In article , Mike Coslo writes:

N2EY wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in message
...


http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...anada_nm/canad
a_leisure_cat_col_1


If that's art, I'm gald to be an engineer.

"Glad to be an engineer"

it isn't art, or even close to it.

All depends how you define "art", Mike.

There is a "con man" element in the
art world today that seems to want to push the borders with every new
showing. It is how we get exhibits such as "**** Christ", exhibits of
decomposing cow carcasses, and now this abomination. Certainly the
Christ exhibit didn't harm any helpless creatures, and was mainly
extremely offensive.

Some folks define "art" as "anything that makes the viewer have an emotional
experience". IOW, if it makes you feel something, it's "art". Since that film -
heck, the *concept* of the film, even unseen - makes us feel something, its
creators think it's "art".

But anyone that thinks torture is art needs a visit
from Karma.

And they'll likely get it.

In the meantime, since there is a element of "art is
whatever you can get away with" in the art critic world, people try to
get away with anything.

It did make you feel something, though, didn't it?

How is Canada disgusting because of what those three bums did?

They gave light (almost no) sentences to the *******s.

As Leo points out, here in PA they'd not have gotten worse.

The people who did this should be either incarcerated or permanently in
a mental institution. They are out on the streets. To say that the
torture and mutilation of an animal is "art" of some form is merely
justification of their sociopathic condition.

Any country where there wouldn't be a huge outcry and immediate
condemnation of such an event condones it.

We (here in the USA) let folks who have murdered *human beings* get back out on
the streets, Mike.

73 de Jim, N2EY