Check out yahoo news> Butterfly massacre for an art exhibit
Damien Hirst, a British artist, filled two windowless rooms with living butterflies for an exhibit. For his 23-week exhibit to be successful, each week he needed to replace 400 butterflies (due to the man-made and small environment, and from being stepped on or injured), which resulted in 9,000 butterflies dying for his artwork!
You're probably wondering, like myself, how did anyone allow this, especially the museum who permitted this showcase? They supported his decision since it brought in 3,000 visitors a day, and because these specific butterflies that were chosen were supposedly able to survive under these conditions.
Other work of his include submerging a shark, as well as a bisected cow and calf, in a tank of full of formaldehyde.
Is this art or rather science experiments that are open to the public to view for entertainment? Animal right activists did not enjoy hearing about this exhibit. They did not understand how Damien Hirst could treat animals with no humaneness.
Personally, I absolutely agree. When does anyone have the right to kill so many natural things for a few weeks of enjoyment?
Should we take responsibility and prevent this type of art exhibit from repeating itself, or do you think this type of art is worth the pain?
What do you think of this article? How can we prevent this type of exhibit in the future? Do you think anything positive came out of this or was it pure entertainment and a waste of our beautiful nature?
Damien Hirst's website
Damien Hirst, a British artist, filled two windowless rooms with living butterflies for an exhibit. For his 23-week exhibit to be successful, each week he needed to replace 400 butterflies (due to the man-made and small environment, and from being stepped on or injured), which resulted in 9,000 butterflies dying for his artwork!
You're probably wondering, like myself, how did anyone allow this, especially the museum who permitted this showcase? They supported his decision since it brought in 3,000 visitors a day, and because these specific butterflies that were chosen were supposedly able to survive under these conditions.
Other work of his include submerging a shark, as well as a bisected cow and calf, in a tank of full of formaldehyde.
Is this art or rather science experiments that are open to the public to view for entertainment? Animal right activists did not enjoy hearing about this exhibit. They did not understand how Damien Hirst could treat animals with no humaneness.
Personally, I absolutely agree. When does anyone have the right to kill so many natural things for a few weeks of enjoyment?
Should we take responsibility and prevent this type of art exhibit from repeating itself, or do you think this type of art is worth the pain?
What do you think of this article? How can we prevent this type of exhibit in the future? Do you think anything positive came out of this or was it pure entertainment and a waste of our beautiful nature?
Damien Hirst's website