Sculpture Community - Sculpture.net  

Go Back  Sculpture Community - Sculpture.net > Sculpture Roundtable Discussions > Sculpture focus topics
User Name
Password
Home Sculpture Community Photo Gallery ISC Sculpture.org Register FAQ Members List Search New posts Mark Forums Read

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-25-2007, 12:45 AM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

"Cultural Gothic" by Paul McCarthy, 1992-3 (Rubell collection)

Metal, wood, pneumatic cylinder, compressor, programmed controller, burlap with foam, acrylic & dirt, fiberglass, clothing, wigs
94 3/4 x 96 x 96 in.


The Paul McCarthy exhibition at L.A. MOCA at The Geffen Contemporary documents three decades of the artist's important works. The media he employs, either separately or in combination, are sculpture, drawing, photography, performance, video, and installation. In many of the works the artist acts as the subject of the performance pieces that are documented by photography or video.

Upon entering the exhibition a sign warns: "Viewer discretion advised. Some material in this exhibition may not be suitable for young viewers." Though the first sweeping impression of the museum and the exhibit seems innocent enough; large scale puppet figures abound, large dollhouse-like sets, scattered monitors projecting cartoon-like characters prancing around, and right in front, a life-sized sculpture group, Cultural Gothic (1992), of dressed suburban father and son, and a goat.

But after taking a closer look at Cultural Gothic, the innocent element dissipates along with your psychological bearings and comfortable viewing space. The Gap-clad boy is motorized and he is humping the goat. The cycle is simple. The boy and the goat look back to the father for approval, the father nods with his hands resting good-naturedly on the boy's shoulders, the boy begins gyrating, then the father nods his concluding approval.
----------


Search of youtube and google has not revealed any video clips.


----------
Photo used with creative commons license and is owned by
"redandgray"
http://flickr.com/photos/gpparker/321541568/in/set-72157594418753000/
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Cultural Gothic.jpg
Views:	3408
Size:	18.2 KB
ID:	7015  
  #2  
Old 09-25-2007, 07:15 AM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

The LA MOCA may consider this art. I would consider it something else.
I see little difference between beastiality and pedophilia. In either case, it involves the rape of innocent life, and a supreme abuse of trust. Why then is this considered something worthy of display at an art museum, rather than something to be ashamed of?
  #3  
Old 09-25-2007, 08:13 AM
jOe~'s Avatar
jOe~ jOe~ is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Spokane, Wa
Posts: 3,190
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

The people no longer seek consolation in art. But the refined people, the rich, the idlers seek the new, the extraordinary, the extravagant, the scandalous. (Pablo Picasso)

It is only possible to speak in the language and in the spirit of one's time. (Eugene Delacroix)

Art is an accurate statement of the time in which it was made. (Robert Mapplethorpe)
  #4  
Old 09-25-2007, 08:28 AM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

Quote:
Originally Posted by jOe~
The people no longer seek consolation in art. But the refined people, the rich, the idlers seek the new, the extraordinary, the extravagant, the scandalous. (Pablo Picasso)

It is only possible to speak in the language and in the spirit of one's time. (Eugene Delacroix)

Art is an accurate statement of the time in which it was made. (Robert Mapplethorpe)
God help us!

( Ooops. Not to be exculsionary, Landseer; goat help us? )
  #5  
Old 09-25-2007, 08:31 AM
jOe~'s Avatar
jOe~ jOe~ is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Spokane, Wa
Posts: 3,190
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

Quote:
God help us!
Why isn't she?
  #6  
Old 09-25-2007, 08:32 AM
evaldart's Avatar
evaldart evaldart is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: easthampton, massachusetts
Posts: 5,637
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

I think that that Mccarthy sculpture was plenty odd enough without the motorized bestiality aspect. He should have restrained himself. His desire to taboo the message simply overtook the art. Ruined a fair amount of intelligent and unique handiwork - too often artists who are supposedly participating at very high levels prove themselve quite immature.

And I'm not making a sweeping statement about this mans career - simply commenting on this one piece. I am not inspired this early in the morning to google-cram more of his work into my brain...perhaps later.
  #7  
Old 09-25-2007, 08:37 AM
jOe~'s Avatar
jOe~ jOe~ is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Spokane, Wa
Posts: 3,190
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

Quote:
He should have restrained himself
But what about LA MOCA ? Equal blame, or?
  #8  
Old 09-25-2007, 10:01 AM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

Quote:
Originally Posted by jOe~
But what about LA MOCA ? Equal blame, or?
Equal and more so. The "artist" has free will and can be as much of an idiot as he wants to be. But the LA MOCA probably pretends to be an arbiter of cultural taste for the city. They are not obligated to be enablers for depravity. That they chose to be is telling. Being responsible and mature human beings is apparently not a high priority on their agenda.
  #9  
Old 09-25-2007, 10:11 AM
jOe~'s Avatar
jOe~ jOe~ is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Spokane, Wa
Posts: 3,190
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

It would be really interesting to observe the personalities and the process in the decision making. That would be more telling than the exhibit.
  #10  
Old 09-25-2007, 01:49 PM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

Quote:
I think that that Mccarthy sculpture was plenty odd enough without the motorized bestiality aspect.
I'm not a fan of motorized moving sculptures, they resemble moving maniquins in a store window display, however, since the figures are clothed and other photos don't show anything real obvious. Without the description and reviews I read, or the mechanical motion it would appear to be little more than a couple of people standing behind a goat, then they may as well be Macy's store window props for clothing, costumes or Halloween.

The whole display could have been done without the mechanicals and gotten the same idea across by dropping the boy's pants or having his hands on either side of the goat's rump. The goat is not showing any resistance or distress but simple stands there.

The father's facial expression is either poorly done or was designed to look somewhat tragic, like someone who just witnessed a minor car crash.

Quote:
The LA MOCA may consider this art. I would consider it something else.
I see little difference between beastiality and pedophilia. In either case, it involves the rape of innocent life, and a supreme abuse of trust. Why then is this considered something worthy of display at an art museum, rather than something to be ashamed of?
Bestiality or rather; 'zoophilia' is not anything like pedophilia, the two are totally different, and futhermore bestiality is not always 'rape' nor 'abuse' any more than all heterosexual contact is.
see the very lengthy article on 'zoophilia' with references at wikipedia.org for more from both sides of the issue.

Given the fact that livestock -especially- is treated like lumber by the meat industry- abused from birth, raised and slaughtered inhumanely and without any consent obtained, bestiality pales by comparison even if rape was involved in some case.

Here's a you tube documentary about the cruelty of Kosher meat (which is supposed to be the most humane) production, with interviews that will offer more than sufficient proof of the real abuse heaped on animals every day for the luxury of bar-b-cue's and ham sandwiches- all originally wrapped in those white sterile packages at the supermarket and devoid of the reality for the consumer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXS_Ekd_r80

--

While McCarthy's sculpture is contemporary, the subject is hardly new in art and mythology;

Analysis by Supervert of the role of bestiality (sex with animals) in contemporary art, particularly in two mechanized works by Paul McCarthy and Mat Collishaw.

In art bestiality seems less taboo than regular old coitus: Leda and the Swan, Beauty and the Beast, the Rape of Ganymede, Pasiphae, the Minotaur, Centaurs raping women, Satyrs "surprising" nymphs, Zeus disguising himself as a bull to rape Demeter and Europa, as a serpent to seduce Persephone, as an eagle for Aegina, a pigeon for Pythia, a stallion for Dia — these themes may be largely mythological, but they certainly are not confined to Greek vases or Renaissance paintings. Cézanne, for instance, painted a fine version of the Leda story, and Picasso's self-identification with the Minotaur resulted in countless pictures of bulls copulating with women.

In contrast, the works by Collishaw and McCarthy differ from this long tradition in that they do not seize upon mythological pretexts for depicting bestiality: they no longer clothe animal sex in myths, but rather cloak machines in animal sex. If McCarthy's sculpture suggests that the pleasures of bestiality will be lost unless transmitted from father to son, it is only because in the future sex may well be highly mechanical.

Full review/article

I'm not sure McCarthy's other works are any more controverisal than any of the other controversial works, including the jar of urine, some of Jeff Koon's works, or the marble Pan-Goat from Pompei, or in fact any of the recovered sexual art pieces from Pompei.
  #11  
Old 09-25-2007, 04:52 PM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

To say that beastiality pales in comparison to the raising of meat for slaughter is like saying rape is no big deal compared to murder. It's apples and oranges. If someone slugs you in the face, and then says, " Relax, its not as bad as genocide!", how much better will you feel?

Sex without consent is rape, be it amongst humans or humans and animals. It is an abuse of trust when it concerns animals because we have been given a higher consciousness and implied, if not mandated dominion over them. So our higher nature is meant to guide them, not commit rape. This parallels the trust that children give to adults, who are committing about the worst sin imaginable when abusing that trust and innocence through rape.

Some of the references you cite in ancient art are using the animal forms as SYMBOLISM, the attempt of the human story-telling apparatus to make things understandable to an audience by inventing a personification of cosmic forces. The difference between good art, good story-telling, mythology, etc, and the work of P. Macarthy is like the difference between a nude painted by Titian and pornography, other than the fact of P.M.'s figures being clothed so as to give himself fewer square inches to display poor modeling skills.
  #12  
Old 09-25-2007, 09:10 PM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennT
It's apples and oranges.
Sorry, that is not true, and here's why; when you look at how society treats meat/egg/dairy consumption even when informed of the horrific abuse and torture, and ghastly death in videos and photos, they still say; "oh poor cow, but YUMMMM steaks are sooo good!!! and I will keep eating them!!!"

But if you bring sex of any degree into the picture, even if the animal may find it enjoyable- suddenly the same person says; "oh no thats animal abuse!! it's cruelty!!! it's terrible!!"
Yet not a minute before they were exposed to pictures showing conscious animals' throats sawed through with a machetti in a US slaughterhouse and bellowing in agony as they suffocate, slip and fall in their own blood while trying to escape.
You have chicks whose beaks are cut off to stop them from pecking each other to death, animals hot iron branded, castrated and de-horned without painkillers, veal calves raised confined in a box so they can't move, and all of these animals jam-packed into as small a space as possible, many showing signs of insanity as they beat their head against the walls repeatedly.

The hypocracy of that way of thinking and stance is totally astounding to me, yet people accept the slaughterhouse issues without a second thought.

In a large way McCarthy's sculpture cleverly forces the viewer to confront that fact internally, especially since the goat is simply standing there unrestrained and not even being held in any way from simply walking away. There are no ropes, chains, barriers or physical obstructions to the goat in the sculpture from simply moving away from something it doesn't like IF that was the case.
Quote:
"Sex without consent is rape, be it amongst humans or humans and animals."
It would be, but why would you assume there is no consent? did you not read about that aspect in the wikipedia article? That was well thought out article and animals do have very clear ways to show approval or disapproval of events around or that directly involve them. A dog clearly displays that he/she enjoys being petted, brushed, given treats, bones or going for a walk- the body language and posture shows it clearly, as does the reaction when a strange dog enters that dog's property and attempts to eat out of his or her food bowl on the porch- the ears go down, the dog takes on a fighting and aggressive posture, every bit of the body language clearly shown.

Another issue would be, does anything humans do to animals EVER involve any form of consent from them? does the cow consent to being your dinner? the lion consent to being caged in a zoo? did that chick consent to having it's beak cut off with a hot wire? and did that bull consent to being castrated, branded and de-horned without the benefit of pain killers?

So this would be a strictly selective form of "consent" in the minds of people- forcing the animal to submit to being abused and horribly killed just because it's going to be justified by being tomorrow's bar-b-cue dinner.
The consent being 100% omitted for the supposed "greater good" of providing Jane and Joe a bar-b-cue dinner for their pool party guests or wedding dinner.

Sorry, I don't see the issues that way at all, either consent is obtained across the board 100% or it has to be admitted it's NOT, since it is proven consent is not obtained at all for the above meat events, then the act itself, be it bestiality or slaughter for the bar-b-cue is immaterial.

If bestiality is abuse or betraying trust etc, then so is all the rest- including that steak dinner on your plate obtained by misery, pain, and a horrific death, the only difference is your meat arrives in a sterile white styrofoam tray in the supermarket refrigerator, totally devoid of any hint of where it came from. Young children are totally unaware an animal had to DIE to provide that hamburger mom is feeding them, the only clue might be the small amount of bloody water absorbed by the tray's liner.

Quote:
"So our higher nature is meant to guide them, not commit rape. This parallels the trust that children give to adults, who are committing about the worst sin imaginable when abusing that trust and innocence through rape. "
We basically rape animals every day- in meat packing plants, every egg you eat, every chicken McNuggets you have at McDonalds, every ham sandwich and every glass of milk were all obtained at the cost of pain, misery and brutal DEATHS of the animals involved, bestiality typically does not cause death or even injury.
Animals are not children, the only parallel there- is trust, the same trust that goat put out that you will treat it kindly and not drag it screaming into a truck to a slaughterhouse where he get's meat hooks in the hind legs and his throat cut.
Quote:
Some of the references you cite in ancient art are using the animal forms as SYMBOLISM,
The ancients, Greeks etc didn't appear to have problems with bestiality, it's depicted in quite a few artworks from Pompei and elsewhere, especially on decorated vases and pots which show men copulating with deer and other animals. The end result may have been excused or rationalised today as symbolic, but back then the Greets practiced pedophilia and even believed griffins were real animals, griffins were not symbolic though they came to be LATER.

There's also the "erotic" temple whose stone carvings adorning it also depict bestiality between a horse and two men, and again, no evidence in this work of restraint or force;





Quote:
other than the fact of P.M.'s figures being clothed so as to give himself fewer square inches to display poor modeling skills
The figures are poorly modelled and look "stiff" as well as lifeless like store dummies, the goat does look more realistic however. I don't believe his intent was to show modelling skills or even total realism, just the theme, which he did do pretty well, though I feel he could have dispensed with the mechanicals and posed the figures differently to get the same theme, but since I have yet to find a video of it to tell, maybe it needed the movement of the father's hand/head and the boy's head to be effective.

Extracted from a survey on one of the sites featuring a review of McCarthy's sculpture, the numbers say a lot, it also implies to me from the numbers that around 15% of the viewers to the exhibition would probably enjoy the sculpture and not find it distasteful or disturbing;

http://supervert.com/surveys/sexual_perversity_results

Have you ever had sex with an animal?
Frequently 115 2%
Sometimes 948 12%
Never 6483 85%
Prefer Not to Answer 76 1%
Total Number of Responses: 7622

If so, what kind of animal?
Not Applicable (I've never done this)
5860 83%
Horse 67 1%
Dog 895 13%
Cow 25 0%
Other 31 0%
Total Number of Responses: 7031

Either way it's around 14% out of over 7,000 responses.

At left is a Greek vase, and at right is a small sculpture from circa 1850 France, both clearly show the intent of the artist and the subject, the subject does not appear to be treated in either as a negative.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	057.jpg
Views:	7993
Size:	19.0 KB
ID:	7017  Click image for larger version

Name:	027.jpg
Views:	15500
Size:	14.9 KB
ID:	7018  

Last edited by Landseer : 09-25-2007 at 09:57 PM.
  #13  
Old 09-25-2007, 10:31 PM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

I guess this demonstrates there is no bad behavior that cannot be rationalized by the human mind, especially ones that we are emotionally attached to.
And we live in an age where there is more pressure to re-examine the instinctual concept of what constitutes " bad behavior " than the behavior itself.
  #14  
Old 09-25-2007, 11:54 PM
StevenW's Avatar
StevenW StevenW is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Denver
Posts: 2,320
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

"The ancients, Greeks etc didn't appear to have problems with bestiality,..."

The depiction of animal sex by the Greeks and the Romans was used in a completely different context. It was propaganda driven, depicting their enemies and used as a justification for wars, slavery, conquest of the barbarians etc... I.E. The "good guys" would never do this kind of thing..

In the final analysis it's irrelevent to me though. The idea of taking ownership for any kind of artistic, social or political responsibility is the final point which is being attacked and continually eroded. It can be attacked because of the very nature of our society and it is being exploited day in and day out in our society, primarily with sex and television.

It's not the museum's fault, after all they are just trying to sell tickets in an ever more competetive field. Only shocking art can compete and being open minded and welcoming all creative thinkers whether they are goat-poking or not is more important than celebrating art.

It's not the artist's fault, after all he has artistic license and is exploring his true inner-childhood self and expressing it with tremendous self-sacrifice, yada, yada, blah, blah..

It's no great surprise to me that a secularist would place more emphasis on a veal chop (completely missing the point) over the direct mental and emotional assault of any young mind who had the misfortune to see this work up close and personal. That direct assault on innocence and youth by a small minority of dissatisfied mental midgets, who can't have "In God We Trust" taken off the Dollar bill is despicable.
  #15  
Old 09-26-2007, 12:05 AM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennT
I guess this demonstrates there is no bad behavior that cannot be rationalized by the human mind, especially ones that we are emotionally attached to.
And we live in an age where there is more pressure to re-examine the instinctual concept of what constitutes " bad behavior " than the behavior itself.
"Bad behavior" is relative, it's also dependent on cultural, political and religion as well as upbringing, and all of these factors vary according to many things as well as time.

There are few things firmly set in stone as "bad" behavior, murder is one of course that is inalterable, so is robbery, burglary, assaults/torture, arson and many others.

Alterable, variable, cultural and geographical include such things as age of marriage, drug and alcohol use, dress or lack of it and sexuality.

In at least one US state kids can marry at age 14 with parental consent, while in the next state over they have to be 18, in one state a kid can drink and also drive a car at one age while the next state over it's 18 or even 21.
In France a woman can go topless in a public park, no one gives it a second thought, in the US she would be arrested, is one "bad" and other not?
Is a 14 year old kid in one state that bans marriage under age 18 any different if he moves a few miles over an artificial border to the next state that allows it at age 14?

If Oregon allows medical use of marijuana or assisted suicide, is it any worse or better, bad or good if done in the state next door?
At one time a woman in the US could be arrested for showing her bare legs in public, now it's nothing- this changed.
At one time homosexuality was a jailable crime, now it's not, bestiality is also not in most states (whereas it once carried the death penalty) but when considering penalties, it's a bit difficult to justify the death penalty for bestiality in a state that sentences a rapist of two women to 2 years in jail and probation.
Ditto for the state of Mass with it's 20 year sentence for bestiality, whereas murderers and violent robbers don't even serve that there.

Society evolves and changes, we no longer keep slaves, black people no longer have to sit at the back of the bus or only use "colored" washrooms under the threat of arrest.

So I think we SHOULD re-examine what "bad" behavior is exactly, and in the cases where it's clearly obvious there is no harm done, changes should reflect that.

In Sweden a committee was formed to examine their laws to determine IF a law was needed, the committee included a cross-spectrum of people, including veterinarians. After many months of research the committee made their findings public; while the commercial porn industry is abusive, that is a separate issue addressed in other ways, they determined that no law was necessary and that existing animal abuse laws covered the few instances where there really was abuse or injury, existing laws against tresspassing into other people's barns already addressed that issue.
No law was enacted as a result.

It is perfectly legal in Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands while Countries such as Belgium, Germany and Russia permit sexual activity with animals but strictly prohibit the promotion of animal-oriented pornography.

Again, what is "bad" varies according to geography and culture, and I don't believe location or culture is a valid rationale for making something a crime.
  #16  
Old 09-26-2007, 12:14 AM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

Quote:
Originally Posted by StevenW


It's no great surprise to me that a secularist would place more emphasis on a veal chop (completely missing the point) over the direct mental and emotional assault of any young mind who had the misfortune to see this work up close and personal.
I didn't miss any points, the show DID have a warning sign about the exhibit;

"Viewer discretion advised. Some material in this exhibition may not be suitable for young viewers."

thus minors would not have been in attendence, but even so, they can find far more extreme graphic on the web with ordinary Google search words.

McCarthy's sculpture is Disney-land compared to what you see on the web and what any kid or teen can easily find in Google or any search engine.

I seriously doubt there is a teen alive today who is so clueless or enveloped they are unaware of this or never heard of it, it's on TV, movies, on the web, in books in many forms from subtle to not.
Even "Scooter" Libby's controversial book "The apprentice" which was lierally all over the news, blogs, Ebay, mesage boards etc graphically described bestiality with a bear among a few other things.
  #17  
Old 09-26-2007, 12:27 AM
StevenW's Avatar
StevenW StevenW is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Denver
Posts: 2,320
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

Hi, I think you are right on those points Landseer, the web is a dangerous place for children and teens and it's no great surprise to me either that 1 in 2 kids between the ages of 12 and 18 has smoked marijuana in the last 30 days in this country. The continual exploitation of our youth (our most precious natural resource) is criminal. The question becomes how far we allow this exploitation to go? I ask would you want your 7 year old son or daughter to see this "art" on a school field trip or on a webpage? There are no warning signs here...
  #18  
Old 09-26-2007, 12:58 AM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

Quote:
Originally Posted by StevenW
The question becomes how far we allow this exploitation to go? I ask would you want your 7 year old son or daughter to see this "art" on a school field trip or on a webpage? There are no warning signs here...
Yes, the web etc is "dangerous" for children to a degree, in one way the computer can't just jump off the desk and physically attack your child or anyone else, it only displays text and images and can simply be turned OFF at any time.
I firmly believe however the internet (which was never designed to be for children,) is an adult arena, as well as one that traverses hundreds of different cultures, beliefs, countries and millions of different people- as such it is up to the PARENTS to control and monitor their children's use of the machine, just as they now control use of the family car, that table-saw in the shop, prescription drugs, alcohol etc.
You wouldn't let you 7 year old use your commercial radial-arm saw in the garage by himself, have the keys to your truck, gun safe or booze cabinet would you?
Why should the computer be any different?

Instead of trying to control the entire internet world-wide, control begins at HOME on your own personal computer.

You wouldn't take your 7 year old to a porn shop, bar or stripper bar or to watch the movie "Texas chain-saw massacre" would you? then you shouldn't take the 7 year old to an art exhibit where there are signs that clearly say;

"Viewer discretion advised. Some material in this exhibition may not be suitable for young viewers."

Or to an exhibit by an artist whose work you know is likely to BE controversial or adult in nature.

You can't wrap a kid up in styrofoam and bubble-wrap today, there is too much out there and they WILL see things despite your best efforts, so the key is to teach them BEFORE they see things, and monitor/restrict/filter their computer use and so on.
If PARENTS did this, on-line pedophiles could never contact their kids let alone arrangea meeting with them, for the computer would be sitting in the LIVING ROOM in full view of mom-dad, not spirited up in the kid's bedroom in a secluded corner.
I would say the most exploitation is in TV, commercials and media, the ones that target kids to get mom-dad to BUY them a certain toy or game, over and over they are brainwashed into the mindset that they NEED this toy and all they have to do is ask MOM for it, indeed- pester her for days till you get it.
  #19  
Old 09-26-2007, 01:46 AM
StevenW's Avatar
StevenW StevenW is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Denver
Posts: 2,320
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

This is all well and good and of-course parents should take ownership of raising their kids to the best of their ability, but it is also blaming the VICTIMS. Your scenario still gives pass to the "Pedophiles" and leverages the exploitation I mentioned already. In a free society were "anything goes" it becomes quite impossible for parents, never mind the 50% single parent homes to monitor a young person all times of the day and children are naturally curious. They will in fact find these things if the computer is in the living room or not or if there is a warning sign or not.

To put responsibility solely on any parent for raising their children is unrealistic at best and it has never been the case in all of human history or even the history of chimps. There is a level of responsibility shared by all of us, even those without kids to be mindful of the fact that children cannot process something of this nature as being aberrant or in fact, pure crap.

It's a powerful statement for our society to have said "hey, we want to go green". We're now seeing the development of hybrid vehicles and organic fruits and veggies and no one says we're being forced or coerced or censored from also buying gas guzzlers and eating toxic-pesticide infused lettuce on our whoppers. The minute someone comes out and says "hey, I want my kid to be safe", it's the parents fault for not having the computer where they can see it or repressing the right to free speech or they're going to see it anyway or censorship or whatever else...

How far will we permit this is still my question.. The sad thing is that organic lettuce and veal chops are more important than the well being of our own kids.
  #20  
Old 09-26-2007, 02:51 AM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

Quote:
Originally Posted by StevenW
but it is also blaming the VICTIMS. Your scenario still gives pass to the "Pedophiles" and

it becomes quite impossible for parents, never mind the 50% single parent homes to monitor a young person all times of the day and children are naturally curious. They will in fact find these things if the computer is in the living room or not or if there is a warning sign or not.
People can also MAKE themselves victims, there is nothing that requires every household to have either a computer or to have one conntected to the public internet, it wasn't long ago that personal computers didn't even exist.
Bottom line is, parents are still responsible for their kids and their kid's use of the family appliances.

Just as with dogs and spay-neuter to prevent unwanted litters, it is the female that HAS the litters and her owner who has to deal with them, you can neuter every male dog in a 10 mile radius, but it only takes ONE to impregnate any and all females who are not spayed, as so it goes with the computer, you can remove 90% of the world wide web off the face of the earth- everything but Walt Disney and cartoons, and put so many filters on emails that 99% of all the emails in the world is canned as spam, but it only takes *ONE* pedophile to contact your child- again- protection begins in the home on your own computer you bought and paid for- not trying to control the content of a billion computers world-wide, and the lives of that many people who also bought and paid for their computers.

Maybe you wouldn't mind a "walt-disney" internet, I would, I would not like my Google searches pre-screened and filtered by someone els'es ideas and ideals of what THEY think I should see, I sure as hell wouldn't want to see "BREAST CANCER" on every web site and forum replaced with bad word filters and displaying "****** CANCER"


Sorry to say, but if the parents can't manage their own kids, maybe they should re-think having children in the first place and certainly not have more to add to their already overloaded lives!

Quote:
They will in fact find these things if the computer is in the living room or not or if there is a warning sign or not.
Well, then I guess they will just have to FIND these things then, bestiality, porn and all the rest has existed long before computers and always will. It's been shown that laws don't stop activities people want to do- the "war" on drugs proves that every day, the failed prohibition of alcohol also proves it, so does making prostitution a crime.
Hitler tried a few things, including ordering book burning, and you saw where that all wound up.

Like I said earlier, you cant wrap kids in bubble wrap, these things and more all exist and will continue to do so, you as a parent (assuming you are) have to educate yourself and kids as to what is out there in society- violence, pedophiles, movies that show violence, the rest of us can't do that for you.





Quote:

The minute someone comes out and says "hey, I want my kid to be safe", it's the parents fault for not having the computer where they can see it or repressing the right to free speech or they're going to see it anyway or censorship or whatever else...

How far will we permit this is still my question..
Either we have free-speech or we don't, I doubt anyone wants to go back to the Nazi book burnings and prohibition, while you may not like bestiality, I see no harm whatsoever with it except in clearly abusive instances- it's hardly an important issue to get worked up over given the multitude of far more important things we will have to contend with- global warming, overpopulation, dwindling resources, the war in Iraq, the pending invasion of Iran, how much it will cost to heat your house this winter, the dollar dropping in value to the Euro like a rocket and so on.

Last edited by Landseer : 09-26-2007 at 03:01 AM.
  #21  
Old 09-26-2007, 09:10 AM
jOe~'s Avatar
jOe~ jOe~ is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Spokane, Wa
Posts: 3,190
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

Holy shit man! This post has taken a one heck of a turn. I want to thank all who are participating. This is intense ! Not many works of art produce this level of response. By this measure you have to agree that it worked big time. Of course that will bring up the other usual arguments. Just shows how deep art stuff is. How else to get this incredibly complex message out? Good one Landseer. I was originally puzzled by the work and why anyone would one create or display it.
  #22  
Old 09-26-2007, 09:34 AM
Landseer's Avatar
Landseer Landseer is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,250
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

Quote:
Originally Posted by jOe~
This is intense ! Not many works of art produce this level of response. By this measure you have to agree that it worked big time.

Just shows how deep art stuff is. How else to get this incredibly complex message out?
Exactly, and while it was obvious to me last night the thread really went all over the map, that's what controversial art is supposed to do, so in that way McCarthy's work, in a word- worked.

The funny thing is, the sculpture is just 3 figures, had they they simply been positioned a little differently, and sans the motor- they would be boring, rather poorly done store window dummies. The work isn't even visually graphic- it has no nudity, blood, guts, gore or violence, the reaction is solely from what it implies to the viewer.

Of course the viewer if not pre-informed by the text, and in the case of the still pics which don't show movement- would probably not have a clue the work has a bestiality theme and might interpret it differently.

I'd sure like to find McCarthy's email address and probe further but didn't find it, what would be interesting is to get a response and comments from him to questions.
  #23  
Old 09-26-2007, 09:36 AM
jOe~'s Avatar
jOe~ jOe~ is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Spokane, Wa
Posts: 3,190
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

Quote:
I'd sure like to find McCarthy's email address and probe further but didn't find it, what would be interesting is to get a response and comments from him to questions.
My thoughts exactly as I wrote my last post.
  #24  
Old 09-26-2007, 09:51 AM
GlennT's Avatar
GlennT GlennT is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 4,213
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

Quote:
Originally Posted by GlennT
I guess this demonstrates there is no bad behavior that cannot be rationalized by the human mind, especially ones that we are emotionally attached to.
And we live in an age where there is more pressure to re-examine the instinctual concept of what constitutes " bad behavior " than the behavior itself.
" Hey, look at all the other bad things out there...my (bad) ( perverted, sick, depraved) behavior isn't so bad in comparison, is it?

Holy cow! I rest my case!

Interesting, though, to juxtapose the million year old survival needs and instinct of meat eating with the fabricated desire to bugger animals. In the animal kingdom, meat eating is a part of the natural order. I'm unfamiliar with interspecies animal sex being part of the natural order. Why bother looking to natural cycles for answers though, if we are not willing to see global warming as a cyclical pattern that has occurred long in Earth's history, and prefer to use it as a prop to push a social agenda?

By the way, the bit about blaming the children or parents for accessing destructive elements in our culture is weird. Is it alright for factories to pollute rivers as long as they post signs that say, warning, do not drink out of this body of water? Or to say, you don't have to drink out of this river, you can go to a different one? Who is willing to take responsibility for the pollution in our visual culture, rather than defending the right to pollute?
  #25  
Old 09-26-2007, 10:02 AM
jOe~'s Avatar
jOe~ jOe~ is offline
Level 10 user
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Spokane, Wa
Posts: 3,190
Re: Cultural Gothic- Paul McCarthy

Quote:
Holy cow!
Pun intended???

Wow, back to global warming again and the thinking that we can pollute rivers (and culture)but not the skies and affect the weather. All the extra gazillion degrees of heat put out by fuels,cars, heaters, factories, homes, bodies has no effect??? Think man. Or read. This is one of the best threads yet. Heavy gobs of personal realty starting to fly. And look what started it.
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Sculpture Community, Sculpture.net
International Sculpture Center, Sculpture.org
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Russ RuBert