Is this art? and if so, should you be able to wear it anywhere?

[trumad]

[Squatch]

1. False dilemma

[cboy4]

2. Sure Trumad. Especially here in the United States where there

is an outcry over how children should be allowed to wear explosive packs on the airplanes, the school bus, to soccer practice, karate and other youth activities.

[meegbear]

3. MIT students do it, so why not?

An MIT student wearing a device on her chest that included lights and wires was arrested at gunpoint at Logan International Airport this morning after authorities thought the contraption was a bomb strapped to her body.

Star Simpson, 19, was wearing a black hooded sweatshirt and approached an airport employee in Terminal C at 8 a.m. to inquire about an incoming flight from Oakland, according to Major Scott Pare of the State Police. She was holding a lump of what looked like putty in her hands. The employee asked about the plastic circuit board on her chest, and Simpson walked away without responding, Pare said.

Outside the terminal, Simpson was surrounded by police holding machine guns.

"She was immediately told to stop, to raise her hands, and not make any movement so we could observe all her movements to see if she was trying to trip any type of device," Pare said at a press conference at Logan. "There was obviously a concern that had she not followed the protocol ... we may have used deadly force."

Simpson was arrested, and it was quickly determined that the device was harmless.

"She said it was a piece of art and she wanted to stand out on career day," Pare said. "She was holding what was later found to be playdough."

Affixed to the front of her black sweatshirt was a pale beige circuit board with green LED lights and wires running to a 9-volt battery. Written on the back of the sweatshirt in what appeared to be gold magic marker was the phrase "socket to me" and below that was written "Course VI," which refers to the electrical engineering and computer science program at MIT.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/city_region/breaking_news/2007/09/mit_student_arr.html?p1=MEWell_Pos3

[Ian David]

8. See also: Charles Alfred Dreyling, Jr.

See:

Repuke Pipebomb Enthusiast and Commerical Pilot gets 2 years probation, $1,000 fine, Community Svc
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=1690398#1691586

And by the way, Dreyling has people who google him and post in places like DU on his behalf:

13. I actually went to high school with him at PCN
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2970897#2971138


Also:

Republican gets Oklahoma City airport bomb suspect out of jail
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2944506&mesg_id=2944668

Man Arrested at Will Rogers World Airport Released on Bail
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1433771&mesg_id=1434182

[moggie]

4. Only in Circuit City and Kerry events

[Tian Zhuangzhuang]

5. Darn it American kids don't make their own costumes

They buy age appropriate costumes that celebrate inclusion.




I know shocking.


but on the bright side every pirate costume sold helps prevent global warming

[Hippo_Tron]

12. They also get suspended for trying to prevent global warming

http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?in_article_id=43272&in_page_id=2

[Bassic]

14. That can't really be a Klan costume, can it? nt

[TalkingDog]

17. It could be a Klan Costume....

If it had a face covering with eye holes.

Most likely it's a Fay-wee Pwincess.....

My Favorite Master Artist: Karen Parker GhostWoman Studios

[TalkingDog]

6. Yes, it is definitively art.

If it meets these minimum conditions:

1) The artist declares that it is art and that it was intentionally conceived or created to be so.
2) Experts Agree.
3) To be honest I can never remember the 3rd one, but IMHO even the 2nd is unimportant. (If an artist makes art and there is no expert to agree, is it art?)

In the case of the young fellow, I'm not sure how he would respond to the question: It that art? I think he would not agree. His agenda is completely different.

But as for the young MIT student, she has declared it to be so and intentionally so.

As an expert I agree. It is art. My caveat is, however, is that it is bad art. It lacks skill or craftsmanlike qualities. If her intention (as a part of the art) was to be provocative (as some in these various discussions have intimated), there she succeeded. But to what end? What was her critical thinking process?

If we take her statements at face value, that part of the process was as badly conceived and designed as the tangible pieces of her art.

As an artist and as an instructor I find work that is intentionally provocative tends to fall flat in a number of areas. And then there are the students who make outrageously provocative work without even knowing that they have done so.

I had tall blonde graduate student from CA who was married to a very intense, quiet black man. She collected figurines and made paintings about them. In one, she showed a large blonde southern belle doll sitting with a small prostrate ceramic Uncle Ben figure bowing at her feet. In her mind it was a loving joke about how much her husband worshipped her and could not understand why every person in the room was outraged.

It is very difficult to get some students to understand that if they make a piece of art, they are responsible, in some part, for the message it sends. (which, I think, is what the crux of most of these arguments on this topic center around) If you are in a crowded theatre you may intent to yell out "Fido" while calling your dog, but if you yell out "Fire" instead or some deaf old lady in the 3rd row hears "Fire", then you bear some responsibility for the outcome.

Ones art, as an idea or object, exists independently of intention. Just as guns exist independently of the intention of being used soley for hunting or self-defense. Ideas and objects can be misused or misapplied. That does not make the creator SOLELY responsible for the outcome. The person who misconstrues the intent bears some too.

The fact that most people did not scream and run away from her or shout out that there was a bomb, indicates that the majority of the people did not perceive her has having harmful intention. Because in all honesty. If you see something that is clearly a bomb. More like the young man in your image, your overwhelming instinct will be to run.

So, until people begin using pretty packages to terrorise the general populations, I will suggest there was an overreaction. On the other hand, some people misconstrued her intention and she does bear some responsibility for that.

As for whether these two young people should be able to wear them in public, that is a debate about radical freedom. And while I am not an expert on that subject, I believe in radical freedom, so I will say yes. They do.

They literally have a right to do anything they please. However, that does not mean that they are immune from the checks and balances which society places on any action.



My Favorite Master Artist: Karen Parker GhostWoman Studios

[msongs]

7. maybe its a protected statement of religious belief? nt

[Odin2005]

9. No. Unfortunately it's become popular to call many stupid things "art."

[eppur_se_muova]

10. Hey! Those are hot dogs!

Armour hot dogs!

What kind of kid wears Armour hot dogs?

[Wilber_Stool]

11. What are they?

Pastries?

[Dr. Strange]

13. Yes, absolutely.

You will probably be shot or have the shit tased out of you by the police. But it's okay--the shooting and tasing is just the cops' version of performance art.

So it's all good.

[Swamp Rat]

15. "shooting and tasing is just the cops' version of performance art."

:thumbsup:

[hedgehog]

16. You need to turn that into a DU poll!