Is Road Kill Art?

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 06 June 2005   #16
Originally Posted by lordmachuca: she uses road kill in her art. It works.
http://www.customcreaturetaxidermy....sy/fantasy.html. made me think twice about it.

OK, having seens these pictures on a screen is different from reality. I don't think I can be in one room with this work, it's just cruel. Is it art? I don't care, it's just disgusting to my taste.
 
Old 06 June 2005   #17
Originally Posted by ashakarc: It's absurd to compare the work of an art student to Gas chambres..that doesn't give any merits to the argument.

As Nate mentioned, we haven't seen the work, how could we judge it? But if we want to build a wall around what art is, then it is a different discussion.

Dead animals are being stuffed with preservative materials and being sold in many places around the world, exhibited in museums for learning purposes, a form of art that has been practiced by older tribes in more primitive societies, it's been practiced along history, now suddenly it's wrong!!
It is disgusting to my taste, and pathetic, but doesn't make it wrong.What is wrong is killing the animal for pathetic reasons like art. If that student killed the animal to use its parts for a project, then yes, this goes beyond this discussion, and there is no point of questioning the artistic merits anymore.


I agree ! Just yesterday, I found a dead dragonfly that I intend to place in a glass display case. These creatures really are fascinating to look at, and give a new appreciation for the complexity and beauty of the creature.
What would make it wrong would have been if I killed the dragonfly just to get my three seconds worth of " Wow that's really pretty !" in.
I do think that art such as this tends to turn the death of these animals into more of a joke - it would be like digging up your dead grandmothers corpse and dressing her as a clown.

Concerning the Nazi 'art ' topic, the Nazis DID create "art" from people. Do the research. They used the tanned leather from the dead to make lampshades, and other trinkets.
People sometimes loose the realization that leather is skin - be it from a cow or a human bieng.

Last edited by Vegan : 06 June 2005 at 09:09 PM.
 
Old 06 June 2005   #18
Originally Posted by Vegan: [/color]
Concerning the Nazi 'art ' topic, the Nazis DID create art from people. Do the research. They used the tanned leather from the dead to make lampshades, and other trinkets.
People sometimes loose the realization that leather is skin - be it from a cow or a human bieng.

Sadly, I am aware of this most ugly crime of all, but you are putting a cruel definition to what is art!!
 
Old 06 June 2005   #19
Two different artists

But both use roadkill. How is it cruel to use roadkill in art? Cruel to the viewers sensibilities? Who's making you watch it?

What I'd love people to do is stop mixing art and good. Art is lots of things, making a show of carcasses doesn't fit into most people's idea of good. I don't see a connection between these two.

And didn't you guys notice that the Nazis were dragged into this because of a fuzzy comment in the thread, not because of the art itself?
 
Old 06 June 2005   #20
Originally Posted by Kargokultti: But both use roadkill. How is it cruel to use roadkill in art? Cruel to the viewers sensibilities? Who's making you watch it?

Precisely, viewers sensibility. What is art without a viewer. I know, one would say, 'but there are other viewers who enjoy such work', fine with me, as long as it's not publicly thrown at my face. But you have a point there ;]
 
Old 06 June 2005   #21
Let's see ....a leather jacket,shoe..whatever (design) can win a fashion award ,that is created by a some recognized world famous fashion designer.
Some dead animal parts used in a different context..so i guess it depends on your perspective and sensibilities.Eskimoes use bones for spears..its a craft for survival.
Heck i think its more a efficient use for a dried carcass than most people can come up with...
now if he had folded up a bit of the flat stuff into a really interesting origami thingy maybe it might tip off the edge into artistic...extra points i would say.
__________________


 
Old 06 June 2005   #22
Originally Posted by CLONEOPS: Let's see ....a leather jacket,shoe..whatever (design) can win a fashion award ,that is created by a some recognized world famous fashion designer.
Some dead animal parts used in a different context..so i guess it depends on your perspective and sensibilities.Eskimoes use bones for spears..its a craft for survival.
Heck i think its more a efficient use for a dried carcass than most people can come up with...
now if he had folded up a bit of the flat stuff into a really interesting origami thingy maybe it might tip off the edge into artistic...extra points i would say.

Cloneops, may be you are implying that some of us think it is absolutely cruel to "kill" animals for whatever reason. If so, then NO. What I personally meant is to kill for the sake of "art".
But, for survival purposes, I wouldn't redicule myself and say please don't kill! Heck, that moment, there is little room for reason and good taste. We are made of bones and flesh after all and more accurately, Protein hungry creatures
 
Old 06 June 2005   #23
curators

you guys are missing one point: who decides what is art or not these days are those few people that choose to place this or that piece inside a museum.

since duchamp, and many others, tore down all kinds of walls that defined "art", it seems that, for the "art system", roadkill is art.

but we still can have a question in the issue: is it art for you?

i would agree with nathellion, iŽd have to see it first.



eks
 
Old 06 June 2005   #24
It's too bad animals can't make art from the remains of people that came to a sticky end based off of their own self absorbed technologies.
__________________
sketch blog
 
Old 06 June 2005   #25
Originally Posted by stepington: It's too bad animals can't make art from the remains of people that came to a sticky end based off of their own self absorbed technologies.


You can probably get pretty creative with cremated ashes. Just think about all the colored sand in bottles at ocean tourist areas.

My environmental science teacher used to give us extra credit towards our grades if we brought in road kill. Maybe he was making art too.
 
Old 06 June 2005   #26
Luckily we've left all sorts of monuments to our stupidity. I think these will last a good while after we get extinguished. The Eiffel tower, some pyramids, and cigarette boxes saying how lethal smoking is and what not. I'm quite sure one or two aliens will be ROFLMAO at the sight of it all. Too bad they'll be the ones in charge of exterminating the human race, because it goes without saying us humans can't be set loose once again after all this. There's no telling what kind of hell we have in store with our minds actively bent on revenge. And these aliens, they might think we got kind of cute and cuddly after getting back our fur and clubs and all.
__________________
modelling practice #1
 
Old 06 June 2005   #27
Originally Posted by XLNT 3d: You can probably get pretty creative with cremated ashes. Just think about all the colored sand in bottles at ocean tourist areas.

My environmental science teacher used to give us extra credit towards our grades if we brought in road kill. Maybe he was making art too.


hahaha ..remonds me of the story of some older lady who collected roadkill....and had a roadside meat-jerky stand....mmmh, maybe teacher taking in extra income too.
__________________



Last edited by CLONEOPS : 06 June 2005 at 12:59 AM.
 
Old 06 June 2005   #28
There is nothing new about using animals as the centre piece of an 'artwork' - I am not a big fan - esp. if the animal died or suffered cruely to become to object of someones 'art'.

Gord
__________________
My Studies

My Anatomy Thread

My Website


Good Facial Expressions Resource:

http://www.artnatomia.net/uk/artnatomy.html
 
Old 06 June 2005   #29
What about stuffed animals? I am referring to the real ones from taxidermy. You always see mooseheads and deer on the walls at hunting stores or in people's houses that are avid hunters. A friend of ours was a big game hunter and loved to bow fish off of fan boats. His house was decorated with wildlife he had killed. He ate all of them, but had some of them stuffed and setup scenery in his house. Like squirrels and stuff climbing around trees and stuff like that. He had no stuffed deer because he had a pet deer(saved it from wild dogs as a baby...ironic) that thought it was a dog.
 
Old 06 June 2005   #30
its true that duchamps fountain(see avatar) posed these sort of questions many moons ago, he did it in a typically irreverant and witty way, and its been done , its over! Duchamps readymades should have been the last word on it. why cant we move on? or indeed move back and put art once again into the hands of those who can actualy create with style and techique.

this conceptual rubbish has had its day and too many talentless people have used it to disguise their own lack of skills and innate artistic ability.
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.