deviant ART

[x]

Live animals as art supplies?

Advertisement
~KingNapoleon:iconKingNapoleon: Mar 14, 2008, 8:11:13 PM
I ran into an acquaintance of mine the other day, and he excitedly showed me his current project. This so-called \"art\" project consisted of a LIVE little chick in a shoe box with a large felt rooster\'s comb adhered to it\'s little head. I was so taken aback by it all that I didn\'t tear him a new one like I probably should have... I reported it to someone in the art department office and they had no idea what to make of it. I can\'t \"verify\" that the bird was suffering, but I\'ve lived with birds for as long as I can remember and not a one of them would stand for that sort of thing.

But really-- live animals? Frankly, I\'m appalled. I think there\'s something deeply wrong with causing animals discomfort in the name of art (insert rant about how everything is NOT art here). Is this some disturbing new trend or has it always been going on? Or was this (hopefully) an isolated incident?

Devious Comments

love 0 0 joy 0 0 wow 0 0 mad 0 0 sad 0 0 fear 0 0 neutral 0 0

~GoshinkiPickle:iconGoshinkiPickle: Mar 14, 2008, 8:31:38 PM
Was it glued on? Yeah, that's..........not okay. If the art department can't do anything about it. try calling animal protection.

--
Never play leapfrog with a unicorn. :no:

I'm da dryad in deviantART's Mythical Creatures Crew!
=sunsets =flower-club
~foocha-kyo:iconfoocha-kyo: Mar 16, 2008, 11:54:03 PM
I really hope this isn't widespread... if an animal is suffering like that, that's not art, that's humiliating and should count as abuse.

--
______
(...OMG)
v
°^°
~eightoutside:iconeightoutside: Mar 17, 2008, 3:46:00 AM
I kind of understand what he was getting at with it as a work of art but using a live chick is pretty gimicky. That extra little bit of something he gets for using a live animal rather than creating the same idea in a different way isn't enough to overcome the negative response he will and probably should get. It's like using shock tactics to get attention for something that would otherwise be a fairly tame message.
~eightoutside:iconeightoutside: Mar 17, 2008, 3:49:01 AM
Just had a thought, how about a cartoon of him holding said 'art projct' and looking pleased with himself with his chest all puffed up like a rooster, call it 'what a cock' :D
~KingNapoleon:iconKingNapoleon: Mar 18, 2008, 10:17:28 PM
Hahaha. For a minute I was thinking of sending the local PETA folks after him... they probably would have glued something to him and then some.
~GregCollinsArt:iconGregCollinsArt: Apr 4, 2008, 12:53:06 PM
I think that the true cock is the guy that did that.
=Itti:iconItti: Apr 7, 2008, 2:19:05 PM
Phone the RSPCA (or whatever your country has).

--
No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However, a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

I often randomly comment on other deviants' work. Feel free to return the favour!
~RyMantys:iconRyMantys: Apr 20, 2008, 6:21:58 AM
Recently, a so called "artist" attached a dog in a gallery and let it die of hunger. I suppose he wanted to get a message across, but it's frankly disgusting, as well as showing a deep lack of inspiration (and compassion).

Well there's a possibility of it being a hoax (I don't think so, saw several articles about it), but some people today do anything to get noticed, and think that just by calling it "conceptual", they pass as intellectual artists. Don't they realize that it's not even original anymore?
~alanthecowboykiller:iconalanthecowboykiller: Apr 20, 2008, 8:23:21 AM
to be fair the dog was going to die anyway it was a stray and only had a few hours to live and nothing could be done for it. saying that i dont think it should of been placed in a gallery i was just pointing out its not like they took a healthy dog and let it die

but back on topic i think its ok to use animals in work as long as their not harmed and are well looked after

--
You can master tantric yogic polyorgasmic wonder sex but you'll gonna die alone