Comments on: ‘Piss Christ’ Photographer’s Work Destroyed. Is Vandalism Art? http://www.danharlow.com/blog/2007/10/10/piss-christ-photographers-work-destroyed-is-vandalism-art/ L'art de la vie Wed, 07 Jan 2009 08:57:42 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2 By: David http://www.danharlow.com/blog/2007/10/10/piss-christ-photographers-work-destroyed-is-vandalism-art/#comment-663 David Sun, 02 Dec 2007 05:22:22 +0000 http://www.danharlow.com/blog/2007/10/10/piss-christ-photographers-work-destroyed-is-vandalism-art/#comment-663 "...there are plenty of people who do not want to have to live in a world where long standing beliefs and values are freely challenged in public." I can't believe that anyone would actually write this line. Have you ever considered that any freedoms that you have now have arisen ONLY because daring people have challenged long standing beliefs and values? And they challenged them in public. “…there are plenty of people who do not want to have to live in a world where long standing beliefs and values are freely challenged in public.”

I can’t believe that anyone would actually write this line. Have you ever considered that any freedoms that you have now have arisen ONLY because daring people have challenged long standing beliefs and values? And they challenged them in public.

]]> By: admin http://www.danharlow.com/blog/2007/10/10/piss-christ-photographers-work-destroyed-is-vandalism-art/#comment-370 admin Wed, 10 Oct 2007 23:01:08 +0000 http://www.danharlow.com/blog/2007/10/10/piss-christ-photographers-work-destroyed-is-vandalism-art/#comment-370 Matt: There is little thugs *do* understand, yet they have a voice and usually that voice speaks from the end of a gun. Scary stuff when you think about it. Imagine how threatened they must feel to turn that fear back towards the artist? Art is a powerful weapon even today in a world of fast food and bad television sitcoms. Matt:

There is little thugs *do* understand, yet they have a voice and usually that voice speaks from the end of a gun.

Scary stuff when you think about it. Imagine how threatened they must feel to turn that fear back towards the artist?

Art is a powerful weapon even today in a world of fast food and bad television sitcoms.

]]> By: Matt http://www.danharlow.com/blog/2007/10/10/piss-christ-photographers-work-destroyed-is-vandalism-art/#comment-369 Matt Wed, 10 Oct 2007 22:54:02 +0000 http://www.danharlow.com/blog/2007/10/10/piss-christ-photographers-work-destroyed-is-vandalism-art/#comment-369 This opens up a whole other discussion but I think any good artist creates by nature and depending on the type of society the artist lives in he/she gets drawn into certain circles. Yes, they are often elitist circles. But any true artist - my <a href="http://www.veshi.com/blog/2007/07/peter_macchiarini_steps.html" rel="nofollow">grandfather </a>was one - just does the work and the elitists come out of the woodwork glomming onto the work [and/or buying it]. It's too bad that elitism is in play. But sometimes that elitism is just education viewed as elitism. The thugs don't understand that. This opens up a whole other discussion but I think any good artist creates by nature and depending on the type of society the artist lives in he/she gets drawn into certain circles. Yes, they are often elitist circles. But any true artist - my grandfather was one - just does the work and the elitists come out of the woodwork glomming onto the work [and/or buying it]. It’s too bad that elitism is in play. But sometimes that elitism is just education viewed as elitism. The thugs don’t understand that.

]]> By: admin http://www.danharlow.com/blog/2007/10/10/piss-christ-photographers-work-destroyed-is-vandalism-art/#comment-367 admin Wed, 10 Oct 2007 22:07:42 +0000 http://www.danharlow.com/blog/2007/10/10/piss-christ-photographers-work-destroyed-is-vandalism-art/#comment-367 Matt: I agree with what you say. I don't think vandalism is ever a viable option. Yet the people who are upset by controversial art are typically not the sort of people capable of creating fine art. These are usually under educated folks who, though they may know how to draw or play an instrument do not lead a lifestyle conducive to pure artistic expression. Expression for these people is typically more base and physically emotive (think head banging). Their art is either a picture of a sunset or Jesus, a heavy metal or classic rock album and their Grandmother's needlepoint. Now don't get me wrong because I don't want to come across more elitist that I already am, but we are dealing with a group of people who don't think about art, they only react to it because reaction (not action like you talk about) is all they know. What I'm getting at is ultimately the elitism of art over these "commoners". Even when these thugs are not tearing up a gallery, we still look down on them for being racist, ignorant and even poor. Art is constantly making value judgments about the lifestyles of those less fortunate to have a good liberal arts education and upbringing. The type of art Mr. Serrano creates is flat out not understood by many of these people and so they react with the only "art" they know - violence. Now I don't want to make excuses for these thugs, but I am interested in how and why art effects people the way it does and also if art is really just a pastime of the elite and cynical. I think it's valid to think about at least. Matt:

I agree with what you say. I don’t think vandalism is ever a viable option.

Yet the people who are upset by controversial art are typically not the sort of people capable of creating fine art. These are usually under educated folks who, though they may know how to draw or play an instrument do not lead a lifestyle conducive to pure artistic expression. Expression for these people is typically more base and physically emotive (think head banging). Their art is either a picture of a sunset or Jesus, a heavy metal or classic rock album and their Grandmother’s needlepoint.

Now don’t get me wrong because I don’t want to come across more elitist that I already am, but we are dealing with a group of people who don’t think about art, they only react to it because reaction (not action like you talk about) is all they know.

What I’m getting at is ultimately the elitism of art over these “commoners”. Even when these thugs are not tearing up a gallery, we still look down on them for being racist, ignorant and even poor. Art is constantly making value judgments about the lifestyles of those less fortunate to have a good liberal arts education and upbringing. The type of art Mr. Serrano creates is flat out not understood by many of these people and so they react with the only “art” they know - violence.

Now I don’t want to make excuses for these thugs, but I am interested in how and why art effects people the way it does and also if art is really just a pastime of the elite and cynical.

I think it’s valid to think about at least.

]]> By: Matt http://www.danharlow.com/blog/2007/10/10/piss-christ-photographers-work-destroyed-is-vandalism-art/#comment-365 Matt Wed, 10 Oct 2007 21:50:58 +0000 http://www.danharlow.com/blog/2007/10/10/piss-christ-photographers-work-destroyed-is-vandalism-art/#comment-365 You do have a provocative blog and that's a good thing. Other than my viceral reaction to the vandalism of someone else's art work my main objection was about the artist having respect for other's beliefs. My short answer is no. My longer answer would be: no except maybe if the beliefs are purposely offensive and violent in nature to the point that they actually cause physical damage. Meaning the Neo-Nazi work here. I think galleries, museums, distributors, exhibitors, cities etc <em>might </em>want to consider the beliefs of others. After all they often try to please everyone. But not artists. And if someone's work is really offensive [in a racists way for instance] then most galleries will stay away. Andres Serrano's work is provocative, yes, and maybe he wanted to disturb people. But, my goodness, he should not have to take into consideration how others feel. How others feel is up to them. And if they don't like the work [or the idea of the work] then they should simply ignore it. Or maybe create something else as an answer. Vandalism is not the right answer. You do have a provocative blog and that’s a good thing. Other than my viceral reaction to the vandalism of someone else’s art work my main objection was about the artist having respect for other’s beliefs. My short answer is no. My longer answer would be: no except maybe if the beliefs are purposely offensive and violent in nature to the point that they actually cause physical damage. Meaning the Neo-Nazi work here. I think galleries, museums, distributors, exhibitors, cities etc might want to consider the beliefs of others. After all they often try to please everyone. But not artists. And if someone’s work is really offensive [in a racists way for instance] then most galleries will stay away.
Andres Serrano’s work is provocative, yes, and maybe he wanted to disturb people. But, my goodness, he should not have to take into consideration how others feel. How others feel is up to them. And if they don’t like the work [or the idea of the work] then they should simply ignore it. Or maybe create something else as an answer. Vandalism is not the right answer.

]]>