The story of a dog being starved to death as part of an art exhibition appears to have been falsely reported by Costa Rican newspaper The Nation, according to new sources. I reported the appalling story here last week among global outrage about the exhibit and a reported invitation to repeat the work elsewhere.
It has now emerged, however, that artist Guillermo Habacuc Vargas intended the work to be a stunt to show how a starving dog suddenly becomes the centre of attention when it is in a gallery, but not when it is on the street. The work was intended to expose people for what they really are - "hyprocritical sheep". He said that in order for the work to be valid, he and the gallery had to give the impression that the dog was genuinely starving to death and that it died.
Juanita Bermúdez, director of the Codex Gallery, stated that she would not have allowed the dog to be mistreated, that it ate and drank regularly, and that it was allowed to escape back to the streets from where it was taken at the end of the exhibit. "It is conceptual art and a work that leaves a social message", she said.
The stunt provoked massive outrage on a global scale, and over a million people have signed an online petition to try and prevent another dog being starved to death in a repeat of the exhibit. Unconfirmed reports say that the artist even received death threats and, judging by the vehement anger I've seen in response to this story, that would not suprise me.
The strange thing is perhaps how you react knowing now that this was a hoax. I suspect, like me, you still feel angry, perhaps that it's sick, and that your initial reaction was totally justified. But though I may not agree with his shocking methods whatsoever, I have to admire Guillermo Habacuc Vargas' ability to inspire such a reaction and, in that sense, didn't he achieve what he set out to do? Whether it qualifies as 'art', conceptual or not, is a totally different matter...
UPDATE (16/5/08): POLL RESULTS ON THIS STORY NOW AVAILABLE
Related posts:
The truth about animal testing
Rodent warfare breaks out in Vietnam
Rising vet bills causing euthanasia
Visit www.thepetextraordinarium.co.uk
March 22, 2008
Starving dog exhibit reported as a hoax
119 comments:
Hi Paul,
Thx for that information, could you tell us more about your source?
Thank you.
Sure thing. The Codex Gallery released a statement explaining/defending the work, although even since this post it has been questionned whether the dog was released or escaped. In my view it doesn't change a lot either way...
Small point:
Anyone called Juanita Bermúdez is female, and therefore 'she' rather than 'he'.
but in the street the dog is free... he is not bounded like that... he can drink or find what to eat on the rubbish...
I think the point the 'artist' was trying to make, Luke, is that there are a hundreds/thousands of strays starving on the streets in Costa Rica but that no-one pays them any attention. But then suddenly when it's in a gallery there's uproar. It was a comment on US (humans)...and I have to say, he has a point. IF it was a 'stunt', which it would now seem that it was, then maybe someone should take notice of the message and not the method? Just a thought...
Hi,
First, sorry don't know how to register.
If I understand (my english is not perfect) what you wrote, it's the art gallery itself, facing all the criticisms, that denied the dog was mistreated ?
If so, very "objective" don't you think ?
Thanks,
Renaud (Belgium).
In my view, the Codex Gallery has a right to defend itself in the wake of the outcry. It's not really the gallery that has come under the most criticism, however, it's the artist himself and the national awards scheme that recently invited him to repeat the 'exhibit'.
Frankly, It's still wrong.
Maybe the fellow thinks he's very "ironic" or "avant garde" by doing this whole sham, but the fact remains that he didn't help the dog, and he DID add to its suffering, regardless if it actually died or not.
He added stress to the dog's life by capturing it and tying it up in front of a large group of people, only to be confusedly let back into the street, and stress HAS been proven to harm animals in a way that it shortens their lifespan and causes other health issues.
Secondly, his "point" is moronic.
If he wants to bring attention to the plight of street dogs, a publicity stunt at the expense of the reputation of modern artists is not the way to do it.
Not only are we artists looked at as weirdos already, now everyone who didn't hear the later "hoax" revelation can justifiably think that killing dogs is some acceptable part of the modern art "scene" (judged as "acceptable" enough to be in a large gallery, not just some lone nut's bedroom).
Not to mention that perhaps organizing a food drive for street dogs, or taking donations at the door of his "art" events for a shelter or rescue center could be a start towards actually helping the dogs and not just trying to get attention to his own name.
Thirdly, the reason why dogs on the street are not "such a big deal" (although I wouldn't say, as he did, that no one says or does ANYthing about it-plenty of groups exist who try to help those types of animals)compared to one being held in a gallery as "art" is that the person putting them in the gallery clearly has the means to shelter and care for him, and if it appears they have taken him off of the street where he at least could forage in dumpsters or get handouts from passersby, yes, it looks like they are actively STARVING HIM, as opposed to "letting him starve on the street", and people are going to be horribly pissed!!
I find it quite bizarre that the gallery released a statement ONLY after the outcry from media...
People in Africa are starving too.
Next time try this on a black kid!
if this is not torturing and killing, what is?
so simple for me...
I agree with the long post from "anonymous" on April 8. I am relieved that this was a hoax, yet still disgusted that the dog was released back to the streets back to a ....good life? I think not. I hate hypocrisy as much as anyone else and at least try to do my part by volunteering at animal shelters and try to find homes for poor animals like this. Just becaues this dog was fed and watered during this exhibit does not excuse what was done after...further confusing the poor animal. The whole thing makes me feel sick.
So, everyone is still piseed with Vargas? Hmm I think that he did make his point afterall.
Modern societies are so mistreating not only animal life but human life too, and all our anger goes to Vargas and his idea to underline (well not with the best of ways the truth is) exactly this situation.
People at the so called third world are working for 1$/day, children are working, human traffic is among with drug traffic and guns the biggest money makers in our times, and all we got to say is down with Vargas.
Don't get me wrong, I do dislike animal mistreating, but all you crusaders, well where are you when children are abused daily, when women are promised work and are "chained" to prostitute, when animals suffer daily in the f*cking zoos (since when do lions live in f*cking germany?)
Think more before you condemn one (1) guy for his anti-animal feelings, look further, but most of all look around you and criticize your everyday environment where your word can really change something.
My 2 cents. (Oh, and no I'm not Vargas atterny ;p)
I have very mixed feelings about the "hoax". I do admire the man for stirring up people, but I strongly disapprove of his own hypocracy. Catching a dog in dire need of help, exploiting it to prove his point and then missing his own message?! In his defense, as far as calling attn. to the plight of homeless dogs (3rd world countries or otherwise) this stunt sure packs a punch and saddly that's what it takes sometimes. I know from experience that things such as starting a food drive or taking donations at his exhibits (for animals) would have hardly made a dent and would not have gotten any attention. It's hard enough to get enough people to part with their change in a country as affluent as ours (USA), let alone in countries where people don't even earn a sustainable living. And while a number of groups do exist to help "those types of animals" they exist on donations and more often then not the money that comes straight out of the rescuers own pocket. Which if you are like me (owner of 6 dogs, 2 rescued off the street and 1 from the shelter) living month to month and always coming across stray dogs that I always try to catch and personally rescue and find homes for, it's neither cheap nor easy. Rescue groups are always in need of money and a place to keep the animals they are rescuing. So while I was very outraged and am still questioning whether to believe -but very much hoping-it was a hoax, and only wish he had followed through by leading by example, I thank him for bringing so much attn. to the issue. And while I know there are OTHER serious issues in the world affecting both animals and people of all ages and gender this is my area of importance and crusading interest and where I feel I can help and make the most difference. And I agree with IOS when he writes " look around you and criticize your everyday environment where your word (and actions) can really change something". Well stated!
http://soydondenopienso.wordpress.com/2007/10/27/guillermo-vargas-habacuc-declaraciones-de-la-galeria-codice/
I think this outrage has just been a lack of research and proper translation.
"Estuvo suelto todo el tiempo en el patio interior, excepto las 3 horas que duró la muestra, fue alimentado regularmente con comida de perro que el mismo Habucuc trajo."
A quote from the Codex gallery owner juanita bermudez -- the dog was out on the open patio all the time except during the 3 hour show, and was regularly fed with dog food that Habucuc brought himself.
I still don't see how this is art.. you wanted a reaction well you sure got one. Is that the only point your trying to make? there are starving dogs?
Yah there is but its harder to take care of all the starving unwanted dogs in the world, and considering the fact that a half the people can't afford to look after and feed a dog because there starving themselfs.
Why we are so upset is because when you have a dog or animal your making a comitment to that animal saying your going to love it feed it and take care of it.
these pictures showed an animal being starved and watched by others and doing nothing about it.
witch i know that was the point your trying to make. but what did you do to help the dog after?
ok so the dog was looked after and feed, but then you just let it go in the streets? why didn't you want to keep it and take care of it, or at lest take it to an SPCA. If your trying to make a strong point about starving animals then why don't you do something about it other then taking a dog in for a few days giving it hope and then throwing it back out to the streets...Your still sick in my mind.
-Chantel. D
Yah paul the Codex Gallery has a right to defend itself..But it still doesn't mean it was right.
Can you honesty tell all these people you thought this was a good idea? and that you agree with everything this person did?
this is discusting.
Ok so, the pictures are all over he got the people angry at him, now what?
Is this person planning on helping starving animals..probably nott.
Oh and I love the part where it says he baought the food himself...HA wow, he did such a great thing he bought the dog some food, but are we forgetting he let the dog back into the streets.
Maybe we are all mistaken about what happend to this poor dog.
So maybe paul you should write the benifits of having this done to the dog, other than maybe more people are aware.
-Chantel. D
tie this artist up and put thier favorite food across the room for them and lets use that as art. What is this world coming too. We can find anything else to entertain ourselves. This makes me sick. utterly sickening.
They released the dog back to the streets? Yeah, that really proved a point... what the heck? At least find the poor dog a home after what you did to it.
I don't care if this was a hoax or not. This is a disgusting show of character! Show me a starving child and tell me that that is art. No one will think that! Those who do, you need to be put away! Murders are disgusting! Pedophiles are disgusting! So are those who abuse animals for any reason what so ever are disgusting! This is not art! This is criminal!!!!!!!
Art is beautiful. This, however, is a sin. This is not art!! I hope the "artist" burns in hell. You need to be tortured like this poor animal!
I'm glad to hear the update, and that it was a slightly mistaken story.
The statement made was strong and it was good to see the amount of people that jumped to the defense of this animal, myself included.
Initially I thought it was disgusting and then thought it must be a statement and not just a form of art, I thought it was a comment on the way pictures are taken of starving people and no one helps those people so the same applies to the animals in the world and that they deserve attention equally. And also that neither should be exploited for the sake of art.
I'm glad to hear the dog was released, but also upset that no one took the dog home and tried to bring it back to a healthy state!
In any case thank you for the update.
for my blog http://cynthelove.wordpress.com/
You're absolutely right that we are still angry. Which means Habucac DID achieve his goal. We're all so involved in what we do in our own lives everyday, that it takes something this drastic for us to take notice. No doubt he returned the dog to the street because it was not a house pet. The truth is that you can't rescue some street animals. They've grown feral, and while they're not attacking people on the street, they wouldn't sleep calmly at the foot of your bed either. They can be helped, don;t get me wrong. If some organization was willing to feed and sterilize these animals, there wouldn't be so a huge problem. For as much outrage as I've seen though, I certainly don't see people volunteering to go down to Costa Rica themselves to feed and care for the street dogs. Or even to send money. It's always "they should have," or "there are organizations," placing the responsibility somewhere else. Wouldn't it be nice if we directed some of this anger into energy for HELPING? In the meantime, I'll sit back and cuddle my dogs and give them some extra kibble tonight.
Why is your blog the only place I can seem to find that states that the starving dog was a hoax?
Unfortunately, the more reputable news reports on the subject of Guillermo Habacuc Vargas starving a dog to death in an art gallery are undetermined on whether or not the dog was or was not actually starved to death. We may never know the truth. The Guardian, one of the best news sources worldwide states that the artist would not comment other than to say they received death threats. The gallery claims that the dog was fed by the artist and escaped the gallery, because it was only tied during the exhibit. You can view the article here: http://arts.guardian.co.uk/art/news/story/0,,2269320,00.html
The same story is also told in Spanish from another news website, which states "Juanita Bermúdez, directora de Galería Códice, afirma que como persona seria no permitiría el maltrato al animal. La directora afirmó que el perro comió en reiteradas ocasiones y que no murió, si no que se fugó durante la madrugada." (http://www.laprensa.com.ni/archivo/2007/octubre/05/noticias/revista/219438.shtml)
Snopes.com, a top watchdog of urban legends and hoaxes has classified the situation as undetermined. (http://www.snopes.com/critters/crusader/vargas.asp)
The biggest websites I could find claiming that the situation is a hoax are only blogs no more reputable than my livejournal.
I have trouble believing that the dog escaped an art gallery without assistance from a human capable of unlocking doors.
What we do know is that Guillermo Habacuc Vargas stated that the dog did starve to death, and a starving dog was put on display in an art gallery. I do not believe that putting something somewhere without altering it can be considered art. If it were, we would all make art daily in our toilets. Guillermo Habacuc Vargas is a failure as an artist. The worst kind of artist is not one who makes bad art, because art is subjective, but one who claims the art of others as their own and in the process fails to make their intended impression on an audience. Guillermo Habacuc Vargas claimed that people observed the stray dog in a gallery, whereas they would not pay attention to it in the street. I think that is the most worthless theory behind art I've witnessed. If the people in the gallery did not help the dog and the people in the street did not help the dog, then basically Vargas wasted a lot of time and some money for nothing. If the dog escaped the gallery, then someone had to help the dog possibly risking their job or other punishment. In that case, someone did step in and help when they saw a dog in trouble. I have helped stray dogs find their way home in the past. I would have freed that dog from the gallery. Whether the dog, Natividad, lived or died after the exhibit, Vargas is basically a moron and not an artist. Therefore, take a second to sign the petition, because no one wants that jackass putting anything in any gallery again.
If this was a hoax where are the pictures of the dog alive and well? Vargas has ducked and dived for too long for it to be a hoax. This is just a ploy to placate people and cover his and the galleries steps.
I would like to see proof before believing him.
As i sit here reading this blog, and its comments I feel that everyone is taking the sole point from what it is and twisting it morbidly into their own fashion and frame of mind. Granted, a starving dog was tied up into a studio and 'displayed' for people to see. Does anyone stop and think for once why the artist did this? Have they looked beyond the shrinking animal, a point of which the artist was possibly trying to point out. No, you all saw and read what you want to read. you only see one side of a story where two sides are always evident.
So quickly people point the fingers at the wrong doers and never look at their own flaws, I am not saying that keeping the dog in the studio was correct. But would you have heard the artist otherwise? No, you wouldn't have. No one takes the time out of their hurried schedules, and buisy day to stop and see what is around them. People need to open their pretty eyes, there are homeless people out there.
Military Vetrans who need help, animals dieing and wasting away on the streets of your cities, kids being beaten, neglected, starved, raped molested. And here you are ganging up on one person showing you how your life is, showing you that you don't take the time to stop and help to be a good citizen. You cry out over one dog, where there are many.
You drink from the river of life but what do you give back to a world that you take from? Do you stop and pick up a wounded lonely cat off the street? Do you stop and help a homeless person, or give them money so they can buy food for themselves for the day. Do you give them jobs, and take them off the streets.
I am just wondering, How do you make a diffrence in this life. Seriously, do you pluck the unlucky off their feet and give them just 5 dollars to make their day. Feed homeless animals, and take them in to get fixed. so far all ive seen is 'what you should dos' and 'what you should have dones' Take it as a mark, you don't see the poor things around you. So who are you to judge anyone who shows what you do not see? Personally I believe that the artist had let the dog go, I don't live where ever this happend but I feel that before you start judging others you need to judge yourself for your faults first.
Take what the artest meant to put out, not what the artist did to one animal. there are animals every day being starved, beaten and abused and you do nothing to help them. So what right do you have to say anything to the artist about how they portray what they do, you don't. Maybe you should start.
So how many of you people pissing and moaning about this are Vegan then? If you're not you have no right to complain when you're food spends all it's life shackled like this dog and force fed until it cannot move/legs break etc.
Get off your pedestals and take direct action.
Just because people are not vegan DOESN'T mean we all eat factory farmed food. I for one, only buy from a local "Free Range" (I hate that term) farm.But thats not here nor there. I agree with this "artists" points but not his methods. And if it's reached the Millions who have signed then maybe a few more of them will start helping out their local shelters. Anyone can sign some paper but it takes more then that. Get off your lazy behinds and do some charity work !! Start a shelter even. Cats,dogs Even reptiles are left for dead everyday. I currently house 63 unwanted reptiles, 6 dogs and 11 cats. everyone can take on something. Shelters also need foster homes. I encourage everyone to just stop bitching and do a little part.
if this was a hoax, why do these photos show an emaciated dog? i just don't understand why he would do this to an animal just to prove a point. yes it is true most humans do not care about animals, but what about people like you and me who do. i'm glad he received death threats, and this is coming from a fellow artist. out of all the works i have created in my lifetime so far, i have never harmed a human, animal or any living thing. just because you are an artist, doesn't mean you should murder. leave that to john waters movies, wtf.
I always thought it was a hoax, so I was never "outraged" by the story in the first place. There have been too many internet stories like this one over the past few years. You place a child or an animal in some kind of harm, and the gullibility of the populace takes precedence over whatever intelligence they might claim to possess.
"....and that it was allowed to escape back to the streets from where it was taken at the end of the exhibit....."
Lets assume that this was indeed true.
Doesn't that make Bermudez and Vargas the biggest hypocrites of them all.
I am also taking great offense on the statement of Bermudez.
I am one of those outraged by this cruely and I am someone who cares about these creatures. On the streets, on death row at the pound and in labs, in factories.
This is not art.
I could think of different ways make the same statement he says he was trying to make, without torturing a creature to death.
And lastly. A statement to cover your butt, saying "oh just kidding, the animal was allowed to escape back to the streets from where it was taken at the end of the exhibit" is really self serving, isn't it?
I'm not buying it.
FACT: In every way, shape & form, the dog was mistreated - cared for or not, it was put on display - that was cruel in itself.
FACT: In every way, shape & form, the publi was mistreated - used, lied to, manipulated. Trying to evoke my pain & pity will not help save millions of mistreated animals - it makes me hate the ones mistreating this one animal..
FACT: Where ill will is bred, misery can only follow. This gallery should be shut down. This "artist" should be investigated. This travesty should NEVER be allowed again...
Did it ever occur to anyone that the Codex Gallery simply released what the public wanted to hear in order to salvage their reputation? That perhaps the dog never was fed or given water and that after this exhibit became public they realized their bad judgement in allowing it at all?
I understand people are angry about this, especially the part about the dog being released back onto the streets. A lot of you are mad that the dog didn't get taken better care of after the exhibit...
However...
Considering what was said about the purpose for the exhibit, you really have to assume that there are a hell of a lot of starving dogs in Central America. You take one in (question: are there even SPCA's in Costa Rica?), and you have to take them all in. Many of these dogs have probably never lived with people, which will happen in a place where dogs are abandoned very young and begin banding together and breeding, having never had the opportunity to be neutered. So basically, they are living like wolves.
I'm not really either for or against this whole "artistic" scheme, but I'd like to see any one of you take in a wild dog - fleas, disease, and all. I guess what I'm getting at is, if you are this worked up about stray dogs in Latin America, pull yourselves together and go rescue them instead of signing online petitions. It will be a much better use of your time.
I'd like to just say that the whole idea of this is so backwards, I agree with the fact that if he wanted to truely make a statement that our society only cares about these such instances when they are brought to the media, this is the wrong way to do it. This guy could not have done his research about animal rights organizations. The truth is that most people really don't think about what a lot of abandoned or abused animals go through, but that is because they choose not to. Being a vegan myself, I don't push people to follow what I believe in, I think that everyone should be able to make their own choices, but most of the time when I am asked why I am vegan, and then begin to explain the life these poor animals live, I'm asked to stop, no one wants to invision their dinner living in such dispicable conditions. They choose to ignore it. But just putting this dog in an exhibit, in which he is trying to make a point such as this, it's no secret that most people choose to live their lives this way, it's the same with the war, and with poverty and all the other big issues that our world faces, people think that if they don't see it, it doesnt really exhist. He could have chosen a much more decent way to make his point. This exactly is the reason that animal rights activist get such a bad rep, it gives the impression that all animal rights activists are extremists, and go to such lengths that just end up causing more harm than good. And then everyone thinks that they are all just crazy cooks. There are actually some of us in the world who actually care about the health and well being of every living thing, whether or not we can actually do anything about it, there are tons of things you can do in your everyday life that will save the lives of hundreds of animals. No one person can do it all, but it takes the banding together of our world as a whole to make a differece, and when guys like this nut job go out there trying to "make a statement" all he's doing is hurting the cause. Someone please tie him up to a rope for weeks on end, and lets just see how he feels at the end of it.
And I just want to add to the person 4/26 at 5:26 am. There is no way anyone in this world can go and take in all stray animals. The point of these petitions is to get people aware of these issues. The animals don't have voices, we have to speak for them. Trust me, if I were wealthy enough I'd buy an entire continent and take in each and every last stray and sheltered animal and give them all everything they need for a happy natural life. But that is never going to happen. Until people start opening their eyes to the truth behind the lives of these animals, there will never be an answer to help them all. People choose to be left in the dark, it's easier for them that way. Once you witness it, those images are never gone from your memory. So instead of posting responses to those who are speaking out for animal rights, whether it be online or whatever, why dont you go and open up a clinic for spaying and neutering in Costa Rica. Cause I guarentee you that everyone who has posted on here in defense of animal rights, has done much more in their lifetimes than you have in the way of helping animals.
i don't even care if art is an excuse, that is sickening. I also don't even care if the dog was released! that's animal cruelty, and so punishable by law! this person should be arrested, or at least punished in SOME way!
also on that note, if you wanted to show someone dying in art, it would be protested, no? not that i'm saying that animals are the same and feel the same thing as humans, but i wouldn't go to an art museum to see a starving child tied up in a corner for people to gawk at!
So - It's funny to read all of you 'outraged' people's comments.
Stop commenting on a blog about it, then, and DO something about it. Your opinion is worthless unless you take action about these things you feel so 'strongly' about. Get off the blogspace and into the real world.
You're not really making much of an impact in this world writing angry comments on the internet from the security of your own home.
I do not make it a custom to post blogs, but there is simply too much anger built up from this event to keep quiet. I believe that in every situation there is a possibility for the truth to be obscured. I believe that this 'artist' has found himself in a situation in which his own life has been threatened just like the life of the animal that he cruelly mistreated. This man is not a man. In previous comments regarding why he did what he did never once did he exclaim the fact that he himself cared for this animal for the duration of the exhibit. Never once did he exclaim that the animal went free, and most certainly he never exclaimed anything to the effect that he was trying to make a point in focusing efforts to saving stray and starving animals. In fact, he named the dog Natividad because that was the name of his friend that was killed by 2 rottweilers (and although there was no further explanation as to how it was that his friend was killed, having lived in Costa Rica, odds are that these animals were severely mistreated).
This 'artist' is nothing more than a coward. Had this 'installment' taken place in Costa Rica, or any location with laws protecting animals from this sort of s**t, he would be serving the maximum amount of time in jail. But no! He went to another state to do it - one WITHOUT animal rights laws. The same applies to the art gallery. Previous reports from the director stated that the dog died, and never once did they indicate that the dog was cared for in any way shape or form. Both at this point are trying to save face. If it hadn't been for the public outcry they wouldn't bother to pull off this lame extraction.
The truth of the matter is that the 'artist', the gallery and the dumba** people who attended the show are all guilty of the suffering of this animal. I have rescued animals for far too many years to believe that these people care for the rights of animals, or anyone or anything other than themselves- they cared just as much as the person that doesn't think twice of throwing a dog or cat out of a moving vehicle. Or even the people who think it fun to burn them while inside of a pillow case, or simple think nothing of beating it with a baseball bat.
He had stated before that he wanted to make a point about how people will do what you tell them to do - thus the "You are what you read" sign that was placed on the wall where the dog was chained (written in dog food). If this was his goal, if he truly wanted to make a point about obedience, he needed to point of the acts of genocide committed throughout the world.
There is simply no excuse for this to have ever occurred and there is certainly no excuse in which it could ever be allowed to happen again!
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=13768687063
Please can you go to that link!
I am so dam sick and tired of people judging before they know the truth!!! i have stuck up for this artist till my fingers started to bleed (Figuratively)
The artist is soo right so many people are a huge fucking bunch of hypocritical sheep!!!
they are all so quick to judge ad acuse him of starving the dog when it wasn't even him who abused it in the first place, to me all those closed minded pathetic people are the thing that make me sick!!!
i love animals i would never harm any animal, my perception of this instillation was deep, It made me want to go out right away and find as many strays as i could!
He really did such an amazing jib on his message but it's so irratating that people who know nothing about art label and bring him down!
grrrrrrr!!
please go onto that link and post a nice big long comment!!
thank you for reading this
shavonne
I have to say, while I think he should have taken in the dog, or found somebody else to take the dog in, I think street dogs everywhere should thank him.
I lived in Honduras for 2 years, and go back almost every year for a month or so. The street dogs in the small town I lived in there are countless. I befriended as many as I could, and even brought 2 back to the U.S.; one lives with me, and the other with my mother.
So I tried to do my small part to help, but far too many people, Hondurans & gringos alike, never gave the dogs another look.
If this guy has made us all take the time to think about these poor, dirty, hungry, homeless dogs, and maybe even take one as a pet, and spay or neuter our own pets, then I think he's done something worthwhile.
This says so much about what can be passed as art today, almost anything-how ridiculous. Also i don't know where the 'artist' is from but where I am from we don't watch dogs starving to death on streets so it's very insulting and completely ignorant of the 'artist' to label people as hypocrites and sheeps.
Whether or not the acts were done as a hoax, a stunt, or as "art", whichever term you choose to describe it, this is absolutely (still) cruel & should be treated as such, tell me, if the dog was released, where are the photos of that?
Releasing him from this torture is more beautiful than any "art" he was objected to in that shameful gallery.
If I were the gallery owner, I would NEVER allow such a thing to take place.
This story, true, or not, is appalling, and I can barely stomach the thought of someone doing this.
Disgusting. Positively disgusting.
For what it's worth, I agree with you Mumphrey. You're obviously in a position to judge 'why' he felt the need to run this exhibit far better than anyone else who has commented on this blog and it's good to hear from you. Aside from the hysteria surrounding the story and the specifics of whether the dog escaped or was freed, there is a bigger issue that many, many people have missed amidst their fury. Thank you for your input.
http://www.hsus.org/contact_us/humane_society_international.html#Q_dog_artist
Q. Is it true that a Central American artist used a starving dog in an art exhibit?
We are aware of this story and have asked our contacts in Central America for more information. According to local animal welfare organizations, the dog was in a state of starvation when he was captured from the street for display in the exhibit. We have also been informed that the dog spent one day in the exhibit and later escaped the gallery. We do not condone the actions of this so-called "artist," and condemn the use of live animals in exhibits such as this. An animal welfare organization in Honduras, where the next art show will be held, is keeping close watch on the case and assures us that the artist will not repeat his objectionable exhibit.
Sadly, thousands of street dogs in Central America are in as poor shape as this one. HSI works throughout the world to prevent the circumstances that allow such a tragic event to take place. We encourage you to learn more about our street animal welfare programs.
Hi everybody,
Personally, and if this whole story is a hoax, I think it's brilliant! What an amazing criticism of our society...
Look at all the intense and emotional reactions all over the world,while no one took the time to verify the information.
It's also amazing how we - in developped countries - think that these poor central american countries dont have laws or animal protection. It's a great criticism of both our laziness and arrogance!! Fantastic! Bravo l'artiste!!
Anonymous from 4/15 who proclaim that we should DO SOMETHING about it. A lot of us do. We work at shelters and we find these dogs homes. Granted I'm not in Costa Rica, but here in Scotland I do my fair share, as I'm sure many of these outraged people do. Don't be so generalising.
Also, have you even seen this guy? He looks like a Nine Inch Nails groupie from 1993. If his statement was effective or not, I'm willing to hold it against him based on his bad fashion sense. Seriously though, where I live, stray dogs do NOT go unnoticed, but that's where I live. Most of the outrage stems from the US, and rightfully so, where dogs are generally better cared for. I know it's different in many other countries, but that doesn't make what he did right. The posts on this thread defending his statement are very impulsive (as are the ones condemning him), but the defenders seem to over look that this exhibit was...well, an exhibit. Dozens of people came in and out looking at dying dog as a social event. Do you think they were affected by it? Who knows? They sure as hell didn't do anything about it. I guess it didn't really have an effect on them at the moment. Personally, I think the 'hoax' bit is just a cover-up to smooth things over.
I'm curious as to how many of these "outraged" individuals eat meat. The torture and cruelty that goes on daily to keep you fed is just as bad as or worse than what did or didn't happen to this dog. This selective caring for animals is nothing short of irritating. Either keep it up for all animals, or shut up.
Well, it's still a sick way to bring attention to something that is happening all over the world. When it was over, if they wanted to help this poor dog, why did they release it back to the streets instead of taking it somewhere to get it some help?
I don't believe the Codex Gallery at all and I don't believe this is a hoax. The Codex Gallery is covering its ass. How anyone can call this art is beyond me. Nick Adrian said that Guillermo Habacuc Vargas is a failure at art. I agree but I think that Guillermo Habacuc Vargas is a failure as a human being and a failure at life.
Personally, I'd like to tie him to a wall and see him starve to death.
I like dogs and animals as much as I like most people. If this was a hoax, I applaud the artist on a job well done. I see a bunch of people still angry at him. I'm not sure, but this must mostly be because they were made to feel foolish. The dog wasn't harmed, and was probably improved by it more than hurt. The artist certainly did more for the individual dog than anybody who is complaining.
Even if it were true and he tied a dog there to starve, it is hard for me to expend much energy in outrage. There are children out there who are forced to be soldiers, and a million more things that more deserve attention.
Of course, here I am expending energy complaining about all the energy expended in frivolous anger.
I suppose the point is, your concern makes it art, but I wouldn't buy it.
The dog is obviously dead and was starved to death at the exhibit. The report that the dog was "released back into the street" is just subterfuge for not having the dog on hand to show it is alive and that this idiot artist has perpetrated a big practical joke for which we should all be ashamed. The exhibit is just another example bioart - that refuge that sadists find to ply their trade under the false flag of "artistic" pursuits and "awareness raising." F*ck them all. The whole movement is founded on bored western suburban conceits of morality and trying to pop them, meaning the scope of the work is hopelessly limited. I live in Africa, and this dog - dead though he may be - was treated better in his last hours than most of the children I report on on a daily basis.
So I would like to know what the visitors to the gallery did to stop this. I for sure would have not left that gallery until that poor animal had been untied and fed. I would have personally have gone straight to the gaollery management and demanded its release. No matter what the 'message' was, that dog must have been terrified.There is no justification for this exhibition.
I think it's ironic that lady who is the head of the gallary fed the dog and everything, and then the dog was "able to escape" back to the streets???!!
Yeah, because I'm sure that dog WANTS to be on the street.
Bring him to the humane society, or something.
Send him here, and I would be more than honored to adopt him.
I have to agree that if the artist wanted to make a point, he could have at least given the dog to someone that would take care of it instead of letting it go. I work at a humane society and have seen the terrible things that people do to animals when they are not wanted. I've seen abused, broken and bleeding pets that still perk up and wag their tails if you give them a second of attention. To say that he did that to bring that to people's attention, I believe he made his point but should have done it in a MUCH better way. I also have to say that kinsie is wrong. If you have spent ANY amount of time around animals you would know that they feel everything that humans feel, and are always aware of your feelings. Animals can always tell what you are feeling and try to help you in any way they can even if they just lick your hand and look into your eyes. I hope that most people never have to see an animal in pain but I can assure you it is one of the most heartbreaking things I have ever seen in my life. I think the artist only did that for his own gain and doesn't really care about those stray animals, he just wanted to pick something shocking that would get himself attention. Well it worked, now what....
I agree with you. I used to volunteer at the humane society where I got my cat. It is one of the best feelings in the world knowing you saved an animal. I am 19 years old, and I got my cat when I turned 7. He was extremely abused. He was used for entertainment. His head was held under water to see how long he could hold his breath before he passed out. It's heartbreaking. So, does that mean this "artist" could take a cat and do the same to "raise awareness"? That's insane. I also have a lab. To even begin to fathom someone doing this to her makes me cry. I am a Criminal Justice major, and I am going into Animal Cruelty like on Animal Planet. I hope to put these maniacs beyond bars. I wish they could be placed on death row, but since that will never happen, I will do anything I can.
I think this guy is brilliant. Many people resist modern art, and cannot be convinced anything is art if they cannot hang it on their wall. However, there are so many things that I can hang on my wall that provoke no feeling or thought. They just hang. When I saw this, I at first thought it was real, and I felt my insides shrivel up in a pang of empathy. I was amazed, disgusted and even angry at the possibility that art lovers could ignore the reality of a situation for the emotional experience. The ironic possibility of cruelty in the name of art is not an entirely new idea, but here it is presented in a new way. I don't think it is fair to judge him as a crusader for animal rights, rather than as an artist, since I believe the primary purpose of this was art - to make people feel and think. It made me do both. Once I found out it wasn't real I could appreciate it, like you can appreciate the empathy you feel for a character in a movie only because you know that the movie is not real. Everyone seems convinced that only happiness can be enjoyed, or if one can enjoy other emotions, it must be on a canvas, or a screen. Are you guys dead to everything?? p.s. fuck you :)
This whole new age "ART" is sickening & IF it is a hoax,yet to be proven that it is not, the artist , the gallery AND anyone who went and saw this and who stood by and did nothing, are all as bad as each other and are alot lower than sewer rats!
i want proof it is not a hoax, not just a statement from the gallery or the artist, because of course they will defend and deny!
and by the way David, your mouth is dirtier than a sewer, how can you appreciate it, when IF it is a hoax, think that it is all o.k in the end,and art does not have to hang on a wall, but it does not have to be murderous and cruel either,
First of all David, we are all voicing our opions respectively on here, and there is no need to say "fuck you" to us, especially before you even hear what we have to say. This man is far from brilliant. I don't really care if it was a hoax or not. Any person who sees a living skeleton and does nothing is lower than anyone should ever be. That dog was suffering in so many ways. Besides severe starvation, he must have had anemia, thin blood, a slow heartbeat, and he must have been so terrified and nervous around all those people who were observing him as "art." I'm sorry, but seeing an animal suffer will never be art to me, and if that means that I just cannot understand the beauty of something new and different, fine. I rather help animals than watch them die. Call me crazy or whatever, but that dog did not deserve what he was subjected to before, during and after this art show.
How on earth is it possible to "pretend" to starve a poor animal???????
This was all just a coverup for the cruel reality!!
If the dog was fed as stated then he would not be looking the way he did. If they were indeed feeding the dog they must have been feeding him very little because he looked like he suffered of malnutrition. That was an abuse of power as a so called artist on his behalf.
He might have a point with his message through his art about how we will not care about a stray dog but we will pay attention to one chained up in a gallery. But you know why?? Because a stray dog will find food somewhere in some alley. Whereas the dog he had tied up has no way of searching for his own food, therefore depending on those he trusted in the first place, those of you that took him to that gallery to suffer and die!
Of course people are hypocrites! But the problem i had with this "stunt" is that in the street, the dog has an opportunity to look for food, to beg, etc. And I am one of those people who buys pet food, with my own money, to leave food for strays, while also trapping them to get them spayed/neutered, vetted, before releasing them again. But this "art" exhibit had a dog tied down, with no recourse to find food. THAT is what upset me. Nevertheless, if they really did feed the dog, and let him roam during off hours, just to expose the suffering that living beings must endure on an every day basis, then I applaud him for this.
Who cares if it's a hoax or not. It's still wrong and the dog was starved, LOOK AT IT'S BODY! The "artist" is clearly trying to get more reputation than actually caring. You know he can do other things to prove his point instead of doing this cruel act. It's wrong and inhumane and Guillermo Habacuc Vargas should DEFINITELY suffer!
i appreciate all art media - but was brought to the point of tears and nausea from the initial thought of someone committing such cruelty - why not give the dog some food rather than make a spectacle of it? spend your creative energy opening an animal shelter - i HOPE the animal was set free where it could at least partake of life's survival of the fittest and if need be dying 'naturally' rather than being tied up and helpless
-this is not art in my opinion
I have a difficult time believing that this was a hoax and that the animal was actually being fed and watered. The pictures of the exhibit show a dog getting more and more emaciated, losing its hair, covered in sores, etc. They also show a dog that isn't even able to move towards the end of the exhibit. Even if they did release the animal into the wild afterwards, it probably would've died without help. I am saddened but not surprised that there would be people who would pass this off as art and people who would defend it. I know plenty of people who don't give animals and animal welfare the time of day claiming that they are lesser creatures. Unfortunately, I don't have the funds nor the time right now to go to Latin America and help strays. If I did I most certainly would got there and other places around the world, and I'd make it a point not only to help strays but the poor human victims of starvation and cruelty as well. Instead, I focus on the problem as it exists in my own backyard. I donate to organizations that help homeless animals, I speak out about animal overpopulation and I volunteer at my local humane society. I also have rescued three dogs and given them a home with me. Yes, I signed the petition to prevent another exhibit of this kind because right now I am not in a position to hop a flight to Costa Rica, start a protest and take in strays. But I can still show my disgust at this man's passing starvation off as art and now claiming that it didn't really happen in an attempt to save his reputation.
I don't understand why people have difficulty believing the dog was fed after it was displayed. IT WAS A STARVING DOG HE TOOK OFF THE STREETS. Why in the world would it NOT look emancipated and about to die? And why do you all think it's his obligation to take this dog in? He's done more than any of you have by making everyone aware of their plight and maybe at least now some of them can be helped. What have you done for starving street dogs lately??
Ok, for one, leting the dog back on the streets isn't a harsh or 'sick' thing to do, it was where the dog was before. Also, it wouldn't traumatise the dog as most street dogs are pets tht have been let out because they were unwanted. These dogs are used to human contact, and most probably benefitted from a meal, fresh water and warmpth.
Secondly, those who call for him to adopt the dog, instead of turning it back to the streets should think again. Most people would not want a street dog in their house, even if they could afford to keep it. Especially if the artist had children, or a busy schedule, as dogs like company, and they get depressed if left in the house on their own alot.
Also, calling for the artist to at least take it to a shelter is not always an option. Most animal shelters (although Battersey (UK) Dogs home do not? will put dogs down if they cannot re-home them. This is because they are almost always overcrowded, and simply cannot help all the dogs.
Finally, i think that the artist made a clever point, and opend up people's eyes. The fact that so many people got angry at him for the state of one dog, and not angry in general about the state of all these stray dogs shows that we only care 'once it is in a gallery' (for want of a better phrase). If you want to be outraged, then perhaps aim this anger at society in general for ignoring this issue up until now.
When news crews enter countries suffering from conflict, poverty, disease, famine and document suffering people for news features, how can they leave them behind? why don't they help the starving child they filmed with flies on their face by adopting them???
The point is, we ALL sit and voluntarily witness atrocities from the comfort of our cosy, 1st world homes EVERYDAY. And guess what? We all voluntarily do very little about it.
So in context of the world, to be so angered by this one artist and this one dog is ludicrous and missing the point entirely. And the artist has managed to capture the impotence and ugly whining hypocrisy of humankind beautifully.
There are plenty of other ways to raise animal cruelty issue awareness so the fact that he did it for souly that reason is bullshit, the fact of the matter is he took an animal into his posession and denied it food,and water that's a crime, wherever the hell it is sitting tied up it is still a crime, whether or not in the public eye it is still a crime.
and to those who say "Why don't you do something about it" HA do something about the billions of unsolved animal cruelty cases? How about um because it's impossible..? Alot of people try and help animals in need and do what they can, alot don't, it's going to stay that way for some time, and signing a petition IS doing something about it.
In 1906, American author, journalist, and social visionary Upton Sinclair wrote The Jungle. He intended the book to expose exploitation of the lower classes through the illustration of the life of an immigrant working in the Chicago meatpacking factories.
The book was not received the way Sinclair had anticipated. Missing his intent, the public instead reacted to the descriptions of disgusting conditions in the stockyards, and the revolting ingredients used in making sausages and the like, resulting in a public uproar. The public's reaction to the book was directly responsible for a government investigation, and subsequent creation of regulatory agencies, as well as the passage of the Pure Food and Drug Act.
The result? Our sausages today do not contain bits of rotten, ground-up rats.
I mention this because I see it as similar to the stray-dog situation. The dog isn't art, it's a social commentary, meant to bring about positive change with regards to a particular aspect of society. It, too, caused a public uproar, similar to that following the publication of The Jungle. Therefore, I think Vargas may actually be successful in his attempt to improve the lives of street dogs, and I certainly hope he is.
Mari wrote:
"IT WAS A STARVING DOG HE TOOK OFF THE STREETS. Why in the world would it NOT look emancipated and about to die?"
Although I agree with Mari's overall point, I feel I must point out that the reason it would not look 'emancipated' is that it was never enslaved, let alone freed.
PS. Of course I know you meant to use 'emaciated'. Don't think I misunderstood your meaning.
It's a little baffling how many people here are insisting that the artist MUST have starved the dog.. Apparently you have dont NO research and have NO knowledge about the stray animal situation in Nicaragua..
There are dogs roaming the streets there, all of which look very much like the dog in the photo.
The artist paid two children to catch an emaciated street dog, he fed the dog, but you can't expect a starving dog to plump up and look all better after one meal!.. then he was chained in the gallery for 3 hours.
In america, this would be much more of an outrage because we have Animal shelters and animal control officers to call .. and our streets are not jam-packed with starving dogs! But the point he was trying to make was VERY relevant to the area where the gallery was. Many of the visitors to the gallery probably passed starving dogs while on their way there!.. and didn't think twice about it because it's such a common sight. To chain a dog IN the gallery though.. most likely evoked a very gut-wrenching reaction from them! .. and perhaps.. made them think a little more about the plight of the animals that they passed on the street..
Perhaps someone who went to that gallery might be inspired to feed a stray dog at home.. or start an animal shelter.. or to pay to have several street dogs spayed/neutered.. because they were forced to really LOOK at a street dog.. because it was INSIDE in their gallery and turned into ART.. which they were there to LOOK at..
Now to me, here in New York, I hear about this and go "OMG! HE STARVED A DOG???" and had to go get further details .. but as I read more about the story.. I'm actually rather impressed.. If someone had that exhibit here in NY.. it wouldnt be much of a statement, it would just be awful.. because I've never even seen a dog in such poor condition! If I see a dog on the street, it's usually got a collar and I pick it up and take it back to its house!.. but if I think about what it would be like to live in a place where stray starving dogs were around every corner.. I can see how it would be effective to maybe bring one indoors and force people to react!
I do not have a problem with what he did. Yep, I am a jerk I guess but it is true. He made his point..it is only worth being appalled over when someone puts it in a newspaper. How sad. If the dog died or not, it spent its time their for a day...not long eough to have committed the starving of the poor animal. If it was sick, well then it was going to die.
The only part of this no one addresses....is that it took an art show to bring a truly horrible aspect of humanity to light. Our need to gratify our sick urges to watch something suffer. Plus no one realizes that animals go through this ALL the time. He was quoted as saything that he did this to show us that people did not care about the dog, did not feed the dog, let the dog starve..until it was put on public display. How many of you ignore something till its being blasted in the papers??
its a shame.....
Just because his intent was to piss people off doesn't justify what he did. You can't ignore what someones does just because it gave the 'desired' effect that he wanted. There's no doubt in my mind that he did this for his own personal gain. Ironically the statement about what really happened was AFTER he got in trouble. then he's some 'animal hero.'
And just because I'm pissed doesn't make me a fool. So basically what I'm getting out of this, if I were to do anything and tagged it with the label of "this is art" and that, "I meant for a bad reaction", it would be completely justified.
Wow, am I appalled by what people can rationalized these days.
And long anonymous post from April 8th....you're my hero! Well said.
hey i just have to say do you honestly think that someone wouldnt sneak the dog food if this was actually happening?