 Efrain Alvarado says: A Catholic Church spokesman said: "One wonders whether the organisers would have been quite as willing to have the Koran defaced". A Catholic Church spokesman said: "One wonders whether the organisers would have been quite as willing to have the Koran defaced".A classic case of "fatwa envy" the art exhibit sounds interesting and thought provoking, no? "Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg (nobel prize winner and world renound physicist) Popped for the comments.  the art exhibit sounds interesting and thought provoking, no?Sure it's thought provoking in many ways, but it certainly isn't art. Art should be inspiring towards beauty and truth. Defacing and ridiculing others sacred objects is the opposite of what art should be. "The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried."- G.K. Chesterton Art should be inspiring towards beauty and truth. Defacing andThe purpose of art is to provoke an emotional response, positive and negative. Beautiful art stirs up a sense of awe and wonder at the beauty of it while negative art is for pure shock value. It's still ART! Nah, these days pretty much anyone can do some dumb shit and call it art. This is what I would call "dumb shit." Art used to involve talent... stuffing paper down one's panties doesn't require any talent whatsoever, nor does subjecting a book to graffiti. Also it seems to me that it's kind of a cop out to call something art simply because it's "thought provoking." It doesn't really mean anything. If it didn't mean anything, it wouldn't provoke thought. these days pretty much anyone can do some dumb shit and call it art.Nobody said it was all GOOD art. But if it provokes an emotional reaction, it falls under the definition. Like I said Wiccan, that's a cop-out. No, that's an answer you don't want to hear. @jmatts78 Instead of bitching, make your own work of art that promotes your point of view. (Like that's going to happen.) Then tell us about it, when you gain an audience like the artist in the article. Nobody said it was all GOOD art. But if it provokes an emotional reaction, it falls under the definition.The feelings this work provokes are hatred, disdain, and animosity. It says plenty of a person who may consider it as good art. The feelings this work provokes are hatred, disdain, and animosityThat's an interesting reaction. But it is your reaction. In others it may provoke wry amusement, to some a contemplation of good and evil, who knows? A variety of reactions; emotional and thoughtful: you see, that's what art does. If that is the case, then it fails as art: There is one indubitable indication distinguishing real art from its counterfeit, namely, the infectiousness of art. If a man, without exercising effort and without altering his standpoint on reading, hearing, or seeing another man's work, experiences a mental condition which unites him with that man and with other people who also partake of that work of art, then the object evoking that condition is a work of art. And however poetical, realistic, effectful, or interesting a work may be, it is not a work of art if it does not evoke that feeling (quite distinct from all other feelings) of joy and of spiritual union with another (the author) and with... The word "art" comes from the same word that "artificial" comes from. Therefore, "art" is always "artificial," as in not natural, but instead, a "representation of Nature." Even abstract art is a "representation" of something natural, in that it represents an abstract thought. In this particular case the work of art is representing the thoughts and opinions of everyone that writes in the bible, plus the idea that "there is something lacking" in the bible as it is and should be amended. This work of art is great, because it causes so many different people to view it in such a wide variety of ways, including those that oppose the work itself. That's beautiful! Anyway, they have put it in a glass case now to stop people writing in it. Aww, in essence, destroying the work of art as it was intended to be. |
View the Top Clips from July 25, 2009
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
New from the makers of Clipmarks: Amplify.com - Don't just share the news...Amplify it!
|
|||||||||||||
