i don't really think it's ever a bad idea to be concerned about killing animals for our own personal gain. i am a vegan, so where i do not approve of it, at least people eat the pigs and don't use them to do little art pieces. i find this pretty gross. if you'd done it with a 200,000 pieces of anything i would've been impressed with your ability. by the standard that it doesn't make much of a dent, awesome. there are plenty of populations of people that need some attention, maybe i can purchase some with a wee bit of cash (that i'll make back after i put the work in obviously) and make a sculpture or something! i mean i'll only need one or two really to keep it at the scale i'm looking for. one or two people really isn't anything in the sea of them that are on this planet ..... because, "If a conceptual piece doesn't provoke a personal or public response, reaction or discussion, then it fails as art." now doesn't that all sound ridiculous?
Catherine M - 14 years ago
Given that we regularly slaughter mass numbers of larger, more intelligent creatures (such as pigs) for food consumption, I think being concerned about ants being killed for an art piece is misplaced. I personally wouldn't kill ants for art, but I also don't eat pigs. If you're going to be indignant about animal rights (and there is plenty to be indignant about), then I suggest choosing your targets more carefully.
I also think that some of this indignation can be attributed to the thought that art is optional while food is essential. Yes, food is essential, but we have plenty of choices about what to eat and don't need to eat animals. And the state of the arts in any society is a pretty good measure of the health of the society (which is why artists are often the first to suffer under totalitarian governments).
Sam-Hec - 14 years ago
To be fair, a number of common dyes which have been used in the past come from squishing bugs. Notably, the red dye used for british army coats ie Red Coats comes from a bug in central america.
i don't really think it's ever a bad idea to be concerned about killing animals for our own personal gain. i am a vegan, so where i do not approve of it, at least people eat the pigs and don't use them to do little art pieces. i find this pretty gross. if you'd done it with a 200,000 pieces of anything i would've been impressed with your ability. by the standard that it doesn't make much of a dent, awesome. there are plenty of populations of people that need some attention, maybe i can purchase some with a wee bit of cash (that i'll make back after i put the work in obviously) and make a sculpture or something! i mean i'll only need one or two really to keep it at the scale i'm looking for. one or two people really isn't anything in the sea of them that are on this planet ..... because, "If a conceptual piece doesn't provoke a personal or public response, reaction or discussion, then it fails as art." now doesn't that all sound ridiculous?
Given that we regularly slaughter mass numbers of larger, more intelligent creatures (such as pigs) for food consumption, I think being concerned about ants being killed for an art piece is misplaced. I personally wouldn't kill ants for art, but I also don't eat pigs. If you're going to be indignant about animal rights (and there is plenty to be indignant about), then I suggest choosing your targets more carefully.
I also think that some of this indignation can be attributed to the thought that art is optional while food is essential. Yes, food is essential, but we have plenty of choices about what to eat and don't need to eat animals. And the state of the arts in any society is a pretty good measure of the health of the society (which is why artists are often the first to suffer under totalitarian governments).
To be fair, a number of common dyes which have been used in the past come from squishing bugs. Notably, the red dye used for british army coats ie Red Coats comes from a bug in central america.