http://www.quodlibetica.com/what-does-it-mean-to-kill-an-animal-in-the-name-of-art/ Writing. Arts. Criticism. Thu, 26 Jan 2012 07:50:47 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 http://www.quodlibetica.com/what-does-it-mean-to-kill-an-animal-in-the-name-of-art/comment-page-1/#comment-243 Imani Sat, 03 Jul 2010 02:06:51 +0000 http://www.quodlibetica.com/?p=555#comment-243 When I read the beginning of this article I was sick in the stomach. Murdering an animal for art just seemed wrong. Then I thought about how we murder animals for food .We humans have to eat. So why am I so compelled to label this as an inhumane act. Maybe because the animals we eat are not the animals we keep as house pets. Maybe because the Humane Society of America constantly show sad commercials of abused animals on TV? No, but when I saw 'masturbating on the dead animal'...I knew Teemo Mäki must have not thought this would be called art. Art.You know, as in the product of human creativity, the creation of beauty and awe, and/or the works of nature. As I read on I did see some things I hadn't thought of. For example, “Why am I so active towards this, when I myself have watched people dying for the sake of War? Is it in my human nature to be negligent towards violence when it causes humans to die, but when it is towards animals all of a sudden I am sympathetic? Mäki's argument (and possible plan) did make a point." In short, the article did give me a new perspective as if I was at the gallery…IS killing a cat in the name of art still killing a cat or is killing a cat in the name of art just drawing attention to the hidden perspective? When I read the beginning of this article I was sick in the stomach. Murdering an animal for art just seemed wrong. Then I thought about how we murder animals for food .We humans have to eat. So why am I so compelled to label this as an inhumane act. Maybe because the animals we eat are not the animals we keep as house pets. Maybe because the Humane Society of America constantly show sad commercials of abused animals on TV? No, but when I saw ‘masturbating on the dead animal’…I knew Teemo Mäki must have not thought this would be called art. Art.You know, as in the product of human creativity, the creation of beauty and awe, and/or the works of nature.
As I read on I did see some things I hadn’t thought of. For example, “Why am I so active towards this, when I myself have watched people dying for the sake of War? Is it in my human nature to be negligent towards violence when it causes humans to die, but when it is towards animals all of a sudden I am sympathetic? Mäki’s argument (and possible plan) did make a point.”
In short, the article did give me a new perspective as if I was at the gallery…IS killing a cat in the name of art still killing a cat or is killing a cat in the name of art just drawing attention to the hidden perspective?

]]>