PDA

View Full Version : killing animals for art!!!



hae_yeon
11-06-2004, 06:30 AM
This was sent to me through another network friend:

Help to stop this insanity! The artist vows to keep killing to support her art! There are two galleries out there showing their sick support of the murder and mutilation of these animals! Here is an article as well as the email address for the Swedish Government (at the end of the article/post). The email address for one of the galleries featuring this mentally unstable human being is info@wetterlinggallery.com let's flood the government and the gallery with our email protests!
http://www.keeponfighting.net/article.php?story=20031209194102357
Please note that the photos on the page are graphic and show more of the artwork. The gallery's jusification of the artist is just as disturbing.

http://www.wetterlinggallery.com/archive/nathalia/nathalia_main.htm

http://www.wetterlinggallery.com/newsletter/newsletter.htm

hae_yeon
11-06-2004, 06:48 AM
Here's my letter to the Ministry, and I sent a similar one to the gallery:

Dear Ministry,
I am writing regarding Nathalia Edenmont's practice of killing animals for use in 'art'. Her justification for this practice is to challenge the paradigm of acceptance of killing animals for clothing or food, arguing that if this is so, it is also acceptable in art. And then what, I ask you? And then what? Unfortunately, Ms. Edenmont's portrayal of the animals in death does nothing to support this claim. Her manipulation of dismembered animals lavishly propped with shiny porcelain objects or soft fabrics does not send a message to consider animal welfare, but rather sends a message that animals are trinkets put here for the amusement of unthinking humans. It sends a message, in fact, that Ms. Edenmont considers animals merely lumps of clay to be molded to suit her day's work. I urge you to put an end to this 'artist's' irresponsible practices now, and end this senseless killing.

A Concerned Citizen of the Global Community,

Karin Simpson

Tracy G
11-06-2004, 09:24 AM
Thanks, hae_yeon. We discussed this last week on this thread. (http://www.plantbasedpeople.com/showthread.php?t=4661) From the info I found online, it looked to me like these photos were part of the Wetterling archive, and that the exhibition ended February 10, 2004 (the dates appear in the upper left corner of your first link). Not that this should preclude protest letters to the gallery, but maybe those should be directed toward removing the photo archive at this point, since the exhibition itself appears to already be down? Though considering the comments made by the gallery owner, I think the hope is pretty slim...

hae_yeon
11-07-2004, 06:49 AM
groooannnn...!! ugh. i can't believe i didn't see that. ggrrr...i'm usually more on top of it than that!! ggrrr!!!

i wonder if it will be like one of those emails that still gets sent ten years later and you receive it from someone every three years or so....

thanks, tracy!

sabster
11-27-2004, 07:10 PM
Ughhh. That's just sadistic. Why is that legal? *shudders*

Tracy G
06-02-2005, 11:22 PM
Well, it looks like hae_yeon's protests (and all the others) fell on deaf ears. :mad: The Wetterling Gallery did remove the archive, but hosted a brand-new Edenmont show last month! Sorry I didn't catch this sooner. :embarr:

www. wetterlinggallery.com/artists/nathaliaedenmont/05_nathaliaedenmont/nathaliaedenmont.htm

(I've intentionally made the link inactive; I don't want to send traffic over directly from this site. Copy, close the space, and paste, if you can stand it.)

grog
06-02-2005, 11:29 PM
Ya know, I'm anti-violence, but if I was in that neighborhood, they might have a few flaming bags on their doorstep each day.

9nines
06-03-2005, 09:15 AM
I have not researched this but it seems the artist is making a point against using animals for clothing and food by showing it is inappropriate in art. She drives this point by outraging people. I base this on hae_yeon's above writing: "Her justification for this practice is to challenge the paradigm of acceptance of killing animals for clothing or food"

Without the outrage the point would not be made. Now I am not going to argue that the-end-justifies-the-means. If the artist is really killing animals for her art, even to fight against animals being used in clothing and food, then I in no way support her, but might she be "photo-editing" these pictures (they are only pictures right? Not real actual displays?) and the animals are really alive and well?

If she is doing this to protest the use of animals in clothing and food, she must care about animals, so I think this is a possibility but she acts as if they have been killed because that causes the outrage and then she can logically ask the world, "why are you outraged at the killing of animals for art yet you find it perfectly acceptable to kill them for food and clothing, when one could easily eat other things and wear other things." That message would be logically sound and without the outrage it would be heard by no one but with outrage it would be heard by many. So maybe the source of the outraged has been faked by photo-editing, in which case this lady is really a clever hero for animals. Of course to reinforce the outrage point, she would not admit the photos were edits of live (not killed) animals, at least not while making her point.

Of course, I do not know that the photo-editing is the case but upon looking at the pictures that was the first thought that came to my mind then when I read hae_yeon comment that the artist is doing this to make the point of animal killing is not acceptable, I really feel this might be the case. In other words, maybe her artistic talent is how well she can edit photos, making them look real and her ability to psychologically outrage people to make them think and analyze their own day-to-day practices.

Again, if she really killed or had these animal killed, she is despicable but I am wondering if she faked the source of the outrage. Anyone know?

Also, are there any other links to her pictures? The link http://www.keeponfighting.net/article.php?story=20031209194102357 is the only valid one in these threads. Those two pictures definitely look edited. I would like to see others, to see if they also look edited.

Tracy G
06-03-2005, 11:12 AM
It's my understanding that they're not faked; they're just vulgar and garish. Edenmont has said that she kills the animals herself and takes the photos within 15 minutes of the slaughter, when they're still fresh. I've read the descriptions of her work carefully, and her main point is not commentary on cruelty toward animals. Her previous exhibition was about the oppressiveness of the Russian regime, and the current one is about "archetypical male dominance" and "female sovereignty."

I did finally locate the archived exhibit from 2003-04, which has not been removed after all, just redesigned. There are now fewer pictures and remarks. But here's the new URL, complete with eight photos. Copy and paste.

www. wetterlinggallery.com/artists/nathaliaedenmont/04_nathaliaedenmont/nathaliaedenmont.htm