Controversial artist Damien Hirst knows how to stir up an audience. This man takes art to the next level and often at the expense of other creatures. For example, his usage of a bisected cow and calf, submerging a shark in a tank of formaldehyde (a colorless pungent gas, CH2O, in solution made by oxidizing methanol), and has most recently filled two windowless rooms with real butterflies. 9,000 to be exact.
Animal rights activists are in an uproar over Hirst’s “In an out of Love” art exhibition. The telegraph reported it as a butterfly massacre, being that all 9,000 of the beautiful creatures died by the end of the 23 week run. And get this, 400 had to be replaced each week after failing to keep up with the torture. According to the newspaper, Hirst used tropical butterflies, which normally live for up to nine months in the wild, but there’s a difference between being in the ‘wild’ and being contained in a closed room.
The Tate Modern at gallery defended the show, saying the butterflies were “selected from varieties known to thrive in the conditions created. ” The exhibit of the influential artist is his first retrospective, and was the most popular show in the museum’s history, with about 3,000 visitors a day. Really? That many people went out to support such a cruel act on such precious and beautiful living creatures.
The butterfly project was one of Hirst’s first as a student, and re-created for the art gallery. Pupae were glued to a board attached to the wall. Butterflies would then hatch, fly around, feed on fruit and sugar water, and then die, to be replaced by fully hatched butterflies each week.
The Guardian called the show “a little distressing and weirdly uplifting.” I strongly believe that art should never be at the expense of a creature’s life. It’s indeed supposed to be creative but I can’t for the love of all that’s good find anything creative about such a horrific show classified as expressive. Will the real artists please stand up!
What are your thoughts on this?
Credit: Yahoo News