Most of you have seen it, a chain letter asking you to sign a petition as a dog starves to death, bourgeoisie artists and patrons stand around and talk about irony. Understanding the need for some artists to shock to create a reaction can be a hard thought to grasp on its own, but to see an “artist” destroy another living being for the sake of “art” is ludicrous. Its one thing to put yourself at risk and to push yourself to certain limits, but to enforce your idea on a helpless victim, thats mein kampf.
Chris Burden was born in Boston, Massachusetts in 1946. He studied visual arts, physics and architecture at Yale College and the University of California, Irvine from 1969 to 1971. In the early 1970’s Chris made a number of controversial performance art pieces with the idea of personal danger at its core. One of Burden’s more well-known pieces, “Shoot,” in which Chris was shot in his left arm by a friend/assistant from a distance of about five meters. In doing this performance piece, Chris was simultaneously criticizing, protesting and commenting on the Vietnam war through his own brand of personal artistic expression. Other early performances by Chris, some of which have existing video of are; Five day locker piece ( where Chris is kept inside a small locker for five days with nothing but a small amount of water), Deadman, B.C. Mexico, Fire Roll, TV Hijack, Transfixed (in which he nails his hands as if crucified to the back of a VW bug), Doomed and Honest Labor.
With Burden’s performances being labeled “Danger Pieces” Chris successfully strummed up controversy and dialogue. One of his most simple yet astounding performances took place inside of a museum. The piece called, ” Doomed,” had Chris laying motionless under a slanted piece of glass with a clock ticking close-by. The idea behind the piece was questioning where art ends and humanity begins. Who decides what art is holy and untouchable? Christopher was prepared to lay under the slanted sheet of glass for however long it took for the world to realize and offer help. Finally, a museum security guard, walked over to Chris and placed a small glass of water. Burden got up, broke the sheet of slanted glass and walked away after 45 hours.
This leads me back to that starving dog, famished, alone, tied to a post inside of some yuppies art gallery. Why didn’t anyone break two of those damn commandments of art? Thou shalt not interfere. Thou shalt not touch. There’s a line you have to cross in order to remain the person you want to be as an “artist” and as a “human.” Nothing is sacred and everything is holy, we should respect all living beings and stop respecting ideas and images higher than our own brothers and sisters.
Chris became a professor at the University of California, Los Angeles in 1978, and after 27 years of teaching he resigned due to a controversy and in his judgment a mishandling of a a performance piece by a student recalling one of his earlier pieces. The performance in question allegedly involved a loaded gun and Christopher was appalled that the University didn’t suspend the student or take action in any way, citing that school safety rules had been violated.
We as viewers trust the artist to make some profound statement without asking any questions. We see their creations, detached and sterile in the physical world, as a monologue. Perhaps the artist isn’t just saying something, they are trying to have a conversation. When the subject of this Art is something living, perhaps our own emotions or response shouldn’t be halted by some silent commandment on how you are supposed to act or interact. Society has chosen art as something not to be interfered with, but art like this is meant to push us to participate. Share, respond, speak up. Your voice and reaction are as valid as any artistic statement, so untie the dog and take it out of the damn gallery.
Subscribe to our RSS Feed And checkout our coffee competition to win a $30 gift voucher to your favourite coffee shop : click here
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
11 responses so far ↓
1 abe // Apr 29, 2008 at 10:42 pm
you’re an idiot. do your fucking research. and go back to art school while you’re at it.
2 abe are winnar! // Apr 30, 2008 at 11:21 am
Durpa durpa durpa
I’m honest Abe Lincoln and I can leave random snarky messages! They’re super relevant, too!
anonymity + an audience = making winners!
3 breanne sheehan // Apr 30, 2008 at 5:54 pm
Mein kampf, too. I just hope we can all stop talking about it and make this sort of absurdity illegal and punishable. Man, if i’m caught running a red light I have to go to court, so what gives? Really?
4 Daryl // Apr 30, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Hey there it’s me.
When I first heard about all this dog starving business I was rather appalled. As much as I believe in the dogma that art should make a statement instead of just “look pretty” I couldn’t wrap my mind around what possessed this man to do this.
After a little snooping around on teh interwebs I found that they had fed and watered the dog when the museum was closed, and the dog itself, which was previously left for dead on the streets, was actually under better care than it would have been otherwise.
If people had known that, the art would have been compromised and lost a lot of meaning. He does seem to go for shock appeal with a lot of his work, however if you look back on previous projects you will find that he has always kept certain safeguards in place. This piece in particular was meant to offend and shock while simultaneously bringing light to a few things, specifically starving dogs in his hometown and the hypocrisy of human beings.
Did you hear about the girl from Yale who did the abortion art? Same sort of thing.
5 Steven // Apr 30, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Hey Daryl,
Thank you for the insightful and thoughtful critique of the article. I dug around on the net too and couldn’t really substantiate one way or another about the dog being mistreated or well-fed. I found this site…. http://www.snopes.com/critters/crusader/vargas.asp
to be the most unbiased on the subject. So I just went with what was best for the article in terms of Chris Burden and the parallel between art, holiness and untouchablility. For me that was what I was really trying to portray in the short article.
And yes, I did hear about the lady who tried to have an abortion and I guess she had a miscarriage or something and smeared her blood on some sheets and hung them up, pretty intense. Which reminds me of Harmony Korine actually trying to impregnate Chloe Sevigny for Julien- Donkey Boy, shooting in the style of a Dogme 95 film, he was shooting blanks instead apparently, they had to use a fake belly.
6 Daryl // May 1, 2008 at 2:22 pm
It’s just infuriating, the sheer ignorance of all involved or trying to become involved with this thing. If seeing starving animals is so bothersome, why not go out and donate your time to your local animal shelter, or if you’re a fat contented American house-cat why not donate money to the WSPA or something similar? Instead, all people can think about is attacking the artist who brought this very real problem to light in the first place. The internet is full of warriors for the cause - there are petitions and blogs all over the place - but in the real world I wonder how much these people are actually doing to help animals in need in their OWN communities? Probably not too much. Hypocrites, all of them.
I haven’t seen Dogme 95 but I wanted to watch it after seeing my first Harmony Korine film, Gummo. That’s a weird one. The miscarriage girl from Yale also didn’t actually have a miscarriage, that’s why I brought it up. Like Guillermo Vargas’s work, it too was staged, or a “hoax”. Here is another of Vargas’s worx:
http://www.publico.es/resources/archivos/2007/12/8/119712443958320071208-806379dn.jpg
7 me // May 1, 2008 at 6:11 pm
speak for yourself Darryl. People who actually care about animals do what everyone on this planet should be doing.
8 Heidy // May 1, 2008 at 6:38 pm
Whoa…Darryl…your comment is a bit insulting…
Are you there 24/7 to see what people do in their spare time? I’ll tell you who the real hypocrites are…people who say they love and care about animals and then have them for a meal just to satisfy their palate. are u one of those? What’s even more ridiculous is that this guy is even considered an “artist” . That makes me sick to my stomach. And if its really true that he did this to “shed light on a situation” , there are so many ways for him to do it…instead of exploiting the animal. Animal exploitation is a form of animal abuse. He didn’t have to make a spectacle of it. True animal activists will “attack” anyone …be it so called “artists”, real artists, even the pope if they are abusing a defenseless creature. Please dont comment on issues you have little knowledge about.
9 Steven // May 2, 2008 at 12:46 pm
hey Daryl,
cool I’ll check out more of vargas’ work.. yeah I heard that the miscarriage ladies work might have been staged as well, to strum up thought and dialogue on abortion issues. There was a good article in newsweek the other day, lets see if I still have it….it talks about a few of the “shock” artists working today….http://www.newsweek.com/id/134309?GT1=43002
it seems your comment strummed up some serious attention from some people.
10 Daryl // May 2, 2008 at 5:24 pm
Hello Heidy. First off, my name is Daryl. One R. Like Daryl Hannah.
No, I’m not an animal rights activist, although I have done work for certain groups in the past. Have you? An example. Five years ago I stood in front of a local KFC with a group of people as we tried to tell others of the cruelties which were, back then, very real and happening in many of the “chicken factories” KFC was purchasing their product from. We handed out pamphlets (they half-heartedly leafed through them before dropping it on the sidewalk), tried talking to people (they walked by, heads down), one of us was even in a bloody chicken suit. NO. ONE. Cared. Adding insult to injury, someone even threw a couple drumsticks at us as they sped out of the drive thru.
This is why I can appreciate what Vargas as done. The way I see it, Vargas is also an animal activist, albeit in a more extreme way. If you look at the link I posted in the comment above you will see another one of his works - humans in tiny cages, it really puts things into perspective. He figured out how to get people to acknowledge something he saw as a problem in his community. He is also an artist. Whether you consider him to be one or not does not change that fact.
I don’t see why my eating habits are ANY of your concern, but I will say I very rarely eat meat due to gall bladder problems. You say that true animal activists “attack” anyone? I’m guessing you consider yourself to be one of these “true activists” judging from your barrage of ad-hominem attacks. You self-righteously admonish me for my own personal views and say that I should not talk of issues I have no knowledge about HOWEVER the issue here is the artist in question and it seems to me like you have absolutely no knowledge about him or any of his works.
Thanks for the link, Steven. I first began getting into shock art first for its controversial qualities with artists like Chris Ofili and Damien Hirst but it really does seem to have lasting appeal. If art does not spark conversation or debate, then what’s the point?
11 Heidy // May 3, 2008 at 11:03 am
You say you’ve done research on this but you obviously didn’t do any research at all on animal abuse. The dog didn’t consent to participate in the experiment…which is animal abuse. Animals, are not ours to wear, experiment on, use for entertainment, or eat. This is PETA’s mission statement and each member takes it very seriously. I understand not everyone will give up meat, and I dont agree with everything PETA does, but they do get alot done. You must think you are God since you think you have an ability to see what animal activists do when thyre not speaking out against animal abuse. And another thing is that if someone sees an animal in pain…speaking up about it is enough! You are no one to say how much more we should do or how much less. If you don’t like the mass bulletins or petition requests, its really simple Daryl: don’t open them up! look the other way.
Is this art just because its in a museum/gallery?
how then, do you define talent? the point is, that this is not art, and the “artist” did not “shed some light on the situation”
even if the dog was fed and cared for after hours, that is still wrong. Dogs need companionship, love and attention, a good home….at all times, not just after hours. With that said, I have a couple of words of advice for you:
Don’t make assumptions of people, don’t pretend to know what you’re talking about, and think twice before insulting animal activists around the world, including me, a member of an organization with well over 2 million supporters.
Leave a Comment