The Starving Dog Exhibition Controversy
Sunday April 20, 2008
What would you call a gallery installation that featured crack cocaine in an incense burner, a musical loop of "Himno de Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional" playing backwards, words spelled out with pieces of dog food and a malnourished stray dog tied on a tether? Personally, I would call it My Artistic Bull___ Detector Has Lit Up and Started to Beep, but that's just me. The Costa Rican artist Guillermo Vargas Jiménez (who is in his early 30s, goes by the name "Habacuc" and is responsible for the above work) entitled it Exposición No. 1. Exposición No. 1, however, is now commonly known as Eres lo que lees (You are what you read) because those were the words meticulously spelled out with dog food.
It is verifiable fact that Exposición No. 1 was staged at Galeria Codice in Managua, Nicaragua on August 16-17, 2007. The above mentioned elements were present in Habacuc's piece, including the dog. The dog, whom the artist had named "Natividad," was on the premises of the gallery for three days. Several arts bloggers at the time mentioned what a dumb idea it was to tether a starving dog in an art gallery. I concurred wholeheartedly with the dumb idea part and thought that was that.
That was most certainly not that. What has happened in the interim is that all Internet hell has broken loose. Not one of those two day wonders, either, but a story that has grown legs, snowballed or gained runaway train status, depending on one's preferred nomenclature for these phenomena.
Shortly after the exhibition closed, stories began circulating that Natividad had died. Natividad may indeed have died in the past seven months, though Galeria Codice's director has flatly denied that it happened on the premises. Official word is that the dog ran away after having been fed for three days. Rather than quashing rumors, though, the press statement had the opposite effect. The story evolved into Natividad not only starving to death under the eyes of onlookers, but doing so because Habacuc physically restrained any animal rescue efforts.
It gets worse. Videos have surfaced on YouTube supposedly documenting Natividad's captivity and starvation. I will say the videos are compelling and the background music is heartbreaking, but in truth they would not hold up in court without sworn testimony from forensics experts. The uncredited, interspersed photos-in-montage could be from a variety of settings.
It gets worse yet. Online petitions are circulating urging that the dog-murdering Habacuc be banned from participating in the 2008 Bienal de Artes Visuales de Honduras. These petitions have already been signed by an estimated 500,000 to one million people and are picking up steam as publicity spreads.
And with these grassroots efforts, (back) in steps the media to bring "worse comes to worst" to full flower. A story, once mentioned by a few bloggers then quickly forgotten, has now rocketed to prominence in arts coverage everywhere. Natividad has legions of supporters, many of whom, if reader comments are any indication, feel that Habacuc should either be (1) chained and left to starve or (2) sent to prison for life, hopefully to be raped by fellow inmates on a daily basis. Reporters, being of a more careful nature, ponder the Deep Questions. Does Habacuc have unresolved childhood issues? Are gallery personnel or Managuan animal control officials lying when they agree the dog ran away? Should the Art World back this petition? Most importantly, albeit unwritten, how did this story get so huge that we're reporting on reporting?
Here's the thing, if you ask me. First, everyone should take a deep breath and count to ten. The title of this trite work of "art" is You are what you read, remember? We shouldn't let things we read, things we should believe 25% of at most, lead us to post things like "If I saw this artist I would stab him in the head."
This exhibition is an unworthy excuse for a rallying point. If we need more reasons to feel outraged about animal rights--and we don't, in my opinion--let's look to our own neighborhoods. Direct the passion this story inspires to local efforts. Donate time and money to programs and shelters that operate where we live. That makes more sense than chasing a loose series of half-truths through cyberspace.
Second, anyone can sign whichever petition they choose, just as any artist can mount a stupid exhibition. Basic Freedom of Speech, right? But the online petition in this story is useless. There is no point in signing it, just as there is no possible way to ban Habacuc from the 2008 Bienal de Artes Visuales de Honduras. He can't enter it and never could, because it is only open to Honduran artists.
Finally, if petitions are in order I'd like to propose new ones. Working titles: "Quit Calling Uncreative Ideas Art" or "Shock Artists Are Cheap" or "You're Not Talented Just Because Your Name Is in the News." I would sign my real name to petitions like those.
Sensational Reading and Viewing:
It is verifiable fact that Exposición No. 1 was staged at Galeria Codice in Managua, Nicaragua on August 16-17, 2007. The above mentioned elements were present in Habacuc's piece, including the dog. The dog, whom the artist had named "Natividad," was on the premises of the gallery for three days. Several arts bloggers at the time mentioned what a dumb idea it was to tether a starving dog in an art gallery. I concurred wholeheartedly with the dumb idea part and thought that was that.
That was most certainly not that. What has happened in the interim is that all Internet hell has broken loose. Not one of those two day wonders, either, but a story that has grown legs, snowballed or gained runaway train status, depending on one's preferred nomenclature for these phenomena.
Shortly after the exhibition closed, stories began circulating that Natividad had died. Natividad may indeed have died in the past seven months, though Galeria Codice's director has flatly denied that it happened on the premises. Official word is that the dog ran away after having been fed for three days. Rather than quashing rumors, though, the press statement had the opposite effect. The story evolved into Natividad not only starving to death under the eyes of onlookers, but doing so because Habacuc physically restrained any animal rescue efforts.
It gets worse. Videos have surfaced on YouTube supposedly documenting Natividad's captivity and starvation. I will say the videos are compelling and the background music is heartbreaking, but in truth they would not hold up in court without sworn testimony from forensics experts. The uncredited, interspersed photos-in-montage could be from a variety of settings.
It gets worse yet. Online petitions are circulating urging that the dog-murdering Habacuc be banned from participating in the 2008 Bienal de Artes Visuales de Honduras. These petitions have already been signed by an estimated 500,000 to one million people and are picking up steam as publicity spreads.
And with these grassroots efforts, (back) in steps the media to bring "worse comes to worst" to full flower. A story, once mentioned by a few bloggers then quickly forgotten, has now rocketed to prominence in arts coverage everywhere. Natividad has legions of supporters, many of whom, if reader comments are any indication, feel that Habacuc should either be (1) chained and left to starve or (2) sent to prison for life, hopefully to be raped by fellow inmates on a daily basis. Reporters, being of a more careful nature, ponder the Deep Questions. Does Habacuc have unresolved childhood issues? Are gallery personnel or Managuan animal control officials lying when they agree the dog ran away? Should the Art World back this petition? Most importantly, albeit unwritten, how did this story get so huge that we're reporting on reporting?
Here's the thing, if you ask me. First, everyone should take a deep breath and count to ten. The title of this trite work of "art" is You are what you read, remember? We shouldn't let things we read, things we should believe 25% of at most, lead us to post things like "If I saw this artist I would stab him in the head."
This exhibition is an unworthy excuse for a rallying point. If we need more reasons to feel outraged about animal rights--and we don't, in my opinion--let's look to our own neighborhoods. Direct the passion this story inspires to local efforts. Donate time and money to programs and shelters that operate where we live. That makes more sense than chasing a loose series of half-truths through cyberspace.
Second, anyone can sign whichever petition they choose, just as any artist can mount a stupid exhibition. Basic Freedom of Speech, right? But the online petition in this story is useless. There is no point in signing it, just as there is no possible way to ban Habacuc from the 2008 Bienal de Artes Visuales de Honduras. He can't enter it and never could, because it is only open to Honduran artists.
Finally, if petitions are in order I'd like to propose new ones. Working titles: "Quit Calling Uncreative Ideas Art" or "Shock Artists Are Cheap" or "You're Not Talented Just Because Your Name Is in the News." I would sign my real name to petitions like those.
Sensational Reading and Viewing:
- Outrage at 'starvation' of a stray dog for art - from The Observer
- Death For No Reason - from NonstarvingArtists.com
- The Starving Dog Artist: A Diagnosis - from the Huffington Post
- Animal Cruelty In The Name Of Art - from YouTube
Comments
haha i like your petition ideas too
You have hit the nail on the head – in full agreement that Habacuc is not an artist; in fact, he’s a hack.
Yes, people are getting a little extreme in the desired Habacuc-punishments, but I can understand where they are coming from.
It’s bad enough that humans lack consideration to other species, and Costa Rica has one of the most notorious reputations for animal cruelty. The comments are simply expressions of disgust that words don’t allow us to adequately articulate.
And you are right too, Shelley, by all means rage away, put your disgust out there – but also put your support forward to actively to something about the enduring cruelty by supporting organisations such as WSPA. I’m reaching into my back pocket as I type.
Give me a huge break! You’re surprised, in a world that contains millions of vegetarians, vegans, animal activists, and other animal lovers, that there are somewhere around a million people who are furious about this? This anger isn’t sparked by the fact that one dog was starving, it’s an outraged response to the fact that this was done deliberately, and in the name of “art”. What a disgusting farce!
But it’s not isolated. The same sort of outrage was generated over Michael Vick’s participation in dogfighting. The reason it didn’t reach the frothing fury that this case is receiving is because the authorities did something about Michael Vick, but no one is taking Habacuc to task for his deliberate act of cruelty. Sure, some of the comments are more violent than necessary, but you can see unintelligent and cringe-worthy responses in every avenue on-line - it’s the nature of the Internet.
Regardless, some of us do not see this exhibit as a “dumb idea”, and instead view it as horrible and callous disregard for the suffering of another living being - by artist and spectators alike. What would you say if he did this to a human child? Would you advise people to ignore it and focus on children’s aid in their own cities? I agree that we should be doing all we can locally, but if we didn’t speak up for the abused when they aren’t being represented, what kind of incompassionate beings would we be?
Jari, your opinion is appreciated. I think what I am most surprised about is the sheer volume of online vitriol that is not based on hard evidence. We don’t know what happened to Natividad or even if it is, in fact, Natividad in the photo montages.
Lest you further suppose that I am an incompassionate, naive, meat-eating animal-hater, I can assure you that I am *the* person that stray animals everywhere within a five-mile radius seek out. I’d categorize this as a sort of karmic “gift,” were it not so often an additional expense. Dogs, especially, have some kind of radar to my back door. No one treats them more kindly, makes more of an effort to care for or find homes for them, or is more enraged by the exponentially escalating problem of animal abandonment as record numbers of US homes undergo foreclosure. “Think globally, act locally” is not a concept to which I am only paying lip service.
However, we are talking about art here. I am put off by Habacuc because (1) it was a shoddy, lazy excuse for an exhibition and, primarily, (2) he refuses to comment or clarify on what actually happened to the dog. He’s neither commenting nor clarifying because, so long as this controversy rages on, it is to his future benefit. You can’t buy this kind of publicity. And that is a cheap trick; the sort of gimmick that devalues honest hard work by other artists everywhere.
As for “What would you say if he did this to a human child?” I would respectfully ask to receive that same huge break you demanded. Let’s deal in absolutes if a polite debate is the goal.
In looking for some info on this so-called human, I came across your site and may I say that not only are you extremely well written but what you have to say is by far not only thought provoking but full of good ole common sense. May you live a long and healthy life for our sakes.