There's almost nothing to debunk at pizzagate.com. It's all opinions.
If they were to write as a simple of list of falsifiable items, I would take a crack at it. However, currently the way they having it would be a debate about meanings of certain facts.
However, they do have some stuff that is straight out wrong.
Louis Bourgeois's art is not inspired by Jeffrey Dahmer.
For one she did a series of Arches of Hysteria in various shapes and poses and I believe you could show this series was conceived before the Dahmer case and she is explicitly clear what the inspiration for these is.
For two, her work is simply not the same position as the Dahmer photo. The arms and legs are completely different.
The first arch she did, the body has no arms and no head and is far less arched. She did this as part of her Cells series which started in the 80's
Thirdly, the crime scene photos were not released at the time of Dahmer's trial, but year later. Which would mean her work was exhibited first.
However, they do have some stuff that is straight out wrong. Louis Bourgeois's art is not inspired by Jeffrey Dahmer. For one she did a series of Arches of Hysteria in various shapes and poses and I believe you could show this series was conceived before the Dahmer case and she is explicitly clear what the inspiration for these is. For two, her work is simply not the same position as the Dahmer photo. The arms and legs are completely different.
Louis Bourgeois completed the particular Arch of Hysteria sculpture in question (now owned by Tony Podesta) in 1993, approx. two years after Jeffrey Dahmer's arrest in 1991.
It takes little stretch of the imagination to visualize an acute similarity between this sculpture and Jeffrey Dahmer's victim, if that victim were lifted at the waist, and suspended in the air.
If you could provide documentation as to the date when that Dahmer victim photo was released, it would be helpful.
Louis Bourgeois completed the particular Arch of Hysteria sculpture in question in 1993
No. She exbhited the sculpture for the first time in 1993. We do not know when she completed it. The previous year she exhibited a different sculpture in this series.
It takes little stretch of the imagination to visualize an acute similarity between this sculpture and Jeffrey Dahmer's victim, if that victim were lifted at the waist, and suspended in the air.
A. The only evidence connecting Dahmer to Louis Bourgeois is imagination.
B. You are not saying anything here. All you're saying is we have two headless average size male figures. Any average sized man would look this way if suspended in this way. The version that came a year before looks like Dahmer's victim if you put him in a different position and removed his arms.
C. We actually know her inspiration because she has talked about it many times. It's the work of Charcot a French neurologist who studied hysterics and . Bourgeois made it a male figure to indicate that hysteria is not limited to woman. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Martin_Charcot
If you could provide documentation as to the date when that Dahmer victim photo was released, it would be helpful.
I can provide documentation that Louis Bougeois was working on her arches in 1989, two years before Dahmer was arrested and thus conclusively debunk this. This is a sketch of the first sculpture in this series. It's dated 1989.
https://www.moma.org/collection_lb/browse_results.php?object_id=70922
Also personally I would see nothing wrong if she was inspired by Dahmer. Lots of great art came from horrible things.
Picasso's Guernica, The Boomtown Rats's I Don't Like Mondays, Saving Private Ryan any painting of St. Sebastian, these are all works of art inspired by horrific things. You need not be a monster to appreciate them.
But the Dahmer -Bourgeois connection was always nonsense and relied on people not knowing that Louise Bourgeoise is a major, major artist.
2) Role in Pizzagate - It is not believed that Louise Bourgeois has any direct role. Rather, her work, Arch of Hysteria, as well as her prior works with themes of cannibalism, are discussedin relation to the mindset of art collector Tony Podesta.
Your last statement - But the Dahmer -Bourgeois connectionwas alwaysnonsense and relied on people not knowing that Louise Bourgeoise is a major, major artist - is straight out wrong. (And pretty funny, that you perceive yourself as so much more enlightened than everyone else.)
The Dahmer -Bourgeois connection was always due to Tony Podesta's interest and investment in her work - relevant to pizzagate as one more piece of information about the Tony Podesta art collection to add to the pile. On it's own, this Bourgeois sculpture would have no relevance to pizzagate at all.
I think that sculpture is monstrous, and brings nothing new, particularly insightful, or GOOD to the world. But that's just me, and even so, I think it's a FAR sight more agreeable than Tony Podesta's other art "treasures" - such as his art by Biljana Djurdjevic.
I've noticed one of the common traits among pizzagate believers is that they think of art as "decorations" rather than something meant to be expressive and intellectually stimulating, so they assume that if you are fond of some artwork it must be because you find it pleasant and enjoyable to look at, rather than because you find it moving or thoughtful or am important expression of an important issue.
view the rest of the comments →
Are_we_sure ago
There's almost nothing to debunk at pizzagate.com. It's all opinions. If they were to write as a simple of list of falsifiable items, I would take a crack at it. However, currently the way they having it would be a debate about meanings of certain facts.
However, they do have some stuff that is straight out wrong. Louis Bourgeois's art is not inspired by Jeffrey Dahmer.
For one she did a series of Arches of Hysteria in various shapes and poses and I believe you could show this series was conceived before the Dahmer case and she is explicitly clear what the inspiration for these is. For two, her work is simply not the same position as the Dahmer photo. The arms and legs are completely different.
The first arch she did, the body has no arms and no head and is far less arched. She did this as part of her Cells series which started in the 80's
Thirdly, the crime scene photos were not released at the time of Dahmer's trial, but year later. Which would mean her work was exhibited first.
rooting4redpillers ago
Louis Bourgeois completed the particular Arch of Hysteria sculpture in question (now owned by Tony Podesta) in 1993, approx. two years after Jeffrey Dahmer's arrest in 1991.
It takes little stretch of the imagination to visualize an acute similarity between this sculpture and Jeffrey Dahmer's victim, if that victim were lifted at the waist, and suspended in the air.
If you could provide documentation as to the date when that Dahmer victim photo was released, it would be helpful.
Are_we_sure ago
A. The only evidence connecting Dahmer to Louis Bourgeois is imagination. B. You are not saying anything here. All you're saying is we have two headless average size male figures. Any average sized man would look this way if suspended in this way. The version that came a year before looks like Dahmer's victim if you put him in a different position and removed his arms. C. We actually know her inspiration because she has talked about it many times. It's the work of Charcot a French neurologist who studied hysterics and . Bourgeois made it a male figure to indicate that hysteria is not limited to woman.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Martin_Charcot
Also personally I would see nothing wrong if she was inspired by Dahmer. Lots of great art came from horrible things. Picasso's Guernica, The Boomtown Rats's I Don't Like Mondays, Saving Private Ryan any painting of St. Sebastian, these are all works of art inspired by horrific things. You need not be a monster to appreciate them.
But the Dahmer -Bourgeois connection was always nonsense and relied on people not knowing that Louise Bourgeoise is a major, major artist.
rooting4redpillers ago
See The Pizzagate Wiki - Louis Bourgeois. The first two pieces of information provided on that wiki are:
Your last statement - But the Dahmer -Bourgeois connection was always nonsense and relied on people not knowing that Louise Bourgeoise is a major, major artist - is straight out wrong. (And pretty funny, that you perceive yourself as so much more enlightened than everyone else.)
The Dahmer -Bourgeois connection was always due to Tony Podesta's interest and investment in her work - relevant to pizzagate as one more piece of information about the Tony Podesta art collection to add to the pile. On it's own, this Bourgeois sculpture would have no relevance to pizzagate at all.
I think that sculpture is monstrous, and brings nothing new, particularly insightful, or GOOD to the world. But that's just me, and even so, I think it's a FAR sight more agreeable than Tony Podesta's other art "treasures" - such as his art by Biljana Djurdjevic.
Are_we_sure ago
There is no Dahmer-Bourgeois connection. None.
Biljana Djurdjevic's art is about man's inhumanity to man and growing up during a time of genocide. All her work is influenced by the Bosnian War.
whatonearth ago
I've noticed one of the common traits among pizzagate believers is that they think of art as "decorations" rather than something meant to be expressive and intellectually stimulating, so they assume that if you are fond of some artwork it must be because you find it pleasant and enjoyable to look at, rather than because you find it moving or thoughtful or am important expression of an important issue.