Creative Global Network for the Visual Arts

whatever are your tastes on art to kill an animal for a performance is not art
Reading darlings, from the
>Magazine Uakix, we are touched enough in our
>sensibility by this received mail this morning
>...... my first impulse to been to send it to mass
>media so that they denounce it on his part. The
>philosophy of Uakix is to show the positive of the
>life, the persons who do good actions, which I
>believe that they are those who more can help to
>this world as it is ..... in a constant
>transformation ....... ....... but there are
>things that if I believe important in putting our
>CONSTRUCTIVE THINGS!!, that we do not support the
>atrocities and less with animals or more innocent
>beings, in this case I believe that the role of
>making something positive is ours!.
>I ask you for excuses if this mail bothers you but
>I think that sometimes it is necessary to say
>something, and in this case I believe that it is
>possible that with only one signature we could
>ATROCITY, that in our world this must no have
>capacity .... I tell you:
>In the year 2007, Guillermo Vargas Habacuc, a
>supposed artist, took to
>a godforsaken dog of the street, tied it to a very
>short rope in
>wall of a gallery of art and it left it there so
>that he was dying
>slowly of hunger and thirst:
>For several days, so much the author of similar
>cruelty as
>visitors of the gallery of art attended impassive
>the agony of the
>poor animal:
>until finally he died of hunger, surely after
>having happened
>for a painful, absurd and incomprehensible
>Does it seem to you strong?
>Since that is not quite: the prestigious Central
>American Biennial of Art
>decided, incomprehensibly, that the savagery that
>it had just committed
>this subject was an art, and this way so
>incomprehensible Guillermo
>Vargas Habacuc has been a guest to repeat his
>cruel action in happiness
>Biennial in 2008.
>Sign here: http: // www.petitiononline.com /
>13031953 / (it is no that
>to pay, to register, not nothing dangerous, and it
>is worth it) for
>to send a request and that this man is not
>congratulated not called
>' artist ' for so cruel act, for similar
>insensitivity and enjoyment
>with the foreign pain.
>It is very easy, 10 seconds are taken and it is
>sure, if we lose the time
>forwarding bullshit that nobody believes, well we
>can dedicate a little
>of this time to try to prevent another innocent
>animal from suffering l suffer
>cruelty of this one, and others, sadistic and
>disgusting ' to be a human being ':
>Pd: if you put the name of the 'artist' in Google
>salt the photos of this poor animal, and surely
>also web pages will go out for you where
>you will be able to confirm it and to see that it
>is true.

Views: 111

Replies to This Discussion

I am not about to wade through 21 pages of postings to find out whats what.
I received a note in good faith and it does indicate that this is a follow on exhibition.
OK, no one in the corporate world has time. I thought we artists did, but whatever. Anyway, I'll powerpoint this down for you, boss:

- People comfortably click the 'forward' button and DO NOTHING ELSE ABOUT whatever all this junk e-mail traffic is pro or against. You may call it a cheap conscience-cleanser.

- You have to have a certain knowledge of the shady streets of impoverished Latin American cities to understand what artist Guillermo Vargas intended to express with his work. You have to be an artist, to begin with.

- Animals are part of our lives and not desperately more important than humans. I thik that, in most cases, this excessive concern is profoundly artificial and a mere distraction from personal issues.

Art is becoming so boring. We need to have more fun.
if starving a dog to death is your idea of fun I would hate to meet you on one of your off days.
But I am not going to get involved in a tit form tat war of words, I know that there are others better at this than me.
I also accept that in South America there are other sensibilities and that we in the west may be too sentimental when it comes to little puppy dogs.
But if "animals are part of your lives" then you would seemingly also condone the starving of people for arts sake.
I can direct you to a couple of neo -fascist web sites where this would be more than welcome
Oh and incidently I am an artist and I did recognise a certain quality within the work which I have read about but not seen. And I did express my interpretation much earlier in this discussion, challenging the sentimental western "aint puppy dogs great" attitude.
In fact i came out as supporting the broad idea of the piece but not the actual doing of it. and forgive me for having an busy life in my corporate world of not earning anything from my art.
however my point is that doing the dead dog in the gallery routine once is getting the point over doing it again as an on going project kind of reducees it to nothing more than a one trick pony trying to make its name before the glory runs out and the next best thing comes along.
Again, you don't get it, man. Read. It will save your soul and deliver it from the pain of thinking I am a black-indian nazi. How preposterous. And according to the Godwin law (check Wikipedia), you lost the argument. Bye.
Oh dear some ones not having a very nice day. Oh well things might get better.
If he had a point to make and he made it well (and my understanding is the dog was not hurt, it was fed and watered and ran away, he wanted us to think about it starving and we did) then it was a thoughtful piece of art that could be considered successful. Only a few hundred people must have seen it. So if it people think it should not be shown again, does that then apply to all art? We should only show things once?
OOO this issue get to a methaphore , and lost his end .
And it's like the speaking about it make's it disapaer into nothing . I like it to see that we are.Yes A dog can be a fly with a microscoop on it .Yes , the doctor that gonna paint a fly . or maybe a nother insect ?
Making cyborg insect's is already reality .Let's paint them or let them paint can be the new slogan .
Who's got the artbrain's ??? Or must we go deeper into it .
Much more deeper are we humans ?
And what has art to do with it ?
Hi Paul, as mentioned in a few posts here - why not just go to the exhibition and feed the dog?
I'd say it's all art, if you say it's art. However, I'd also say it's bad art. Better question is: What makes art "good"? Because then you are into the the twin aesthetic questions – what is art and what is beauty – and the all-important aesthetic/ethical question: What do we mean by "good" ? It is easy to say something is bad, or nonsense, or doesn't make sense, or it's "interesting," but more difficult to say with conviction that something is good and define what is good about it. Do we all agree Francis Bacon made good paintings? I doubt it.

Ray Johnson (1927 - 1995), was both a friend and an enormous influence on me. He played endlessly with meaning in a way Wittgenstein might enjoy, but he was a collage artist and the world was his material, including people. When Kaprow and others did "happenings," Ray did "nothings." Then he did "nothings" backwards "sgnihton." He made copies of his works and mailed them off to people as if they were originals – in a sense they were. He drove his art dealers mad. He was the Buddah who you meet on the road and kill. Ray drowned himself in 1995. There's way more to his story... take a look at this piece I wrote on him (and the film about his life, "How to Draw a Bunny." LINK: CLICK RAY JOHNSON: SOME ASSEMBLY REQUIRED.

Much more to this story above, and the story below.


Matthew Rose / Paris, France



My links


© 2020   Created by 4art Media.   Powered by

Links | Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service