David Lynch, you’ve got competition.
If we don’t allow people to use dead animal parts in their art, then the terrorists have won!
As far as thought provoking: I’m left thinking that the artist is a frustrated Anne Geddes gone horribly wrong. She could have made her art another way. Photo-manipulation, taxidermy, or at the very least using animals that were put down for other reasons. She didn’t do this because the image isn’t the lump sum of her message; she wants you shocked by her method. I don’t think the fact that it is shocking makes it art. In my opinion true art would be able to stand on its own independent of the method. Think about it… if you knew that those exact same images were made using photoshop, would you give it a second thought? It’s sophomoric, violent performance art.
I disagree. I find it, in various parts, beautiful, amusing, and thought-provoking despite the method. Even if these were simply photoshopped, I’d find them strangely beautiful (especially the Carrollian ruffed rabbits), disturbing (the cat heads evoke some buried horror-movie shudders), and amusing (the mouse and chicken prints made me chuckle on first glance). I don’t find myself thinking “You go, girl!” for killing them solely for the art. On the other hand, I don’t think it’s depraved, desperate or a jaded attempt to shock.
Although the idea of some psychotic Ann Geddes chucking babies’ heads off to sew onto sunflowers is intriguing…
Indeed. This is what happens when an aspiring Anne Geddes isn’t loved and nurtured. Well… either that, or she thinks the dichotomy between the way society views and treats animals is such an extremely Jack Handy Deep Thought that it requires a series of animal mutilations to bring it to our attention. It’s like she has the keys to our collective soul and has been reading our most secret thoughts. :rolleyes: Genius.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not faulting anyone for having a differing opinion. I’m just voicing my own.
Surprising Damien Hirst (sp.) hasnt been mentioned yet
Heh. Had to look him up. Another one whose slightly disturbing work makes me think, “Wow!”
Maybe I’m weird…
Also Joel-Peter Witkin:
http://zonezero.com/exposiciones/fotografos/witkin/jpwitkin1.html
Honestly, the hostile language of the OP troubled me considerably more than the art itself, crappy sick bitch-slap-worthy damn bitch whore though the artist might be. Guess that’s why it’s in the pit, but it still bugs me to see women perpetuating traditionally misogynistic slurs against one another.
the best part of this thread is that the O.P. responds to the Work Exactly the way the artist predicted some people would.
art isnt supposed to be pretty pictures and happiness. if it doesnt make you think or question, or pause and wonder then its crap.
strange but not the strangest, I personally agree with the statement as I see it.
Hey, if the shoe fits…
So it’s made from animals, big freakin’ deal. I use taxidermy in conjuction with both my special effects contracts and in my private sculpture. Killing simply for the sake of the art is a little out there, but if I HAD to kill, I would.
It’s all in the eye of the beholder. Personally, I’d not have anything to do with this kind of art.
Then again, I don’t like Anne Geddes’ crap, either …
I have to agree.
Well, we might just as easily say: “Use dead animals in your strange meals. Don’t kill fresh ones for them.”