I really shouldn’t have been surprised when this story was e-mailed to me yesterday.
From the story:
_An artist in Brooklyn, New York, has created an exhibit where visitors can get photographed for free — wearing a fake fur vest and brandishing a cardboard rifle — with life-size cutouts of Palin and her daughter Piper. A large, stuffed, slain caribou is thrown in for dramatic effect.
The work by artist Dawn Robyn Petrlik is entitled A Photo Op with Sarah Palin and features a rifle-toting Palin and her daughter kneeling in the snow, with mountains in the background. A fluttering US flag at the side completes the picture._
And if you really want to know what pointless gimmick art looks like, here’s the “artist’s” website.
Now I’m not one to say “I told you so” but…I told you so.
_She came up with the idea for Photo Op after seeing a smiling photograph a few weeks back of Palin and Piper next to a caribou they had gunned down. The artist was disturbed by the celebratory picture.
“I found it to be a disturbing dichotomy between her extreme pro-life stance and her glorification of hunting,” she said….So she tried to “turn that into something humorous, which helps us diffuse some of the fear and process it.”
Petrlik created the exhibit at a cost of US$12,500._
A few thoughts on art: One, If an artist uses the word “dichotomy” in describing their work, that’s code for “I really don’t know what the hell point I’m trying to make here.” Two, I appreciate Ms. Petrlik’s concern for my fear and her valiant attempt to diffuse it. I don’t know how she found out I was terrified of giant stuffed caribou, but thanks to her there will be one less polyester and styrofoam SOB traipsing through my nightmares. Three: if she actually dropped 12 grand on putting this thing together then to hell with writing, I’m going into the prop business.
The beauty of art is that it can be anything the artist says it is, so I will take Ms. Petrlik at her word that this is indeed a work of art (although to me it looks more like the aftermath of a shooting on the set of “Sesame Street”). But the corollary to that is art can also be interpreted and analyzed in whatever manner the viewer sees fit.
Anyone up for some pithy art criticism today?