Anti-war exhibit wins British art prize

[gabosaurus]

I saw this story while reading about the latest dead rapper. I figure all of you would be greatly entertained. Or something to that effect.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/entertainment/5351732.html

[glockmail]

Whouda thunk that politically motivated liberals who know shit about art would honor a politically motivated liberal who knows shit about art? :finger3:

[theHawk]

I don't see how anyone can call that "art". Its just politically motivated garbage.

[hjmick]

I'm one of those people who believe that art is pretty much a subjective thing. Not everyone can agree on what is and isn't art, and that's fine. One man's art is another man's garbage. In my opinion, after examining the picture that accompanies the article, that is not art but I can understand that some people would consider it so.

More intriguing to me is the disclosure in the article that indicates the exhibit was "based on a lone protester's six-year vigil outside British parliament" and "Wallinger meticulously reproduced everything from Haw's weather-beaten poster decrying President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair as 'baby killers' to the demonstrator's tarpaulin shelter and tea-making area." So, again this is just my opinion, the artist, Mark Wallinger, essentially stole Haw's work of six years and made $51,000.

This then begs the question, how much of that $51,000 do you think Wallinger will be giving to Haw? A man who has apparently not worked in six years and could probably use the money. I mean, he was Wallinger's muse, so to speak, his "inspiration." He ripped off the work Haw put in to his protest, I'd say that Haw deserves at least half of the money.