The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english /entertainment/arts/newsid_1869000/1869104.stm
(Remove space)
-----
Can a display of real, dead (some would say mutilated) human bodies be considered art?
German Professor Gunther von Hagens seems to think so.
I could understand this - probably - if it were a scientific display at a museum.
But as art? Not in my book.
(Remove space)
-----
Can a display of real, dead (some would say mutilated) human bodies be considered art?
German Professor Gunther von Hagens seems to think so.
I could understand this - probably - if it were a scientific display at a museum.
But as art? Not in my book.
Page:
Trying to define art, well, i couldn't do it. Or define what art should do, for that matter. Not the kind of wide, genre embracing definition that covers all the accepted artistic media, so i suppose i'd have to say it's down to subjective interpretation whether you consider something to be art or not.
So i guess i couldn't say your halved cows, animal feaces or whatever else, are *not* art, at least they could be to some people, if not to me. But i suppose that could equally apply to anything.
Still, the modern artists often play on shock value and attention grabbing to make a quick buck. And can you really blame them? The art world lap it up.
I saw an interview with damian hirst (the cow guy) recently. I was slightly reassured to see he didn't really have a clue how to define art either. And bemeaused at how he bordered on mocking people who bought his work for anything other than personal liking.
One word came to mind. 'Player'.
So i guess i couldn't say your halved cows, animal feaces or whatever else, are *not* art, at least they could be to some people, if not to me. But i suppose that could equally apply to anything.
Still, the modern artists often play on shock value and attention grabbing to make a quick buck. And can you really blame them? The art world lap it up.
I saw an interview with damian hirst (the cow guy) recently. I was slightly reassured to see he didn't really have a clue how to define art either. And bemeaused at how he bordered on mocking people who bought his work for anything other than personal liking.
One word came to mind. 'Player'.
Hmmmm.
Ok, it may not be *art*. But would it be ok with you if it was on display on the Science Museum?
If so, what's the difference?
It's on display. People can see it. Who cares whether it's in an art gallery or in the science museum. People will know what it's about before they go in, so you'll have no worries about people accidentally stumbling in to see it.
What annoys me is the MP's who branded it sick etc, hadn't even seen the damn thing!
How can you comment on something you haven't seen?!
Madness...
Ok, it may not be *art*. But would it be ok with you if it was on display on the Science Museum?
If so, what's the difference?
It's on display. People can see it. Who cares whether it's in an art gallery or in the science museum. People will know what it's about before they go in, so you'll have no worries about people accidentally stumbling in to see it.
What annoys me is the MP's who branded it sick etc, hadn't even seen the damn thing!
How can you comment on something you haven't seen?!
Madness...
Basically it has that sick fascination factor about it. Yes its ghoulish, but people will go see it.
Personally I think its taking art to far, but no doubt their will be a vocal group moaning about freedom of expression e.t.c.
It makes me wonder whats next, and how people can enjoy seeing dead bodies, however they're displayed. Lets face it, if someone did this 100 years ago it'd be off to prison, or worse, wouldn't it ? But in 2002......oh dear !
Personally I think its taking art to far, but no doubt their will be a vocal group moaning about freedom of expression e.t.c.
It makes me wonder whats next, and how people can enjoy seeing dead bodies, however they're displayed. Lets face it, if someone did this 100 years ago it'd be off to prison, or worse, wouldn't it ? But in 2002......oh dear !
To me, that isn`t anything like art. I`m uneducated in the art field, as I did it for GCSE. It seems the only way to truly learn about modern art is to become either a 2 year old, and chuck paint around, or a mad insane blood addict who loves to kill things.
This is just my opinion of course, but I will never be a fan of dead horses, sheep or any other bodies at all.
My idea of art is pretty pictures, ones that clearly took a lot of effort, or ones that are just nice and colourful. One of my favourite pictures is actually a fractal:
www.geocities.com/ma0pnt/chaos/pinwheels.jpg
This is just my opinion of course, but I will never be a fan of dead horses, sheep or any other bodies at all.
My idea of art is pretty pictures, ones that clearly took a lot of effort, or ones that are just nice and colourful. One of my favourite pictures is actually a fractal:
www.geocities.com/ma0pnt/chaos/pinwheels.jpg
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english /entertainment/arts/newsid_1869000/1869104.stm
(Remove space)
-----
Can a display of real, dead (some would say mutilated) human bodies be considered art?
German Professor Gunther von Hagens seems to think so.
I could understand this - probably - if it were a scientific display at a museum.
But as art? Not in my book.
(Remove space)
-----
Can a display of real, dead (some would say mutilated) human bodies be considered art?
German Professor Gunther von Hagens seems to think so.
I could understand this - probably - if it were a scientific display at a museum.
But as art? Not in my book.
Page: