One Sick Woman

[NY94J30]

Explanation:http://www.wetterlinggallery.c...r.htm

"One can, of course, choose to think that it is always wrong to kill animals in the name of art. That nothing can defend Nathalia Edenmont. But if you feel more doubtful, we would very much like to explain Nathalia's reasoning, and how we at Wetterling Gallery argue when we exhibit her art.

Art arouses thoughts and poses questions that are necessary. Nathalia's beautiful pictures are frightening in the same way that many other beautiful things hide some sort of suffering. One can enjoy beautiful exteriors, or one can go beneath the surface and find things that perhaps you do not want to know about. If Nathalia's pictures had been repugnant, it would have been easy to reject them. But now they are so beautiful - and the insight into the reality behind them gives rise to thoughts about people's shallowness and double standards. Many of us eat meat, wear leather or use make-up that has been tested on animals, without this arousing especially strong reactions. But when a picture shows a dead rabbit, all hell breaks loose. "

[gabossie]

But I am kind of shocked on her methods of obtaining these animals. Is it hard to obtain rabbits, cats, mice, chickens that are already dead? NO.The fact that she won't get them for free and that she gets them in some other way and then kills them is creepy.

Where did you read this? I didn't see anything that mentioned where she got them, other that she killed them in the most painless manner possible. For all we know, these could quite easily be animals from a shelter that were scheduled to be put down anyway.

[vicki]

Explanation:http://www.wetterlinggallery.c...r.htm

"One can, of course, choose to think that it is always wrong to kill animals in the name of art. That nothing can defend Nathalia Edenmont. But if you feel more doubtful, we would very much like to explain Nathalia's reasoning, and how we at Wetterling Gallery argue when we exhibit her art.

Art arouses thoughts and poses questions that are necessary. Nathalia's beautiful pictures are frightening in the same way that many other beautiful things hide some sort of suffering. One can enjoy beautiful exteriors, or one can go beneath the surface and find things that perhaps you do not want to know about. If Nathalia's pictures had been repugnant, it would have been easy to reject them. But now they are so beautiful - and the insight into the reality behind them gives rise to thoughts about people's shallowness and double standards. Many of us eat meat, wear leather or use make-up that has been tested on animals, without this arousing especially strong reactions. But when a picture shows a dead rabbit, all hell breaks loose. "

I read that but it doesn't justify it. I can't speak for everyone but I personally don't eat meat and I don't wear make up. The skincare products I use are all natural and not tested on animals, i.e. Burt's Bees products. I try not to buy leather and I never wear fur. If they made riding/hiking boots and saddles that were waterproof without leather, then I'd buy them but unfortunately for me, I need them for my hobbies. I think it's stupid and hypocritical of her to kill animals to arouse feelings and make people second guess themselves for eating animals. But that's just me.

[crzycav86]

I think you guys are forgetting about the artist's cultural background. In the former Soviet Union, do you think they really cared about animal rights? In most third world countries today, there are more important things to worry about.

Do you think the russians are looking at her artwork in disgust? Probably not. Only in the countries where the citizens have been conditioned to look down on such "cruelty" will the citizens actually care(ie: U.S). It's an issue of the viewers' cultural background, not a universal right or wrong.

My english teacher told us a story about a mountain lion the strayed from the mountains and entered the backyard of a house in the suburbs. The father went outside to fend off the beast, but he ended up getting mauled and died. The police went out in search of the lion, and eventually killed it.

After these events, a fundraiser was set up for the children that the man left behind(apparantly he was a single parent). It collected $3,000. Another collection was set up for the cubs that the dead lion left behind. It raised $30,000....

As far as the artwork goes, I think it's pretty neat. I just wanted to bring a different point of view to your attention..

[skydragoness]

Where did you read this? I didn't see anything that mentioned where she got them, other that she killed them in the most painless manner possible. For all we know, these could quite easily be animals from a shelter that were scheduled to be put down anyway.

You'd think if she got them from a shelter they'd be quick to point that out. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt at that.

[gabossie]

So your hobby of riding the back of one animal while wearing the skin of another is justified, but her hobby of photographing deceased animals is not? Both require the death of an animal for human enjoyment and interest. Double standard?

[skydragoness]

So your hobby of riding the back of one animal while wearing the skin of another is justified, but her hobby of photographing deceased animals is not? Both require the death of an animal for human enjoyment and interest. Double standard?

[gabossie]

You'd think if she got them from a shelter they'd be quick to point that out. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt at that.

I don't see why she would disclose where she got the animals, as it has no significance to the art piece. Infact, it would in my opinion, cheapen the effect if we all knew she got animals from the vet that were going to be killed anyway. It would make people more comfortable with it, when infact they shouldn't be. Why would it be ok for the vet to kill the animal but not for her to?

[vicki]

I don't get animals and kill them. The merchandise I purchase is already dead, processed, and treated. Plus, the leather I wear most likely comes from the discarded hide of the cow you ate for dinner last night.

[NY94J30]

VickiQuote »I don't get animals and kill them. The merchandise I purchase is already dead, processed, and treated. Plus, the leather I wear most likely comes from the discarded hide of the cow you ate for dinner last night. [/quote]I think that is very much the point of her exposition - you cherry pick what are good and bad use of animals, as if there were some transcendental right or wrong involved and as your choices aren't just that - your culturized and subjective thoughts.
Modified by NY94J30 at 11:26 PM 10/26/2004

[gabossie]

So it's okay because YOU didn't kill the cow? And as far as animal cruelty is concerned, the life and death of livestock is far more tortured and inhumane than that of those animals, assuming she put them down in a painless manor as the article mentions. Again, I don't really like the idea of killing the animals, but you're all sitting here calling her a psyco ***** because she called you on a double standard. For our culture, it's out of sight, out of mind. She brings it into site, and you all flip about something that you KNOW goes on every day, but you don't have to see.

[Jesda]

Eat, ride, wear, or become friends with an animal.

This art however is just a waste of its life.

[vicki]

So it's okay because YOU didn't kill the cow? And as far as animal cruelty is concerned, the life and death of livestock is far more tortured and inhumane than that of those animals, assuming she put them down in a painless manor as the article mentions. Again, I don't really like the idea of killing the animals, but you're all sitting here calling her a psyco ***** because she called you on a double standard. For our culture, it's out of sight, out of mind. She brings it into site, and you all flip about something that you KNOW goes on every day, but you don't have to see.

I've never called her a psycho *****. I just don't condone the killing of animals in art. I just think there are better alternative ways of expressing oneself than to kill and display animals. And I don't feel as though I am the personal cause of cows being killed. If these cows are being killed anyway to feed you carnivores then I am just using the leftovers efficiently. Also, a pair of boots lasts me a long time. You eat meat everyday which results in more deaths. :p

[NY94J30]

Jesda

Quote »Eat, ride, wear, or become friends with an animal.

This art however is just a waste of its life.[/quote]On what logical basis did you reach your conclusion? because that's where your sensibilities lie? or utility?

The former clearly has no bearing, and If the latter, I'd like to hear you elaborate.

[gabossie]

Yes I do, and such is the food chain, the cows eat that poor innocent grass too . But you again miss my point. Quote »I am just using the leftovers efficiently[/quote]The same COULD be said for her. If these animals were going to be killed anyway, she's just using the leftovers. the problem is she's using the leftovers in a manner which leaves them looking like an animal. Your boots will never look like a cow.

[vicki]

They wouldn;t be leftovers preinjection and killing. :p

This argument is going nowhere Greggie poo. I am going to agree to disagree.

[574-240sx]

my dog is now terrified of this lady. This lady thing a good pet is a dead stuffed one. I say this lady should keep to plush kind of animals.

[Jesda]

Jesda

On what logical basis did you reach your conclusion? because that's where your sensibilities lie? or utility?

The former clearly has no bearing, and If the latter, I'd like to hear you elaborate.

Consider your own death. If you served a productive purpose, would that not be more valuable than if you were shoved into a vase?

[NY94J30]

Consider your own death. If you served a productive purpose, would that not be more valuable than if you were shoved into a vase?

Who determines what is productive, there are many levels of productivty. Who's to say that my death as a vase wasn't prodcutive, maybe I stopped the atrocities in Darfur.

[s13sr20chris]

i wonder why she did not do it with people? hey we are all gonna die right? it sure would raise even more "interesting" questions! sometimes i wonder i our entertainment isnt out of control. maybe its because i dont have cable tv to desensitize myself. i dont know. art is funny stuff. my wife is an artist. she even has her ba in fine arts though she is now in law school. i think if she ever made something like that i would freak out. maybe thats my "double standard" but i think the "standard" is to not act like some kind of freak. really, is it so horrible to have "standard"s? i dont actually think it is a "double standard". the "standard" lies in the motivation. if your motivation is to freak people out and "all hell breaks out" then my "standard is not appeased. if its to feed you, make an honest living, or something thats different.

ill tell you what i tell my wife. you artists are wierd folk. how do i stamp this woman? SICK! [/fundamentalist rant]go ahead and say it. i know you want to call me some sort of closed minded nut. im a big boy; i can handle it.

[w1ngzer0]

i thought the thread was about vicki, for some reason >:P

[StrangeLove]

Hmm... so using a fake cat head is out of the question?

So, just because they are animals they deserve be mutilated? They can't defend themselves, so lets take advantage of them!

When we kill an animal for food we use it for other things as well. Cow for example, we use nearly every part of it. Nearly nothing goes to waste.

This woman needs to be committed

[Mr1der]

killing for art is stupid....

making an art of killing however...

[IvoryJ30t]

ok, and now the animal rights people are gonna get all uppety.

in all reality, who the hell cares? its a dead animal.

if you were to be killed by an animal, do you think the animal would have remorse or regret about killing you?? i think not.

[IvoryJ30t]

i could see and support the outrage if she was mass murdering animals for no reason, but to kill a few animals for art is nothing to get upset about.

im sure some of you have run over an animal or two in your car. road art.

i used to have a 5 1/2 foot male iguana. he was extremely territorial. i had him since he was 3 weeks old. i used to bring him home mice, rats, and hamsters from the pet store. when i let them loose, he would chase them down and kill them. quite a sight.

the point of this is that those animals would have died anyway. it made no difference.

this woman is not taking someones beloved pet and slaughtering them for no reason.

she is killing a single animal for the sake of a display. not all that different from the way that your cat would kill an animal it caught outside and present it to you as a gift.

[s13sr20chris]

man you guys are so surface. what i am saying is the killing of and animal is no big deal. thats life and it happens all day everyday. what im saying is that she did it for the wrong reason. right is right and wrong is wrong. how many times does not matter. what she did was wrong because it was just for shock value.

[NY94J30]

right is right and wrong is wrong.

Really? And who decides?

[SDRonEbay]

You see this cat on my shoulder...it's just an animal. It will die one day, just like I will. But it is not for me or any other person to determine when and how that cat dies. It's definitely not up to me to display the dead cat in a very $h!tty manner and call it art. I used to be an "artist." I hate the term now because so many people have turned art into a game of "who can shock who the most" and this proves it. Art is in essence an opinion of taste and de gustibus non disputandem est. But sometimes it's confused with lack of taste. This crap and plastination are nothing more than an early look into hell.

Wish I could have a little while with her...we'll make some art with a battery charger and 3" needles.

And if her or anyone wants to make art of my cat, I'll make art of their spleen.

[s13sr20chris]

Really? And who decides?

why do you ask? you know the answer.

[IvoryJ30t]

i wasnt condoning her behavior, i just thought that some of you people got way to upset about the dead animals.

things die. get over it.

what she was doing is another story. a little deranged, but not the atrocity that some make it out to be.