To me, The Human Centipede is more of an art than the killing a living creature or even shitting in a can. While defining art is complex, and I realize that an argument can be made for or against any piece of “art,” both of the aforementioned pieces were not artistic in any way. First of all, the inhumane act of killing another creature “for show” is despicable and should not be commended. The dog was forced to suffer and had no choice in the matter. While those who went to the exhibit may have had a choice to feed the dog with the dog food given, the dog had no way to fight for itself or live while it was denied nutrients. This dog was put in a zoo of people who walked past him and allowed him to suffer for their own entertainment. After the dog disappeared, and presumably died, the artist was asked to repeat this horrendous experiment. While I recognize that in the Central American culture dogs are not regarded as highly as they are here, it is still a reprehensible thing to do and I would never take a symbol of their culture or something else that is valued to them and harm it in the name of art. I would not deface a Hejab just to make a stand against Al-Quaida, even though I do not agree with it.
Similarly Shit in a Can is a pointless and uncreative waste of space and money. The fact that someone would pay $60,000 for 50-year-old poop is beyond my comprehension. It is a waste of resources and time that the artist could have spent creating other works and it makes me seriously question whether he is an artist at all. Quite literally everyone on this planet can shit in a can and sell it. I do not think that Shit in a Can displayed any creative effort on his part and was all together a pointless piece of “art”.
No comments:
Post a Comment