Archive for February 16, 2004

More “Challenging” Art

February 16, 2004

Here’s a follow-up to Yobbo’s post about the moonbat Aboriginal “artist” – meet the US’s version, Larry Fink.

The first hint of what is to come is in the Artist’s Statement accompanying his pictures.

It was time ? the election was stolen, robbed by middlemen on top. Folks who thought the past was the future because they owned the present. Entitlement didn?t come from being lazy; it came from cunning aggrandizing connivance.

The leader was a twice entitled frat boy with charisma informed by homily and stubborn gotcha comfort.

Sorry, I’m not sure I caught that?

9/11 gave birth to doom. The tragic inevitable moment, the rupture of providence, the rape of the external soul of America. And its aftermath.

Critical images of the president and his men would not be published. In fact, all critical thought was temporarily suspended and the fundamentalist Islamic conspiracy bore the turf for the fundamentalist neoconservative conspiracy which was already in wait for the history which would give it license and muscle. Its muscle is still prominent and will be for some time.

Jesus Christ, this guy is channeling Richard Neville.

As it became apparent that the presidential team was acting beyond the righteous knee jerk of anti-terrorism, when the public critical spirit was on the rise, I offered the pictures again to the Times. No! The New Yorker. No! Harper?s Magazine. No! The European market I felt sure would publish them. But no. Like their influences, the images were banned, not by decree but by mute fearful compliance to the norm.

Or maybe they were shit. Who knows? After being rejected by every publication under the sun, Fink found salvation at – where else? – a university. The pic which prompted the post is here. That’s GWB there, groping that woman’s naked breast. It’s possible, not being trained to appreciate the nuances of great art, that you don’t fully appreciate the rich metaphor involved here, so here’s the artist himself explaining:

The woman is a symbol for the world, and his groping is a symbol for what the administration seems to be doing, which is groping not necessarily for pleasure but for dominance.

In the words of Nerve magazine:

Listen, we’re not Patriot Act-type folks over here, but it’s clumsy symbolism like that which makes us think freedom of expression might be overrated.

I can’t wait to see what bold statement moonbat artists turn out next. We’ve had sexual symbolism already; surely a puppet motif of some kind can’t be far behind. A flash of brilliance just struck me: combine the two!. GWB controlling a puppet Ariel Sharon raping a young palestinian girl! I’m off to collect my grant.