Or is it life imitating art? Either way, that Art guy is KILLING me.

From In the Month of Mae:

Stephen Wiltshire. This young artist is grabbing a lot of attention by the likes of CBS and other national news outlets. Stephen has been drawing cities since being diagnosed with autism at a young age, saying it’s his way to express himself. What’s unique about this artist though is that all he needs is a 20 minute helicopter ride above New York and after 7 days, 12 pens, and a lot of music on his ipod, he finishes the massive 18 ft accurate depiction of the city all from memory. He’s so accurate that when drawing Rome, he drew the exact number of columns in the Pantheon. His work is being shown at Brooklyn’s Pratt Institute along with his permanent gallery in the Royal Opera Arcade, Pall Mal.

Impressive, but it’s not quite Dogs Playing Poker now, is it?

Lol – the bulldog is holding the ace of clubs with his toe. Tell me THAT isn’t art?

I’ve been racking my brain trying to come up with a great joke about this article, but then I decided to open this up to you – my funny, brainy, and quite bizarre constituency. In other words, I’m doing what we politicians like to call “delegating.”

If you want to see a larger picture of this article, simply click on said article. BTW, that’s something you still can’t do on Andy’s blog. (okay, that’s a lie, you can open up pictures really big at Andy’s. I’m not sure why I keep saying that. Perhaps it has to do with the $30 Andy has owed me for the last 3 years).

**Thanks to Steven Humour , an artist in his own right.

Ho hum. Art. As we’re all painted as knuckle-dragging conservatives, we naturally hate everything of any artistic value. I have been to the Vancouver Symphony Orchestra just once, and while I had a great time, I’d also like it if it were self-sustaining. It currently gets over $2.5 million per year from federal and BC government grants. Oh well. It can’t be all Elise Estrada bubble gum tunes all of the time.

There has been a huge backlash related to arts funding lately, with the recent announcement–and subsequent retraction after one day–of cuts to arts funding. This is basically what happens when you sign contracts with these kinds of institutions. They don’t care that the government is now in major hock to the tune of $2.8 billion–they want their money. The arts programs have an agreement to be paid out based on gambling revenues, which is basically seen as separate from the major revenue pool. Here’s how bad the arts community has it these days:

Tuesday’s budget said the government would hand out $139 million in gambling grants this fiscal year. Including the grants restored for this year, along with the additional $30 million, the government is allocating more than the $167 million announced in February.

Not bad. They were able to goose out an additional $30 million for a total of 530 groups asking for funding. Personally I think they should combine the two ideas and make gambling a component of the art. Botticelli Baccarat, Renoir roulette. Come on, seven! Daddy needs a new pair of Dadas!

While the government might be offering the loosest slots in town to the art community, we should probably save more outrage for another elitist pastime–sports. Take the BC Place, for example, owned by the British Columbian government and losing money at $4 million a year. Venue for the BC Lions, as well as a few concerts and trade shows, it will also be the opening and closing ceremony host for the 2010 Winter Olympics.

Even if it were a simple money-loser like stated above, then you could at least argue it’s comparable to the arts community with thei hand out. However, they’re now looking for a little sprucing up:

Faced with having to spend $360 million of taxpayers’ money to put a retractable roof on BC Place Stadium, the Liberal government has begun exploring another option.

Why not throw the massive redevelopment project open to the private sector, using Premier Gordon Campbell’s favourite development model — a private-public partnership deal?

$100 million has been spent already, and now they are considering starting from scratch. They also can’t even decide on whether they want this roof or a brand-new stadium. How on Earth are they planning on getting back their costs for this? Even if the new retractable roof were to last fifty years, which would be a true miracle, they would have to get roughly $15 million profit from the stadium per year, or roughly what its operating budget is now. I’m officially quitting my profession and building stadiums for dupe cities.

The cost of going to a BC Lions game can be argued to be an elitist activity, too. Even the cheapest seats are $30, with the premium ones going for $80. How is a family of four supposed to enjoy a day out to the football stadium they helped to build? Picture four people in the nosebleeders behind the goalposts. Once you buy the hot dogs and pops, you’re looking at well over $200 for attending.

Does CFL football really need a retractable roof? I’m sure the Doily Expo is a huge draw for Vancouver, but I’m pretty sure the BC Lions can get by on outdoor benches somewhere in Burnaby or Richmond and we can just board up the place. All said and done, the costs of the supporting of the BC Place, which is directly competing with the GM Place that is not getting the same kinds of subsidies, might not just rival the arts committees but cost us millions more. At least the arts community is getting along with gambling revenues, mostly, which anyone can do for $3 with Extra.

Pharaoh Campbell can feel free to build this giant roof or a new stadium or whatever he needs to, but he had better get spending under control. There are plenty of arguments for having major venues in cities to get people to come out for concerts and commerce (estimated at $40 million a year in Vancouver), but it will be overshadowed by the cost of overbuilding with this monstrosity. Whether in generous grants to the arts or to sports franchises or so Bono can make himself feel better, the true spectator elitist sport is government overspending while Rome burns.

For some reason I thought about this picture last night. I’m sure many of you remember this from a National Geographic cover from 1985. The article was entitled Along Afghanistan’s War-Torn Frontier , and became one of the most famous National Geographic pictures of all times. As a matter of fact, it was featured on the cover of National Geographic’s Top 100 Pictures of all time.

The picture was taken by Steve McCurry in 1984 at the Nasir Bagh refugee camp in Pakistan. The girl was 12 at the time, an orphan, and was attending an informal school within the camp when the picture was taken. The photographer didn’t even get the girls name.

McCurry tried for years to track the girl down, to find out how she’s been, but to no avail. Then 15 years later, a National Geographic team went back to the refugee camp to try to find *Afghan girl*. They found a guy that knew her brother, who then contacted the family, and then put them in touch with her.

Her name is Sharbat Gula and she told McCurray she remembers him taking her picture those many years ago because no one had ever taken her picture before. She had gone back to live in Afghanistan in 1992, was married and has three daughters.

If you’re interested in any more information, this link could be helpful.

A Vicar for St. John’s Church in Horsham, West Sussix, England, had the crucifixion sculpture you see in front of you removed from his Church because he claims it scared the bejesus out of kids and adults alike. As you can imagine, those parishioners who like scary Jesus were not in favour of the sculptures removal:

A vicar has removed a sculpture of the crucifixion from the front of his church because it was a ‘horrifying depiction of pain and suffering’ that was scaring off worshippers.

Rev Ewen Souter said the traditional Christian symbol was frightening children and that it would be replaced with a modern, stainless steel cross.

Some of the congregation have reacted angrily to the decision, saying it is another blow to Christian tradition.

One long-standing member of the church, who asked not to be named, said: ‘The crucifix is the oldest and most famous symbol of the Christian church.

‘Pulling it down and putting up something that would look more at home on the side of a flashy modern shopping centre is not the way to get more bums on seats.

‘Next they’ll be ripping out the pews and putting sofas in their place, or throwing out all the Bibles and replacing them with laptops. It’s just not right.’

I’m as anti-PC as the next angry white man, but I really have to agree with the Vicar on this: If a sculpture of Jesus could actually scare Jesus himself, it’s best to take the thing down. The sculpture in question is horrifying, no two ways about it. I certainly wouldn’t attend a church that had a sculpture in front of it that scares flies off shit, and I wouldn’t attend a church that had a sculpture of the Virgin Mary giving birth, placenta scene and all.

I think that last visual put everything into perspective very nicely. I seem to have that gift.

Gimme that old time religion…

Over the last few years, and particularly over the last few months, I have heard a constant stream of anti-American negativity. From American involvement in Iraq to the financial meltdown and everything in between, the constant berating of America hasn’t stopped. Well, today it stops, and it stops on a dime (not an American dime though, an actual dime that’s worth something, maybe a Chinese dime or an Indian rupee).

I bring to you, with pride busting out of every orifice, Sandy Paws Creative Grooming. This is what America is all about. This is, quite frankly, the best America has to offer. Sandy, who I believe is the genius behind Sandy Paws, is a groomer extraordinaire. From what I gather, Sandy takes bizarre and hideously deformed looking animals, like the one pictured, and crafts them into beautiful, attractive and exquisite different kinds of animals.

The animal you see in front of you is Cindy. Cindy, apparently, used to be a dog. Now she is a chicken. Cindy may be a chicken right now, but by the magic of Sandy grooming, tomorrow she may be a peacock, and the next day a turtle. What else can Cindy be? Let your imagination be your groomed dog palate, let imagination take you on a ride like a good blotter of acid would.

How does Sandy transform bizarre and hideously deformed animals like Cindy? I’m not sure, but I have an inkling it’s through black magic. Who knows, it very well may be through radical, and illegal animal body reconstruction and modification. It may even be through a generous grant by the ex- East German government. I’m sticking with the black magic thing. Either way, Cindy’s a chicken.

God bless Sandy and Cindy. God bless the beauty of an idea. God bless America.

God bless us, every one.

Oh. Keyser’s. God!

Two abstract works by the American [artist Mark Rothko] are displayed at the Tate Modern in London but there have been claims that they are being displayed on their side, against his wishes.

The two paintings from the Black on Maroon series have been hung vertically with bold stripes running from top to bottom.
However, Rothko is thought to have wanted the works – which he donated to the Tate before committing suicide in February 1970 – to be hung with the stripes running horizontally and the location of his signature on the back of the paintings is believed to reflect this wish.
(more…)

The world of art has long been so irrelevant that it regularly resorts to shock theater. Sadly, legitimate and talented artists toil in obscurity while juvenile hacks are elevated to national attention.

A famous example of such faux-art is “Piss Christ” by Catholic and photographer Andres Serrano. Serrano, who was the recipient of a grant by the U.S. National Endowment for the Humanities (also known as “the American taxpayer”), depicted a small plastic crucifix submerged in a glass of his urine. As planned, the “Piss Christ” image stirred much controversy.

Piss Christ

Serrano’s work confirmed one of the most reliable rules in the art world: if you lack talent and are desperate for immediate publicity, insult Catholicism.

Another artist utilizing shock sans substance is Karen Finley. The “performance artist” has “smeared herself with chocolate, painted with her own breast milk, [and] put Winnie the Pooh in S&M gear…”

(Which must have thrilled the suits at Disney.)

Karen Finley

In contrast to Serrano’s success at the public trough, Finley’s application for the National Endowment for the Arts was rejected. As is common among liberals who feel entitled to government funds, Finley threw a hissy fit and sued the government. Due to the free speech/1st Amendment ramifications involved, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley, in 1998. By a razor-thin margin, Finley lost 8-1. Conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, in a concurring opinion, interpreted the relevant law plainly by declaring that “decency and respect are to be taken into account in evaluating applications.”

Little surprise that Finley sued considering that liberals accept no objective standard for decency (except that there is no objective standard).

Which brings us to the latest court jester in the art world: Aliza Shvarts. A Yale art student, Ms. Shvarts, whose last name could only have led to years of therapy, has stirred controversy with her most recent work.

A Yale University student’s senior art project, which she said documented her bleeding during repeated self-induced abortions, sparked a protest on campus, an outcry on the Internet and debates over morality, medicine, art and academia.

And — it was all faked. Senior Aliza Shvarts told Yale officials Thursday that she didn’t get pregnant and didn’t have abortions. [...]

Shvarts told classmates that she had herself artificially inseminated as often as possible for much of this past year, then took legal, herbal abortifacient drugs and filmed herself in her bathtub cramping and bleeding from the miscarriages. She said her work will include video, a sculpture incorporating her blood mixed with Vaseline wrapped in plastic, and a spoken piece describing what she had done.

[She] told the Yale Daily News that she wanted to provoke debate about the relationship between art and the human body but that the intention of the piece was not to scandalize anyone.

Indeed, who could possibly be scandalized by filming do-it-yourself abortions?

Aliza Shvarts

“Provoking debate” is the convenient shibboleth of those who are caught committing acts of gross idiocy. Apparently as long as society is forced to jabber about something, the underlying controversy, filming your faked abortions and expecting people to believe that it’s art, is somehow justified.

Shvarts’s art (“Shv_art”?) has created an outcry (and rightly so), but the project shouldn’t surprise anyone. Faked or not, Shvarts’s hideous brain child is the logical and natural result of decades of policies and laws which debase abortion to a common surgery with little or no moral ramification. In such an environment, a faked abortion is a mundane enough act to be worthy of filming and exposition. If you are offended, well, Shvarts merely intended to provoke debate.

As one of the premier and selective universities on the planet (charging around $45,000 USD a year), it would be reasonable to expect the art from any Yale student should reflect some maturity and talent. Apart from the her shameless dishonesty, Shvarts lacked taste, talent and judgment.

So she’d certainly fit in the art world.

~ Sisyphus, cross-posted at The Sisyphus Files.