Plain cruel, please sign

Ah yes, good way to pass it off. Or not. I think peoples moral objection isn't that there are starving animals in the World, there are, that much is patently obvious and tragic. What the objection is about is the fact that this artist (and I'm using the term loosely) has profited from leaving a dog tied up to starve to death and that none of the visitors to the exhibit even seem to have questioned this.

I'm not trying to pass anything off. And you seem to be more angry at the patrons than the artist (quite rightly. I would imagine these people are the types of people who should pay most attention to the 'piece').
I'm not saying it's acceptable, I'm just saying that it goes a lot further in terms of impact than a dumbed down 3pm rspca advert with cosey celebrity voiceover. Impact=Coverage (as displayed by this thread), and coverage is a good thing :) (brings about awareness!). Ideally all of those apposed to starving animals should go and adopt a starving animal themselves (seems quite hypocritical to me that a person could object to one starving animal [be it a natural of profitable act] and turn a blind eye to thousands of locally sheltered animals waiting on a shot of sodium pentothal). In reality the dog was probably fed of an evening anyway!.
 
if someone did this in the UK, he'd be banned from even looking at an Animal ever again, straight after the RSPCA and the public beat the **** out of him.
 
Why didn't anyone do that when it was out on the streets?

because it wasnt being denied its freedom and being denied food. At least out in the street it can go where it wants and attempt to survive, this guy took away all chances it had of survival.

Out in the world the dog, and everyone, is completely responsible for themselves. We should only have to intervene if someone is doing wrong to another. Now dont get me wrong, i dont think we should just ignore people in need of help. But a dog out on the streets and a dog being kept prisoner are completely different things.

(Did the people that viewed the exhibition actually know the dog was being ill treated? Like not being fed and such, im sure if people were aware at the time the dog was being tortured they would have done something)
 
well obviously all the discussion in this thread is under the assumption that it was not fed and died from neglect/torture

if the guy did feed it and all then fair enough, still not really keen on him keepin it tied up for so long tho.
 
If he's allowed to do this again I would actually pay for my air fare over to said exhibition and come hell and high water I'd get that poor dog out of there.

I can't describe how angry that has made me feel, I'm literally seething with rage at that 'artist' and the organisers of the event who allowed it, as well as the idiots that view such atrocities.

If you think I'm a keyboard warrior when I say this, fine, but if I ever saw the artists responsible for this, I wouldn't hesitate to give him a damn good kicking. It'd be worth the time custody just to make him feel a tiny percentage of the pain that poor dog went through.

It's not as if there aren't enough starving people and animals in this world that we're trying to save. For him to do this is completely and utterly barbaric, ******* *****.
 
If he's allowed to do this again I would actually pay for my air fare over to said exhibition and come hell and high water I'd get that poor dog out of there.

I can't describe how angry that has made me feel, I'm literally seething with rage at that 'artist' and the organisers of the event who allowed it, as well as the idiots that view such atrocities.

If you think I'm a keyboard warrior when I say this, fine, but if I ever saw the artists responsible for this, I wouldn't hesitate to give him a damn good kicking. It'd be worth the time custody just to make him feel a tiny percentage of the pain that poor dog went through.

It's not as if there aren't enough starving people and animals in this world that we're trying to save. For him to do this is completely and utterly barbaric, ******* *****.


well apparently he is going to do it again, get saving for your air fare
 
Do people read the whole thread these days? Apparently the dog wasn't allowed to die. It was fed regularly -- however the people visiting the gallery didn't know that, the only thing they had to go on was what the display plaque stated...that this dog was going to starve to death. Yet still they did nothing.
 
Do people read the whole thread these days? Apparently the dog wasn't allowed to die. It was fed regularly -- however the people visiting the gallery didn't know that, the only thing they had to go on was what the display plaque stated...that this dog was going to starve to death. Yet still they did nothing.

It would help if people actually read the whole thread yes.

I think it's fantastic art. As CBS said on the first page, it forces people to think and not just the people who were there. It makes a very powerful point about society, as said previously, people are quick to form strong opinion but aren't prepared to act.
 
If he's allowed to do this again I would actually pay for my air fare over to said exhibition and come hell and high water I'd get that poor dog out of there.

I can't describe how angry that has made me feel, I'm literally seething with rage at that 'artist' and the organisers of the event who allowed it, as well as the idiots that view such atrocities.

If you think I'm a keyboard warrior when I say this, fine, but if I ever saw the artists responsible for this, I wouldn't hesitate to give him a damn good kicking. It'd be worth the time custody just to make him feel a tiny percentage of the pain that poor dog went through.

It's not as if there aren't enough starving people and animals in this world that we're trying to save. For him to do this is completely and utterly barbaric, ******* *****.

You go for it, but I'm saying keyboard warrior until you do.
 
Back
Top Bottom