30 October 2004

Is it permissible to kill animals in the name of art?

I believe this is truly abhorrent.
Most people who see Nathalia's pictures for the first time are impressed by how beautiful they are. It takes a few seconds before you start to wonder how they have been made. A photo-montage? Some kind of digital manipulation? When you look closer, there is something slightly distorted in the rabbit's expression. Something slightly abnormal about the face of the cat. Slowly you realise that the animal is dead, that the animal has died for the sake of the picture. Is this acceptable?

There is nothing illegal in Nathalia's art. She has killed the animals in as humane a way as possible. Has she been guilty of a moral crime? We do not think so. We think that art is of vital importance. What do you think?

Absolutely disguisting.

Comments

Naum,
Couldn't agree with you more! It is morally demeritorious, and should be legally culpable, for such a heinous atrocity to occur, especially in the name of "art." How can this sort of thing transpire in this day and age.