I recently received an email with the ominous title “FW: PLEASE SIGN!!!!!” Now because my brain has not yet been completely washed away with cheap Chardonnay, my guard is generally up when any form of petition-based mail arrives in my inbox. However, I had little else more interesting to do (or should I say I had a number of pressing matters to attend to from which an inane distraction would be just the ticket) so I read it.
The mail in question refers to an artist (or “artist” as he’s refferred) from Costa Rica called Guillermo ‘Habacuc’ Vargas. For an exhibition in the Códice Gallery in Managua, Nicaragua last year Vargas captured a stray dog, which he named “Natividad”, and tied it up under the words “Eres Lo Que Lees” (“You are what you read”) which were written in dog biscuits on the wall. Now, apparently, Natividad was left there unfed throughout the exhibition and eventually died of starvation.
Predictably this has caused outrage. There is a petition mentioned in the mail to stop Vargas from taking part in this year’s Visual Arts Biennial of the Central American and several others on the internet. Also there are numerous blogs and postings on the subject along with YouTube videos all full of heart-tugging emotional music and, of course, violent hatred!
Here are some of the YouTube comments including inventive suggestions for retribution…
“Lets pour gas on them and have them wake up in a dark room with a book of matches in there hand and then invite ppl to the show”
…and some people, as usual, just need an excuse to dust off the old white hood…
“lets go linch the spick bastard!”
What I find the most shocking about this is the willingness of people to drop everything at a minute’s notice and form an angry mob. It seems we, as a species, are always just seconds away from becoming an irrational hate group. And hate is hate, whomever it is directed at. It doesn’t need reason or any of the normal rules we supposedly deem necessary to be civilised.
Even more disturbing is the fact that people are manipulated so easily, and I’m not talking about starving dogs here really, because if that’s all it takes, an unsolicited email, to sway people into making death threats (apparently Vargas has received many of these) or just into making quite frankly disgusting (and no doubt illegal) comments online, then we can be made to do or accept anything.
If anyone bothers to research Vargas’ exhibition from a more reliable source (more reliable than a questionable email, someone’s YouTube offering or any blog anyway – and you can include this one) they may find out more information about the truth. Are you going to do that?
OK, well from the Observer, March 30th 2008:
Juanita Bermúdez, director of the Códice Gallery, insisted Natividad escaped after just one day. She said: “It was untied all the time except for the three hours the exhibition lasted and it was fed regularly with dog food Habacuc himself brought in.”
Tags: Artist, Códice, Costa Rica, Dog, Gallery, Guillermo, Guillermo Vargas, Managua, Natividad, Nicaragua, starve, Vargas
muttonhead.wordpress.com 
April 19, 2008 at 8:07 am |
Whether or not this is true the sentiment behind this monstrous exhibition is sick. Would you display a starving, dying person in the name of art?
I would also like to point out that the Observer quote says the dog ESCAPED agter one day. Not that it was released.
Anyone who condones this sort of exhibition is (almost) as sick as this inhumane Vargas.
April 19, 2008 at 6:55 pm |
If this is incorrect information, please share where you found more legit info.
Thank you
April 20, 2008 at 12:17 pm |
Candace – I’ve shown the quote from the Observer. I read another from a Nicaraguan paper. This whole thing it would seem is a hoax by the artist to show the hypocrisy of the public reaction. It’s up to you to decide what you want to believe. I would say, however, that I have seen no evidence at all that corroborates the story that this animal died.
bruyere – if this is ‘sick’ so what? I am not a fan of conceptual art but if art is meant to reflect the world we live in then take a look outside.
As for starving children – maybe we should be spending our time doing something about them and not arguing over the welfare of one sick dog that may or may not have died.
April 21, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
I am disgusted by the nature of this exhibition, whether the facts are true about the dog being fed or not, whether it died of starvation or not, whether people had the chance to feed it and chose to do nothing…But having said that and having seen and signed the online petition, I have to ask why isn’t there a petition going around asking the heads of the richest nations to do something about the fact that at least 10,000 children die of starvation every single day. This CAN be prevented. It would take a fraction of less than one percent of the 7 richest nations’ GNP to end extreme poverty as we know it. I’m a dog and animal lover, but let’s take care of our starving children first and then we can worry about the starving adults, and then we can worry about starving stray dogs. Or will it take some opportunist artist to tie up a sick dying African child to a gallery wall with people at an opening watching it die before we DO SOMETHING about it?
April 22, 2008 at 2:48 am |
Muttonhead;
An individual can prove a point without hurting others whether human or animals. It most definately Is Not ART when the subject is on the submissive end with No Choice! Particularly, when the subject is being chained, without food and water a NECESSITY to live.
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6vP8CgTonQ)
And it’s very obvious that this animals was suffering being chained up the way he was, and the fact that looking at his ribs bulging through his skin is a sign of not eating and dehydration. I have three dogs two old and one a year and a half. And they look nothing like that because they are fed, and have water.
There is absolutely nothing Artistic about starving an animal to death.
This is not ART! It is torture, if it was a human it would be called Murder!. I will not support any Gallery or Biennals that participate in evil torture of innocent animals. I’m also a professional artist, and a true artist. And I donot torture animals to be known. For I have true art and true art stands on it’s OWN.
Only FAKE want to be Artists resort to such low tactics. As they have NO true Talent or nothing of substance to offer, so they think of a pathetic scheme to attempt to draw attention to their non-existing talent. And the Biennal who encourages this by displaying this so called fake art is just as guilty.
PS; Also, the people who are protesting this treatment of animals do care about starving people. I’m sure most of them volunteer to charity organizations or donate monetary funds because they care. These thousands of organizations for various sectors could not exists if people did not care. And it does not make people hypocrites because they lift their voice and let it be known that they Do care! They are a voice for the voiceless.
April 23, 2008 at 12:52 pm |
Sipho
Originally I wrote this post because I felt an over-reaction had taken place. I was commenting on the behavior of PEOPLE not the welfare of animals. People seemed to make up their minds without even trying to find out if there was any truth to the story. In fact many people don’t seem to care if it’s true or not, they just want something to direct their feelings towards and when the ‘facts’ are presented they still unflinchingly maintain this position. It seems they WANT this to be true (i.e. the dog was starved to death) to validate their beliefs which seems a strange position to take for people who care about animal welfare.
Regarding the specifics of this exhibition, I guess we’ll never know the truth, but to me it stinks of a stunt – and the information released by the gallery seems to show this. Obviously the artist does not want to comment and lose the impact of the piece but if the gallery information is correct the dog was fed and watered, and only tethered for the 3 hours of the exhibition (it was a day). Now I don’t know if doing that is cruel or not, I am not that dog, but all the societies that I am aware of on this planet make animals do things they do not ‘want’ to do. For example we keep animals as pets, train them, breed them to our specifications and put them on leads. This is not to mention breeding and killing animals for food of course. You may or may not agree with any of these ways we treat animals but they are sanctioned by the society(ies) we live in and in this light tying a dog up for 3 hours would not seem something too outrageous. The appearance of the dog is due to it being a stray, malnourished dog. Pictures on YouTube show nothing more than that.
Whether this is art or not I would say is too subjective to make any absolute statements about. Nobody that I have met seems to agree about art. But some say art should provoke thought and debate which this would seem to do, so in that sense I guess it is.
April 23, 2008 at 7:39 pm |
Of course now the gallery would say the dog was fed because of all the negative attention. How many people Admit to doing anything wrong. They all claim to be innocent!
And if this is a Hoax, it’s not funny and I doubt that it is a hoax!
And just because a animal is a stray does not give anyone the right to abuse them. What’s next, putting people who are sick and homeless on display because they are not perfect. Because it’s art according to you, because and I quote: “Some say art should provoke thought and debate which this would seem to do, so in that sense I guess it is”
If that’s the case, anything goes and that includes murder as an Art. Because murder definitely (provokes thought and debate) of people.
Claiming anything and everything as Art is a Cop Out, when it comes to hurting animals in the name of art. There is a difference in having a animal as a pet in a loving environment and not like that which is being displayed on video.
I would like to say, I donot condone any type of violence toward anyone.
We could go on and on with this debate as to whether this is art or not to infinity and probably never agree on this matter. Let’s just say, we agree to disagree!
April 23, 2008 at 11:32 pm |
*applauds muttonhead*
Sipho
Of course everyone will stick to what they originally heard – people hate to admit they were wrong… and it was supposed to create negative attention! It was designed perfectly to fool unsuspecting Facebookers and other assorted bloggers and then trick them into seeing their own faults.. however people have proven to be more stubborn then he probably thought they would be because people, instead of questioning the original news, are denying the reliability of the sources of new news about the fact that it was a hoax.
Of course it was a hoax. He is trying to spread awareness. He did not hurt the dog at all. It was taken care of in a similar manner to any animal shelter. There was no violence involved; that is the condition he took it off the streets in. To argue that putting a dog on a chain is cruel would be foolish because almost all domesticated dogs are put on chains or leashes or in kennels for many hours a day without the constant availability of food…. I apologize for not being able to keep up with any replies I get here but that was my two cents take it or leave it..
Here’s a cite to check out: http://www.dabbler.ca/news/parliament-of-one-starving-dog-as-art-–-don’t-believe-everything-you-read-20080411/
I can’t vouch for how reliable it is, but at least the author is thinking for himself which is more than most of the people screaming bloody murder can say for themselves..
muttonhead… if you’ve got a facebook we could use you’re help http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=11869777933 (check out some of the bulletins)
April 25, 2008 at 10:32 pm |
I honestly think Vargas’s work is outstanding (assuming of coarse that it was a hoax…)
I’m not going to describe why the artwork was so powerful (or effective), because I know that anyone capable of independent thought will eventually figure it out for themselves… but I do want to point out a side effect of the human art show vargas has created… perhaps a piece of the puzzle he wasn’t necessarily expecting…
As Sweetcaro mentioned, so many people are becoming obsessed with their original thoughts on the issue instead of adapting to the new information and trying to see why vargas may have chosen to do this.
As such, I see this work as a critique of the world’s media system, as well as the commonly reported connection between the 1 dog vs. Millions of children issue.
Vargas has proven, yet again, something which many of us are already aware of: Death sells!
In the same way that a serial killer, lethal bank robbery, or crazed college shooter will make the front page of the NY Times every day, the masses have aligned to show where their interest truly lies: tragedy. The human species thrives on it in much the same way that some teenage girls choose to cut themselves. We, as a species, long for the injustice, cruelty, incarceration, destruction, death, betrayal, and hatred that exists in this world. But we also crave new death. The same old story only carries a punch for so long. Darfur was important a few years ago, but its no longer “cool” to be concerned with that story of injustice. We have to keep moving on, nevermind that there was no resolution.
As such, wait a few weeks. Every single person that signed that petition will forget as soon as the next big things come. We are moths drawn to the brightest light, lemmings wandering mindlessly off the edge. We say we care but what does that even mean these days?
But of course, it is only in our minds that we are so self righteous. Look at the very comments cited in the above post; threatening to kill a man for having “killed” a dog. How does that make you the better person? How are we constantly asserting ourselves as the moral authorities of the world when we contradict ourselves with the very punishments we wish to implement. We are nothing more than the fuel for someone else’s desire for that same injustice, cruelty, incarceration, destruction, death, betrayal, and hatred.
So lastly, I must condemn myself for my own statements here. Because no matter whether you agree with me or not, at the end of the day I was motivated to post a comment here because of the need to retort against someone else’s actions/statements that I viewed as “unjust”. Its a vicious cycle, and we’re all just pegs on the wheel.
Maybe that’s what vargas was trying to say… either way, he too is no more than part of the system…
April 26, 2008 at 12:51 pm |
that fucking goddamn bastard has to die!! i hope
he fucking burn in hell, and suffer twice more as that dog did. i signed the pettition and i will send it to all the people i know. i don’t care if someone says that he did not kill the dog, because i know he DID and he will suffer for this, i promise. message to guillermo vargas: DIE YOU FUCKING MOTHERFUCKING BITCH! YOU DON’T DESERVE TO LIVE ANYMORE!!! FUCKING MORON
April 26, 2008 at 3:55 pm |
I agree muttonhead. And I think his exibition in fact worked – we are, obviously, what we read.
April 27, 2008 at 3:25 pm |
Hello,
As expected animal activist are in a tizzy about it. The artist is spoken of as evil. Perhaps he is. I have a feeling that in reality he’s probably not all that bad. He’s stimulated a viral like support for suffering animals. People are mad and doing something about it, when before they might not have cared.
I don’t know if the artist should not be allowed to show his concept again. I think that it’s good for our society to see this kind of thing up front, not to hide from it but to embrace it and to do something positive about. Like any artist the artist had to do it.
From what i heard the dog wasn’t killed like may say, the god was left to die like so many others are every day. They aren’t left by an one person in partticular. They are left by every single person in the world.
Any one that knows me know that I am an animal lover and it is sad for me to see this kind of suffering in an being. But, I feel that it is important for people see these things first hand. I feel that it is important for the reaction, the awareness that it spawns and ultimately leads to a better situation for the suffering.
I wish there was a way for me congratulate Vargas on a dog gone job well done,
Joe
April 30, 2008 at 10:20 am |
I am astounded by the gullability of all ‘outraged’ bloggers on this issue. It shows the massive power of the internet and the ability of misinformation and rumour to explode across borders. Always good to be sure of your facts before reaching for the red button, with so little corroborated facts on this case wouldnt it be better to err on the side of need to know more before acting out a hate crime… Remember HG Wells and ‘The war of the worlds’? I thought we were getting a bit more sophisticated when it comes to ‘information’ and the media.
How about spending some time looking at the real news, there are horrors for all and petitions to sign that may improve the living conditions and sustainability of life of millions of creatures on this planet of ours. Try avaaz.org to sign petitions to the united nations concerning world food shortages and try to alleviate the conditions that result in food riots happening NOW in countries not far from you.
I was sent the email about the dog and followed the blogs to this point and felt I had to say something….Regards Anna.
April 30, 2008 at 1:26 pm |
Ena, woah there pal. Have you heard of bromide ?
Think you need some…..then again it sounds like you’re already dosed up on many drugs, so why not try a nice cup of tea and a slice of victoria sponge cake.
Muttonhead, I am with you brother/sister, there are too many in the world spouting hate at the drop of a hat. I find it very strange how people can rally round in a flash to chivvy up a posse in order to linch someone. yet when a worthy local cause asks for help they’re always busy with more “pressing” things.
To be fair, I hadn’t heard of the Vargas exhibition until i read your blog. However reading through the petitions/blogs of hate which have spiralled out from this unheard of (alright non mainstream) event, anyone with a modicum of sense will realise that they are being played and that there are ulterior motives for the initial “anonymous” petition.
I am still waiting for the petition to drop into my junk folder….but then again I like you don’t spend my time reading items in the “JUNK” folder because they tend to be….er…junk.
keep up the good work.
S.
May 1, 2008 at 12:04 am |
I don’t think most yal are fully understanding what this post is about. You keep making the same hypocritic comments that Vargas is clearly trying to point out in his piece. Calm yoself down.
May 6, 2008 at 7:44 pm |
If the dog did run away and i dought it very much…..thats what they want us to beleive…why didnt they get help for the dog instead of letting all the sick rubber neck on lookers stare at the poor thing we are ment to be sivalized i dought it….this man is sick ! and if this is Art then why not stick a cancer patient that is dying in the room then what would people say…would they all just stand staring then or would they be embarrased because the person is human and should have dignity…Animals have rights as well and im glad so many people are angry and not easily led by them saying the animal exscaped ..it shows we have feelings and maybe we are not so bad after all with a few exceptions of sick individuals who treat animals as second class citizens…
May 15, 2008 at 11:07 pm |
Torturing an animal for whatever reason is sick. You mention starving kids…well I blame organized religion, if it didn’t condemn birth control, people would not be breeding like rabbits, and there would be no starving people in the world. There are people out there who have over 10+kids can’t support them, get sewn up, stop breeding and there won’t be starving children. And…don’t torture a dog to prove that point
May 18, 2008 at 8:23 am |
Okay, I’m an animal activist too, vegetarian, active in the RSPCA etc. i have to say, you “outraged” animal activists are such hypocrites. I believe it was wrong of Vargas to put a dying dog on show in the name of art, to disrespect it like that, but seriously, if you are angry that they tied up a dog for 3 hours against it’s will…then hey! I’m sure nearly everybody in the world that owns a dog has tied up their dog against it’s will for 3 hours. And not to mention, training them for circuses, TV shows etc. killing for leisure and food. It all happens. Personally, I’m more concerned about those thing that a dog tied up for 3 hours. And if you really do treat animals as equals to you, then i’m sure you don’t presume to know what is good and bad for them, and leave them to do what they want, and have their own freedom. Look at yourselves before you go attacking someone else.
May 31, 2008 at 12:11 pm |
Thumbs up for muttonhead!
Most people should really use their own brains a bit more.
December 1, 2008 at 11:24 pm |
You Are What You Read
“I think this guy is sick! Someone should tie him up, no, put him in a glass box, so that he can’t stand up. Then heat up the room that he’s in and have a waterfall going in the corner. And if the bastard doesn’t die in a day, then gut him from head to toe. That shit isn’t art it’s the work of a disgusting piece of shit, devil, who deserves to burn in hell for that.”
This is just one of the thousands of outraged comments found across the internet directed at the artist Guillermo ‘Habacuc’ Vargas. Vargas gained global attention in 2007 when he captured an emaciated dog from the streets of San Jose, exhibited it in The Codice Gallery, Nicaragua. Tied up with no food or water he let the dog starve to death, with the title ‘Eres Lo Que Lees’ (‘You Are What You Read’) written in dog food on the wall behind the animal. The story swept across the internet as a chain email directing you to an online petition to stop the artist repeating the piece while representing Costa Rica at Bienal Centroamericana in Honduras in November of this year. The petition now holds over a two and a half million signatures. Angry blogs and Youtube videos call for Vargas to be given the same treatment as the dog and be tied to a post with no food or water. These blogs and videos feature thousands of comments, like the one above, condemning the artist as an “animal murderer” and denouncing his work as inhumane cruelty. Facebook groups have been created for incensed users to rant and rave about Vargas’ actions. These groups have hundreds of thousands of members. Vargas and the gallery have even received death threats.
The gallery later insisted that the dog, named Natividad, did not in fact starve to death but ‘was untied all the time except for the three hours the exhibition lasted and it was fed regularly with dog food Habacuc himself brought in’ and then escaped after one day. Vargas has declined to comment on the condition of the animal but says he wanted to test the public’s reaction and highlight the plight facing thousands of stray dogs in San Jose.
“Habacuc has put the guests in a position to question their own moral responsibility. Failure to act to save the dog indicates a process of rationalization on behalf of the guest, which probably considered the perceived facts of the situation: the dog was a stray set to face death anyway, it’s so far malnourished that it will be miserable regardless, it’s for the sake of art and who am I to ruin it, etc.”
Vargas’ refusal to comment on the dog’s survival has only furthered speculation about the dog’s demise and it is precisely what the artist wanted. The furore over the whole situation has become part of the artwork itself with each incensed comment and angry email adding to it’s message. Even though no one at the exhibition stepped in to help the poor dog, hundreds of thousands have felt aggrieved enough to sign the petition after reading the email or to leave a comment at the end of a blog. The artwork’s title You Are What You Read – it makes sense. To make no action when you feel things are in control but as soon as you’re told they aren’t and it’s easy to do “your bit”, everyone jumps on board.
Vargas’ work highlights people’s ability to ignore suffering and cruelty until it is presented to them out of the context of everyday life. There are tens of thousands of stray, starving dogs on the streets of San Jose and only a tiny proportion of the global population are actually trying to help them. Then as soon as one is publicly displayed, the whole world throws up their arms in outrage and jostles to get on the bandwagon. By putting the animal in an art gallery, Vargas made an example of the dog. While some people will find that cruel, the statement that he was making about cruelty was immensely resonant, sparking off this global debate. Vargas was, in fact, making an example out of us, the apathetic public. He understood, and intended, the outcry that took place, it was all part of his artwork, and while it doesn’t lessen the impact of the impassioned outbursts of those against the spectacle, it shows them in a different perspective. The comments are turned back on the commenters to expose their contradictions. The striking thing is that some people are still not backing down, in spite of the evidence presented that the dog survived and was well-looked after, and stubbornly continue to protest.
“With the unlimited access to information comes the heavy responsibility of critical thinking.”
The furious reactions to the exhibit have come from all over the world, probably further than even Vargas could have imagined. The exaggerated interest has amplified the artist’s local concerns about stray dogs on the streets of San Jose and turned them into a global discussion about animal cruelty. This would have been incapable of happening without the World Wide Web. This far-reaching technology has shrunk the world to an unimaginably small scale. Through instant messaging, Facebook statuses and online forums; news, information and gossip can be sent around the planet in a flash and can be discussed between people of cultures than would not usually have contact. The internet has become an interactive, electronic debating table where anyone can voice their opinion, intellectual or ignorant, and be heard, but with the abundance and easy availability of information, you have to be careful what you believe.
Anybody can access Wikipedia and write something, anybody can write a blog and anybody can read them. Chain emails arrive in inboxes everyday claiming that Bill Gates wants to give you money or that forwarding the email to ten more people will bring you good luck and most people delete them instantly but something about Vargas’ case was different. Even though it only takes a couple of minutes ‘googling’ the name Guillermo Vargas to find websites and weblogs that provided evidence to the contrary of the petitions and protests against Vargas’ work, millions of people didn’t take the time, when faced with the chain email, to think for themselves, do a tiny amount of research and come to an informed decision. Instead they condemn a man off the back of uninformed evidence.
The increase in audience awareness across the world has shifted the possible outcomes of work for artists such as Vargas. His exploration into the reaction that this work could cause highlights how much our communicative powers have changed over the last decade. But equally it exposes our almost unquestionable belief in the information that we know is being written behind screens. Our faith in the words written by others has come out of historical approaches to recording and writing our histories and events. But in this new age of mass un-vetted and uncontrolled communication our creative and expressive avenues must become increasingly self aware, for if you are what you read then we must be able to stand behind what we write.
References
http://www.theginblog.com/2007/10/artist-chains-up-dog-until-it-dies-is-this-art-or-animal-abuse/
http://www.pluginamp.com/network/node/3575
http://www.dabbler.ca/news/parliament-of-one-starving-dog-as-art-%E2%80%93-don%E2%80%99t-believe-everything-you-read-20080411/