was also a much funnier website. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
You can where I come from.
|
WTF!? That is absolutely horrible and appalling. So sad...http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/tr...smiley-047.gif
|
The pictures are sad.
|
what an a**hole.people should go to trial as if they had killed anothe human for a crime such as this...
|
Heh. I personally think he's a sick **** myself, but he did get people thinking and talking. Maybe it'll motivate some people to actually get involved with homeless people and starving people and animals.
Oh and Costa Ricans view these dogs as vermin, thats why he was able to get away with it. But seriously, starving a dog in a public place with some writing on the wall to justify what he did is ****ed up. And he'll probably get away with it. |
Of course he will. That's what sucks. And like I said earlier, he wants this kind of attention. He knew it would happen. When you're starving for attention, you don't care if it's good or bad.
|
i knew there would be a time when my username would apply somewhere.
btw, the dog wasn't starving. 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? it's as much art as any other thing in the art gallery |
Quote:
I'd slap you if I could you are such a reject. Why could he not have taken a picture of the poor dog then nursed it back to health and taken another picture? His reasons behind it are understandable but he is being a hypocrite, I used to work in an animal sanctuary starving animals are nothing to brush off as if they are meaningless. WHY are things like this allowed? I'd have stolen the dog. |
Quote:
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 |
Quote:
|
I like how that randomly makes taking a starving dog a big time theft from an art exhibit.
|
Quote:
|
'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. |
its art, whether you like it or not
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
that would be nowhere near as effective. Quote:
|
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? |
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.
|
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:02 AM. |
© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.