that a contemporary artists' instalation consisted on destroying gold fish on a blender, is that true??? I think it's an urban myth or something, I really doubt anyone will do that. I'm sure people in here are going to know.

lol

he put live goldfish in a blender and let the the viewer decide if they should be blended.

a simple googling could give you the name of the aritst and pictures of the installation: http://www.evaristti.com/work/instal...LENA/index.htm

but were they blended??????????

yes, i do believe so

ugggh, I don't think that's art. It's just sadistic cruelty. There is a line you know.

the fact that this supposed artists can get away with it bothers me. Yes he posed an ethical question and he made his point across, but seriously was it necessary?? I don't need to have a blender with a goldfish in it to realize human beings have power over life that they somehow use and abuse. You just need to see the news and the people that rationally chose to end someone else's life, or do it by accident. Killing these goldfish is unecessary and it's kinda hypocritical because if it had been a dog or worse, a child, he wouldn't have been able to get away with it.

When I see this type of art I just think of pretentious wannabe artists that make a career out of shocking people with contrived "art", consisting of pure shock value, in order to make up for a serious lack of talent or technique.

I just think it's sad.

so youre not a madge fan anymore?

lol, it's different. Madonna is not endangering any life form. And she sings, no matter how limited her voice is, she is still using a form of technique. She is a dancer, no technique, you are not a good dancer. She is a trained ballerina so she has technique.

What type of technique are you using with such art piece?? I don't think buying some gold fish and blenders and put them on a talbe can be considered of artistic technique by any definition of the term.

If it lacks technique, is it art?? or is modern art technique absolutely anything?? is eating a technique?? if I put myself in display eating and let's say showering and stuff for a week, can that be considered technique?

............

i thought the thread was gonna say:

i just remember what someone told me..........

that you had a boyfriend that looked like a girlfriend i had in february of last year.


lol. its my damn ringtone. when ppl call at 5am jolting you awake it tends to get stuck deep in the mind.



about the goldfish... if that was in fact happening on a regular basis, enough animal rights people would be all over it here in the states that there would be the kind of attention on the matter that we'd know for sure it was in fact happening. all it would take is a google.

thats what tends to happen here. for better or worse... peta brings enough attention to these kinds of things that they gain their own kind of infamy.

i couldnt agree more.

I think someone was fined for blending a fish.

Prevention of Cruelty to Animals or Peta or one of those got on their ass over it, I remember. Well if people think its cruel, then they wont blend it. Its not the artitist, he just made a make-shift fishbowl from a blender which is okay, and its a hell of a lot better than some shitty installation art Ive seen in my time but its the sick bastards in the public that choose to press the button. Just comes to show you, that people who attend art gallaries arent all arty farty liberal rights for all type people. If they were, that fish would be still alive by the end of the day.

I agree with it being cruel ra ra ra, but honestly, i think its such an awesome concept for art. i am a little jealous i didn't think of it.

I somewhat agree with you,I do think it's beyond sick that some dude blended a fish.
And I was wrong, the man who did it wasn't fined, he could not be found.
So he basically turned the blender on and ran.
It also seems it happened twice, not once.
But on the other hand, the artist could and should have known some sick fuck would use the button.
I think he should be fined, that's not art IMO, it's giving people a real easy chance and good excuse (No, I didn't WANT to hurt the fish, it was art!) to hurt an animal and he got away with it.

And it wasn't some obscure art gallery this was in, it was a large museum.
And again, I don't think this is art:


Link 1: court ruling on fish blending
Link 2: Ausralian law report on Denmark incident

I agree with the fact that the person who turned the blender on is a sick fuck and probably he or she is two steps away from becoming a sociopath or a serial killer, BUT you cannot take away responsability from the author(becuase I just refuse to call him the A word).

This was really calculated to get publicity, through hurting fish.

Why didn't he chose a dog for instance? Put dogs in gas chambers, it would be the same scenario. Yet he didn't do it because he wouldn't be able to get away with it.

People don't see fish as having feelings or being "alive" I think people see fish as either things you eat, or decorative things, instead of living beings. Maybe the people who turned the blender on, wouldn't have done it if it was a dog, being themselves probably dog owners or something.

I think he knew this. Well you can say that fish are easier to control and put in a museum, but I just find this type of "authors" to be coldly calculating and manipulative.

It's like his recent work, he's taking lots of HIV infected junkies and he's giving them money and materials to make paintings with the hiv blood, drugs and other stuff, as a sort of "protest for the rejection junkies and hiv infected people receive in society". Please. It's just shock value posing as social commentary.

I oppose this type of art because it's fake and fucking tacky.

Aaaghhh me too! Now that song is stuck in my head.

The goldfish thing is repulsive. WHY would anyone want to do that?? If I was there and seen it, I would have to throw up. Or maybe I'd chase the fucker down and slap him.

I don't know what I would've done but I guess I would've done something. Like staying all day long and persuading people not to turn them on, or unplug the blenders or something.

Why would anyone do that?? well some people have saddistic tendencies so it's no big problem to turn them on.

As for the author, well he's just an attention seeking idiot.

...

ok maybe im just dumb
but i dont really understand, did he just stand there and was like come one someone press it, and then someone ran up and did it, or did he stand there and got like shouts from the crowd being like blend blend blend or was it like he just stood there for a while and eventually blended the poor fishy bastard?

lol, who knows. I guess he just blended it. Maybe he was alone, who knows.