Comments on: Death: Be Not Proud http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2008/04/23/death_be_not_proud/ Reflections on art and architecture by TIME critic Richard Lacayo. Tue, 08 Dec 2009 15:49:09 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Tan Boon Tee http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2008/04/23/death_be_not_proud/comment-page-1/#comment-248 Tan Boon Tee Fri, 25 Apr 2008 06:21:21 +0000 http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2008/04/23/death_be_not_proud/#comment-248 Art has no definition, it is beyond definition. Playing with death has always been artists’ prerogative – in whatever media they may decide to express. But toying with another person’s near death scenario would be unethical no matter how deeply soul-touching it may appear to the artist. Somehow, the value of a piece of art is as elusive (if not illusive) as ever -- there has never been any acceptable benchmark. Perhaps only the very rich would understand and appreciate. Some times, the more outrageous a setting is, the more it is acclaimed to be a masterpiece. Who knows how the mind of an artist works? Art has no definition, it is beyond definition. Playing with death has always been artists' prerogative – in whatever media they may decide to express. But toying with another person's near death scenario would be unethical no matter how deeply soul-touching it may appear to the artist.
Somehow, the value of a piece of art is as elusive (if not illusive) as ever -- there has never been any acceptable benchmark. Perhaps only the very rich would understand and appreciate.
Some times, the more outrageous a setting is, the more it is acclaimed to be a masterpiece. Who knows how the mind of an artist works?

]]> By: skunkworks http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2008/04/23/death_be_not_proud/comment-page-1/#comment-247 skunkworks Wed, 23 Apr 2008 22:25:20 +0000 http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2008/04/23/death_be_not_proud/#comment-247 Sorry, that was totally sanctimonious. But I do think it's pretty much true. I also hate those "Body World" things btw. Sorry, that was totally sanctimonious. But I do think it's pretty much true. I also hate those "Body World" things btw.

]]> By: skunkworks http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2008/04/23/death_be_not_proud/comment-page-1/#comment-246 skunkworks Wed, 23 Apr 2008 21:24:45 +0000 http://lookingaround.blogs.time.com/2008/04/23/death_be_not_proud/#comment-246 The display of someone else's death for one's own motivations, no matter how pure, is similar to the concept of slavery. Another human being can never be a means, only an end. To display another person like this is to make that death a message between the displayer and viewer, or artist and audience. This is not the case for the hunger artist because that was an individual choice, and a transaction between two parties. It's when a third party enters the equation that it becomes a fundamental and inexcusable wrong. And "permission" is no excuse, just like we don't permit people to sell themselves into slavery. They can work themselves to death if they want to, for no money, but a third party can’t "own" that motivation. Representation of another person is always a co-opting a part of their humanity, but death is the ultimate moment of privacy, and a moment that we can’t know until it happens to us. To try to infringe on that, no matter how ultimately futile (just like pure slavery is ultimately futile) is wrong. Dignity is essentially privacy, our power as an individual to be defined by only ourselves. We all die alone. The display of someone else's death for one's own motivations, no matter how pure, is similar to the concept of slavery. Another human being can never be a means, only an end. To display another person like this is to make that death a message between the displayer and viewer, or artist and audience. This is not the case for the hunger artist because that was an individual choice, and a transaction between two parties. It's when a third party enters the equation that it becomes a fundamental and inexcusable wrong. And "permission" is no excuse, just like we don't permit people to sell themselves into slavery. They can work themselves to death if they want to, for no money, but a third party can't "own" that motivation.

Representation of another person is always a co-opting a part of their humanity, but death is the ultimate moment of privacy, and a moment that we can't know until it happens to us. To try to infringe on that, no matter how ultimately futile (just like pure slavery is ultimately futile) is wrong. Dignity is essentially privacy, our power as an individual to be defined by only ourselves. We all die alone.

]]>