I actually think the art is pretty cool. To me its a statement on the fine line we're walking on in respect to cloning and gene manipulation. I wouldn't be surprised if they are using stolen children somewhere to do these genetic tests but I don't think that means the artist condones it but rather it is a form of shock art to get people aware and talking of the very controversial topic. Just a thought don't kill me over it.
How many variations do we need to awaken to her concern, and for her to finally realize her core purpose of creating public awareness. This makes me wonder - how many ways can she depict a sickeningly- deformed, animalized, sexualized, mutilated, semi-human being, and continue to draw a crowd? This topic isn't new, she just found a way to make it work for her. And it obviously is, as she's getting plenty of attention, for doing the same thing over and over again. And, somebody MUST be PAYING for it. Creating that art looks time-consuming and expensive. Call me a skeptic, but her art doesn't seem mass-market friendly AT ALL.
She been creating pieces that feature these creatures - hundreds of them - for more than ten years of her professional career. Seems like overkill, and not all that evolved. I find it hard to believe, that anyone who takes in her work goes running off, bent on learning truth about biotechnology, gene therapy, or any complex medical issues.
People are buying it though, do we blame her for catering to her market. I know that if I was making really good money I would keep producing. Now if it a trend started to pop up that people buying my artwork were caught in nefarious activities, then I might change my style. Every artist yearns to have a niche of their own though
I don't blame her, because - 1) I like money, 2) I like to earn money by producing art, and 3) I don't know what what's in her head. I haven't found anything current, regarding her intent with these "human/pig-monster" sculptures. It would be nice to think that she had it in her, to find out if her market is primarily criminal. I would think she'd have heard a little about it by now, but maybe not.
I know, a lot of people like a good freak show, even if I don't. My opinion, it would be awfully depressing to make this my life's work, but that's just me. So that said, I admit, I MOSTLY question her, and the fact that's she's still producing these things - because I wonder who pays for her time and the materials, just so she can keep producing variations on, essentially, the same thing so prolifically. If look hard enough, I can probably find some answers to questions, so maybe I'll do that.
view the rest of the comments →
dougG ago
I actually think the art is pretty cool. To me its a statement on the fine line we're walking on in respect to cloning and gene manipulation. I wouldn't be surprised if they are using stolen children somewhere to do these genetic tests but I don't think that means the artist condones it but rather it is a form of shock art to get people aware and talking of the very controversial topic. Just a thought don't kill me over it.
rooting4redpillers ago
How many variations do we need to awaken to her concern, and for her to finally realize her core purpose of creating public awareness. This makes me wonder - how many ways can she depict a sickeningly- deformed, animalized, sexualized, mutilated, semi-human being, and continue to draw a crowd? This topic isn't new, she just found a way to make it work for her. And it obviously is, as she's getting plenty of attention, for doing the same thing over and over again. And, somebody MUST be PAYING for it. Creating that art looks time-consuming and expensive. Call me a skeptic, but her art doesn't seem mass-market friendly AT ALL.
She been creating pieces that feature these creatures - hundreds of them - for more than ten years of her professional career. Seems like overkill, and not all that evolved. I find it hard to believe, that anyone who takes in her work goes running off, bent on learning truth about biotechnology, gene therapy, or any complex medical issues.
All that - and I didn't even scratch you. :)
dougG ago
People are buying it though, do we blame her for catering to her market. I know that if I was making really good money I would keep producing. Now if it a trend started to pop up that people buying my artwork were caught in nefarious activities, then I might change my style. Every artist yearns to have a niche of their own though
rooting4redpillers ago
I don't blame her, because - 1) I like money, 2) I like to earn money by producing art, and 3) I don't know what what's in her head. I haven't found anything current, regarding her intent with these "human/pig-monster" sculptures. It would be nice to think that she had it in her, to find out if her market is primarily criminal. I would think she'd have heard a little about it by now, but maybe not.
I know, a lot of people like a good freak show, even if I don't. My opinion, it would be awfully depressing to make this my life's work, but that's just me. So that said, I admit, I MOSTLY question her, and the fact that's she's still producing these things - because I wonder who pays for her time and the materials, just so she can keep producing variations on, essentially, the same thing so prolifically. If look hard enough, I can probably find some answers to questions, so maybe I'll do that.