Giant dog turd wreaks havoc at Swiss museum:
Ever get the feeling that a lot of modern “artists” are The Emperor’s New Tailors?
Fuck. I get why people say this about abstract art, or found art, even though I don’t agree with it. But we’re talking about a strictly representational piece here, and one that clearly took some effort to construct. And someone still breaks out the tired old “Emperor’s New Clothes” canard. What is it with you people?
Because inflatable dog crap, while amusing on some level, really doesn’t communicate anything intelligible to me?
Why don’t you just admit that 90% of art, just like everything else in the world, is shit? This example is even conveniently labeled as such.
If it amused you, it would appear to be communicating something, wouldn’t it?
Same is true of the inflatable Ronald McDonald characters they once had floating over McD’s when I was a kid.
Though I was more scared of them than amused by them.
Bolding mine. I’ve seen plenty of art that I didn’t really like, but I would never presume my tastes to be universal.
I guess some of us people lack the refinement to understand the artistic subtleties this artist brings to inflatable works such as his “Santa Claus With a Buttplug”. :rolleyes:
His inflatable works are fun, but personally I liked “Class Fool” better:
Pure genius. 
If they ever need the Sistine Chapel redone, they should use some video stills from this performance.
Who said anything about subtle? Who said anything about refinement?
What do you mean by “communicate anything intelligible”? Let’s take a well-known series of paintings (presumably qualifying as art with merit), Monet’s Water Lilies. What intelligible thing do they communicate?
I think I took that college class too…but my guy was some furiner who talked and dressed funny and was teaching some math thingy…and I think he used mustard.
Alas, if only he too had used ketchup…then maybe it would have been more meaningful…
Blll
As long as he has the Barbie doll insertion correct, it is all golden.
Well i can’t say that a gigantic inflatable dog turd is the best example of modern art, it amuses me enough that I like it. Generally if it makes me giggle on some level then I like it. I don’t know if I’m always interpereting things the way the artist wants me to, but I don’t care. Of course some art is just concept art, which isn’t amusing the way this dog turd is, but is also very good.
The guy I like best is Cosimo Cavallaro. I found out about him because for a while he was just covering things with cheese which inspired me to paint my peanut butter and jelly Mona Lisa. I’m by no means a painter or an artist, but I had a blast doing it. I’ll never understand why the fundies were so upset with the chocolate Jesus. Chocolate is a sweet and positive experience for most people, and it wasn’t meant to be eaten.
On the otherhand, sometimes it seems like art is being made just to piss people off and be edgy, and that I’m not a fan of. Painting the virgin Mary in elephant dung doesn’t seem to accomplish anything positive unless I’m not getting it. Even if there is a point being made, you can hardly expect that it wont be offensive in the US. I don’t get Santa with a Butt Plug either.
I knew a group of pagans who made a Chocolate Moose for one of their ceremonies. And they DID eat it.
(Yes, I wrote that correctly. And they knew exactly what they were doing. Chocolate Moose.
They also used to follow up the litant line “Let us Ever Remember and Never Forget…”
with the response: “…An Elephant’s Faithful, 100%”
They were a fun and weird bunch.)
Comedian/artist Natalie Gray already did it 
If you’re looking for life-size reproductions of the Sistine Chapel, it was done before her – they did a full-scale one for the motion picture The Agony and the Ecstacy, Irving Stone’s bio of Michaelangelo. But, of course, that one, like this other one, were done “straight”
Maybe you can get XKCD to do a stick-figure mural of the Sistine Chapel.
i.e. with Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.
There was a thread here awhile ago about a Yale art student who had a gallery consisting of footage of her expelling what she claimed were 7 or so miscarried embryos and the resulting blood rolled up in saran wrap. Anyway, someone in that thread said something to the effect of, “Artists are always trying to evoke emotions of disgust and anger. But those are easy emotions to evoke. I wanna see some of these edgy artists try for some more difficult feelings.” I agree with this viewpoint immensely.
Yea, I don’t get that either. Of course if you think about it, it pretty obviously wasn’t what she said it was. If she was able to reasonably convince everybody that was what it was, then it certainly takes talent, but it is talent used in a deliberately ofensive way.
That reminds me of the guy who was displaying six jars of what he claimed was LSD. The police came and impounded them. I was a little too young at the time to realize that there is no way he actually had six jars of LSD. The whole point was the emotional response that looking at three jars of LSD gives you. It’s even funnier that the police didn’t get it either. Unfortunately, they ruined the effect. I can’t unfortunately find a reference to that incident to confirm or deny that he actually had LSD in those jars. For all I know, he’s in prison right now.