Art Or Animal Cruelty?

[gaia.plateau]

I would counter: Lets start a global warming thread and not hijack this important thread about animals vs. art.

I'll second the notion... we may as well just transfer the posts.

To kill a dog because they are living naturally in a manner that you don't approve of, aesthetically, thats just jacked up. Thats about like somebody sort of compared to Hitler...killing people because they didn't agree with his aesthetic principles.

What this guy should have done, I think, is dressed up in a dog suit and starved himself to death in a museum. It would have gotten the point across far more strongly.

Or self-immolated. That's always a good option for protest.

[Cheese//]

What I'm wondering is that why didn't you guys care about the thousands of other dogs that have died from negligence before this one?
I bet because you didn't know, eh?

Well, this dog's life, or rather death, had a much more profound effect on everyone's emotions than the rest of the nameless dogs that died that no one ever cared about.
The death of this dog has caused you to care about the issue of stray dogs in Nicaragua through its equally painful but not equally meaningful death compared to the death of other stray dogs.
And if it hasn't really made you think about the stray dog problem in Nicaragua then I doubt you'd care about the dog dying anyway.

[gaia.plateau]

What I'm wondering is that why didn't you guys care about the thousands of other dogs that have died from negligence before this one?
I bet because you didn't know, eh?

I can't speak for the others who posted in this thread, but for me it has absolutely nothing to do with the death of the dog in question. We live in a society that collectively chooses to enslave animals for our personal pleasure, amusement, and emotional security. Yes it's extreme to refer to pets as slaves, but at the most essential level, there really isn't a difference between one species dominating another and one race dominating another.

That being said, these pets/slaves dying due to negligence is par for the course. It's an inevitability. Terrorism and genocide are other inevitabilities of the current manifestation of human civilization, and they don't affect me emotionally either.

The reason I "care" about this issue in particular (and I don't think it's fair to presuppose that because someone doesn't make a thread about an issue on an internet message board, they don't care about the issue), has absoutely nothing to do with the death of the animal, and everything to do with the "the absolute raping of an animal's dignity, and the whoring of that loss for public attention".

Do I "care" about the individual lives of the hundreds of thousands of Tutsis that were systematically exterminated in Rwanda over 8 years? No, I don't. This is because I am a relatively well-informed individual, and for the well-informed individual there are an infinite and rapidly growing number of issues to "care" about, and if we spent our time feeling emotional impact and false mourning for all of them, we would never get anything done. This doesn't mean that we shouldn't discuss and think about the issues, or learn from them, but that we should be intellectually honest, and avoid pretentious mourning over issues that don't affect us in a meaningful way.

Cheese, you're the one that created this thread as an "interesting subject for discussion". If you wanted to discuss the thousands of dogs killed in Nicaragua, you should have started a thread to discuss that, instead of luring people to express the emotional impact of this issue and then berate them for not being more expansive. Just my opinion. Edited November 24, 2007 by gaia.plateau

[Cheese//]

What I'm wondering is that why didn't you guys care about the thousands of other dogs that have died from negligence before this one?
I bet because you didn't know, eh?

I can't speak for the others who posted in this thread, but for me it has absolutely nothing to do with the death of the dog in question. We live in a society that collectively chooses to enslave animals for our personal pleasure, amusement, and emotional security. Yes it's extreme to refer to pets as slaves, but at the most essential level, there really isn't a difference between one species dominating another and one race dominating another.

That being said, these pets/slaves dying due to negligence is par for the course. It's an inevitability. Terrorism and genocide are other inevitabilities of the current manifestation of human civilization, and they don't affect me emotionally either.

The reason I "care" about this issue in particular (and I don't think it's fair to presuppose that because someone doesn't make a thread about an issue on an internet message board, they don't care about the issue), has absoutely nothing to do with the death of the animal, and everything to do with the "the absolute raping of an animal's dignity, and the whoring of that loss for public attention".

Do I "care" about the individual lives of the hundreds of thousands of Tutsis that were systematically exterminated in Rwanda over 8 years? No, I don't. This is because I am a relatively well-informed individual, and for the well-informed individual there are an infinite and rapidly growing number of issues to "care" about, and if we spent our time feeling emotional impact and false mourning for all of them, we would never get anything done. This doesn't mean that we shouldn't discuss and think about the issues, or learn from them, but that we should be intellectually honest, and avoid pretentious mourning over issues that don't affect us in a meaningful way.

Cheese, you're the one that created this thread as an "interesting subject for discussion". If you wanted to discuss the thousands of dogs killed in Nicaragua, you should have started a thread to discuss that, instead of luring people to express the emotional impact of this issue and then berate them for not being more expansive. Just my opinion.

The reason I made this thread was to promote other not just see the act and then immediately think that the artist in was some sort of psychopath (as I did) but instead think more deeply about the reason he did such a thing then figure out for themselves if he was right or not.
I'm happy that many people have done that but also a bit disappointed that there is hardly an ounce of support for the artist.

The fact that I or anyone else didn't make a thread about stray dogs in Nicaragua but instead made a thread about the art work is supportive of the artist's cause.
Stray dogs in Nicaragua was not previously a "current" and relevant topic.
But along with the interest in the artist and the particular dog also came interest in the stray dogs of Nicaragua.

Personally, I'm more interested in people's reactions to this subject and the artist's thinking rather than trying to save stray dogs.
If I did care more about stray dogs then the topic's heading would have been: "Artist grows awareness of stray dog problem through art."

[gaia.plateau]

I'm happy that many people have done that but also a bit disappointed that there is hardly an ounce of support for the artist.

Hey, I supported him in the form of some solid constructive criticism.

What this guy should have done, I think, is dressed up in a dog suit and starved himself to death in a museum. It would have gotten the point across far more strongly.

Or self-immolated. That's always a good option for protest.

[ghostofdavid]

Is this like when Jon Benet Ramsey died and people threw a shit fit, forgetting that lots of children die all the time and in similar fashion... but on a much less important scale because its a dog?

Animal cruelty is pretty lame, but comparing it to the life of a child is even more so. Edited November 27, 2007 by ghostofdavid

[Stealth]

What this guy should have done, I think, is dressed up in a dog suit and starved himself to death in a museum. It would have gotten the point across far more strongly.

Thats what I was talking about this guy is such a pussy. He wants to make a statement but has something else make the sacrifice.

I still dont give a shit about stray dogs in wherever the fuck they are. Besides, I cant imagine that the exibit makes a fair comparison. Are the stray dogs there really too retarded to find their own food?

Hold on, I'm going to try and set you all off on another tangent. I hate MAAD too, as well as most of this seasons CBS linup. I think they are gay.

[Hookah_Bob3]

I believe it's been shown that Human beings attach emotions to things that we give human attributes to. We cannot conceivably care about the dogs that we don't know about as much as we care about this individual dog because they have not been personified. They have not appealed to our emotional senses. It's the same reason we care more about a friend passing away than a friend's friend. There's a deeper connection

[erufiku]

Define Art.
As for me, it ended a long time ago, with the emergence of PoMo.

[gaia.plateau]

Define Art.

The use of any medium, such as language, music, paint, or a dead dog, by a human to create a cultural product or result intended to incite thought and emotion.

From my perspective, anyway. Edited November 28, 2007 by gaia.plateau

[shisha fan]

Define Art.
As for me, it ended a long time ago, with the emergence of PoMo.

art is relative. letting a stray dog starve to prove a point is animal cruelty.

[Sonthert]

Humans are more important than any other species. We need other species, true. All the other animals of the animal kingdom realize that too. They don't go snuggling up to other species. Look at birds. Birds will only flock and roost with their own kind. They aren't aggressive, necessarily, but they realize whose one of their own and who is one of the other guys. I'm sure the KKK has used the same logic down through the years to justify hatred across races. Which doesn't make it OK. We are the only species (minus a couple of apes/monkeys) that treats other species similarly to members of our own species. Species kill amongst themselves (Or at least attack) just like humans and another animal species not killing for their own sustenance is unheard of. We are animals, first and foremost. We can choose nobility, kindness, mercy and morality. They are not our nature, however.

[gaia.plateau]

Humans are more important than any other species. We need other species, true. All the other animals of the animal kingdom realize that too. They don't go snuggling up to other species. Look at birds. Birds will only flock and roost with their own kind. They aren't aggressive, necessarily, but they realize whose one of their own and who is one of the other guys. I'm sure the KKK has used the same logic down through the years to justify hatred across races. Which doesn't make it OK. We are the only species (minus a couple of apes/monkeys) that treats other species similarly to members of our own species. Species kill amongst themselves (Or at least attack) just like humans and another animal species not killing for their own sustenance is unheard of. We are animals, first and foremost. We can choose nobility, kindness, mercy and morality. They are not our nature, however.

So you think that we are merely biological machines, and slaves to our own inherent natures without hope of overcoming them? If we've evolved from Great Apes into Cro Magnus... why not from Cro Magnus into veritable humans, capable of true altruism and civilizational compassion?

[jbean422]

i think that the asshole should have the same thing done to him so that he can experience what he did to the dog

[Snoopy1966]

That is just cruel. The pic of everyone standing around the dog drinking made me ill.

I see no art in this at all.

[r1v3th3ad]

Fuck art.
I've seen enough fucked up stuff besides hearing about this.
I wonder if its the same dog that is on my friend's myspace page...there is a russian, anorexic, model, with a dog corpse on her, like a scarf. Posing....
I'm disgusted with half of what the art scene has turned to.

2. PETA is a bunch of idiots doing a circle jerk to come up with ideas. They "try" to save these poor animals from these testing facilities....ya right, they go to the extreme and burn the place down to make a point. HOW BOUT RESCUEING THE ANIMALS FIRST ASSHOLES! The facility burns with the test victims still there....

And as for the economists....Al Gore. Thats all I have to say, Al FUCKING Gore.

I'm done.

[oolatec]

Someone needs to tie this asswad to a pole until he starves to death and call it art too.

[NoPeace]

take that guy out and fucking shoot him. hes a sick fuck

[james]

Both?

Just like most things, you can debate whether or not it's art. But it's certainly fucking cruel.


God I hate people. Idiot was probably doing it mostly for the press. Starving a dog to bring attention to starving dogs is like raping an infant to bring attention to the raping of infants. Maybe he should kill himself to bring attention the the suicide epidemic?

[gr!m]

No doubt in my mind this is animal abuse. I have a dog of my own (jack russel, looks like the RCA dog)...I would hate to see this happen even to a stray. The line between art and just f'ed up is way to this these days.

[jayson]

Fucked up shit.

Art is much too liberal a term. Here a man willingly and knowingly let a dog starve to death, which is a long and excruciatingly painful way to die, under the pretense of "art", and people dismiss it as such. This is no different than a man who ties up stray dogs and watches them die for pleasure... the end result is the same regardless of the path taken or excuses given.

[AKammenzind]

Personally, I think that if its meaning was to make the problem of stray dogs more apparent then it definitely succeeded.
The publicity generated from the whole shebang has benefitted the greater majority of stray dogs much more than if he had made a speech or just taken pictures.
I believe that that dog's death had more meaning than if it were to just die in the street anyway.
I don't think killing animals is right.
But this necessary sacrifice has certainly helped the rest of the stray dogs out on the streets.

Well, if you're twisted enough I suppose you might consider it art... but that's just sick.

Anyone who intentionally starves an animal should probably be evaluated by a trained professional because they might well be a danger to those around them.

If his intention was to make the plight of stray dogs more apparent, I think he might have succeeded if only because people want to save the poor things from his type, heh. Either way, he doesn't seem to believe in leading by example

[JtowninAtown]

I could care less if other people like to describe this as art. He tied up an animal that doesn't have a "choice" in the matter and decided (for the animal) that the dog should die to serve a higher purpose. This man is worse than Michael Vick (the football player who had illegal dog fights) who kept his dogs healthy btw. This is animal cruelty, which is fine to INSPIRE art, but should never BE art. Enough suffering happens naturally. To cause pain and hurt for the sake of art is a part of humanity I want no part in... that poor creature... did anyone else look at the picture of it huddled into itself and everyone is standing around it with their wine glasses? This is disgusting... Edited February 4, 2008 by JtowninAtown

[St. Goodypants]

The exhibit IS art. It IS conveying an emotion to make a point. However, art is useless to anyone who forms their own opinions and acts according to them. 

That said,
This fucker is seriously sick, and should be taken away for pulling a needlessly cruel and stupid publicity stunt.

[raytrace]

If someone put a bunch of pre-teen girls on video having sex with adult men and women and claimed it was art, would it be art or child abuse?

I think the answer is pretty clear. Edited February 12, 2008 by raytrace