The Kathy Griffin picture as art...

[InternationalFunboy]

Off the top, I have no political affiliation. I'm looking to hear thoughts on this piece of work, not in denial of the mediapolitical, but external to it. At the same time acknowledging our current social climate, stereotypes, feelings, and opinions should be fair game for any conversation about art.
Mods, do as you will.

I enjoy the image greatly. It feels much like a political cartoon come to life, huge and vibrant. For me it evokes American Gothic which itself is a stark portrayal of small town folk. The piece forms a bridge to President Trump and includes the use of violence and gore to great effect...overall it portrays depth and blank emotion alongside its unavoidable political commentary. Brilliant.

The circus around the whole affair contributes to the greater work, each reflecting on the other - the art and the society - like one of those endless mirror rooms. I'd love to hear your opinion about the work. I find it to be a real lightening rod!

 

[Ms_Ann]

Off the top, I have no political affiliation. I'm looking to hear thoughts on this piece of work, not in denial of the mediapolitical, but external to it. At the same time acknowledging our current social climate, stereotypes, feelings, and opinions should be fair game for any conversation about art.
Mods, do as you will.

I enjoy the image greatly. It feels much like a political cartoon come to life, huge and vibrant. For me it evokes American Gothic which itself is a stark portrayal of small town folk. The piece forms a bridge to President Trump and includes the use of violence and gore to great effect...overall it portrays depth and blank emotion alongside its unavoidable political commentary. Brilliant.

The circus around the whole affair contributes to the greater work, each reflecting on the other - the art and the society - like one of those endless mirror rooms. I'd love to hear your opinion about the work. I find it to be a real lightening rod!

Would you hang it on your wall?

 

[InternationalFunboy]

Would you hang it on your wall?

Sure, I plan to. It's part of a project to decorate my house with internet-sourced images that are touchstones of one type or another, things that have historic relevance to me.

 

[Ms_Ann]

Maybe hang it right next to Piss Christ. That would be good.

 

[phrodeau]

Or the Danish Mohammed cartoons. Those were fun.

 

[Ms_Ann]

What other works is Kathy Griffin know for? She's not exactly Andy Warhol.

 

[InternationalFunboy]

Or the Danish Mohammed cartoons. Those were fun.

What do you mean?

 

[RobDownSouth]

What do you mean?

The same RWCJ hothouse flowers who called for their fainting couches over the Kathy Griffin picture were the ones chortling with glee when some Moose Limbs got bent out of shape about satirical cartoons about Mohammed done by Danish artists.

 

[Ms_Ann]

The same RWCJ hothouse flowers who called for their fainting couches over the Kathy Griffin picture were the ones chortling with glee when some Moose Limbs got bent out of shape about satirical cartoons about Mohammed done by Danish artists.

The difference there being TRUMP IS AN ACTUAL PERSON. Apparently. Funboy thinks Griffin is wall worthy. Do you 47?

 

[InternationalFunboy]

The difference there being TRUMP IS AN ACTUAL PERSON. Apparently. Funboy thinks Griffin is wall worthy. Do you 47?

I'm a fan of Kathy Griffin, but in this instance she just happens to be the person in the shot. What draws me to the image is that it's dangerous. It has teeth. It will offend some, and that delights me.

 

[HisArpy]

I'm a fan of Kathy Griffin, but in this instance she just happens to be the person in the shot. What draws me to the image is that it's dangerous. It has teeth. It will offend some, and that delights me.

Whatever floats your boat. Or covers the gloryholes in your wall.

If it was viable (even as art), the world as a whole wouldn't be condemning it. Even the radical Libs don't want to touch it.

 

[hashtag34]

The same RWCJ hothouse flowers who called for their fainting couches over the Kathy Griffin picture were the ones chortling with glee when some Moose Limbs got bent out of shape about satirical cartoons about Mohammed done by Danish artists.

For the start, Mohammed isn't alive, whereas Kathy Griffin promoted violent messages about a real person.
Yes, they could be interpreted as symbolic by a certain audience, but many peoplee aren't that sophisticated.

On top of that, I don't think that Any country would take lightly such messages about their head of state.

 

[cleaver]

Whatever floats your boat. Or covers the gloryholes in your wall.

If it was viable (even as art), the world as a whole wouldn't be condemning it. Even the radical Libs don't want to touch it.

this is simply wrong...

the art of it - even in it's ham handed presentation - was in what it provoked

the shitstorm - obliterating any concept of tolerance
and the shrill glee with which the detractors have hoisted the counted coup
is as ugly as the images may be themselves...

but... so much for any 'self criticism' to be found in that...

it is a shame that griffin did not have the wherewithal
or perhaps even foresight
to prepare for the (what would seem obvious) reactions...

had she been firm,
first in what and with what gravity
she was going to be attempting...
and secondly
in a resoluteness of purpose,
her act would have found more traction...

it was an image.
a cartoon.
in cartoon times
of a cartoonish public figure
by a cartoonish figure.

instead she immediately caved, apologized, waffled and blubbered...

she became her own worst enemy in this... her pr folk were actionably lax.

but the op is right...
the bigger story is the ravenous rabble who
(despite her political bent)
were anxious to serve her up
and wave her bloody rags
in service to... what?

rectitude?

art provokes intellectual fervor - indeed!
it is no longer enough to dislike.
eradication is now the quasi-political go to...

while no hirst, ofili or serrano... griffin's image(s) have indeed provoked
and - in this instant age -
have suffered the instant wrath of a socio-politically hyper-stirred mob
that lynches first - perhaps, (and we will see) only -
before ever putting the provocative art to deeper intellectual scrutiny...

the power of griffin's trump was...
aborted by the artist's own gibbering vacillations
as to resolve, point and purpose.

it certainly hurt no one - not even the cloistered 'barron' as his pops invoked
except griffin herself.
too bad, i feel...
not that i am a follower of hers, but...
she has been funny at times...
has been a long time active supporter of the lgbt (or whatever acronym is vogue) communities
and
had been the very best part of the tv new years eve stupidities;
challenging and spinning the otherwise stuffier co-host, cooper...
a rather fearless yearly performance...

i believe cnn was one of the biggest pussies in this greater debacle...
canning her, even before she caved into the onslaught....

step back.
way back...
and give this whole thing an objective, intelligent eye...

really?

 

[hashtag34]

it is a shame that griffin did not have the wherewithal
or perhaps even foresight
to prepare for the (what would seem obvious) reactions...

it was an image.
a cartoon.
in cartoon times
of a cartoonish public figure
by a cartoonish figure.

I tend to disagree, cleaver.
This is no longer a matter of taste or lack of, For example when they called Melania a whore.

The potentially violent content needs not be treated lightly.

I'm certain that most people on Lit, and many people were able to see that it was all symbolic,
But there's a segment of the popullation, albeit small, who doesn't have the capacity to diferentiate. And who's prone to take things literally.

This isn't about Trump, no matter how distasteful he might be to many.
Cartoons hinting towards violence towards a head of state could increas instability and are a matter of national security, so to speak.

 

[Ms_Ann]

Real people are losing real heads. Is that art?

 

[Conager]

I see value in this point of view:

I'm a fan of Kathy Griffin, but in this instance she just happens to be the person in the shot. What draws me to the image is that it's dangerous. It has teeth. It will offend some, and that delights me.

And this:

Real people are losing real heads. Is that art?

That dichotomy of reaction underscores the point of the OP.

There is that old quote about pornography being hard to define but I know when I see it. That's only true for the person who views and image and finds it pornographic.

As far as photography and special effects as art go, if not tge specific subject matter, it would be, to me, wholly unremarkable. Nothing about it seemed especially well executed, if you'll pardon the pun.

I've no talent for identifying how to make an image "right" but can see when lighting and composition feel right. That might be the point here, that I am missing in that they wanted a stark, unexpected bit of gore on a bright, sun-lit day.

Amidst all this discussion I saw an image posted up apparently of Game of Thrones with some heads on pikes. That image was far better in every way. I don't know if the image I saw was simply a scene grab from the show, or whether it was a purposeful, still image created to promote the show that happened to feature the heads.

I get why you might want it. I used to work not far from the former home of American Continental which was located in the Arizona Biltmore area. Long after they and others caused the Savings and Loan bailout scandal, Charlie Keatings headquarters lay vacant, but the sign was still in place. I considered swiping itvas a return on my taxpayer dollars as a nice little piece of American History. I didn't end up doing that not out of any sense of propriety or for lack of equipment to effect the heist, I just simply never got around to it.

 

[Ms_Ann]

If you hate The President of the United States...it's art.

 

[Porkwarrior]

Apparently in John Waters house there's a framed Swastika made out of Chuck Manson's hair.

He didn't ask for it, and he has the decorum not to ever display it.

When John Waters is the sign of restraint & decorum, maybe it is time for a bit of fucking self reflection.

 

[Ms_Ann]

Best thread in The Lounge.

 

[InternationalFunboy]

For the start, Mohammed isn't alive, whereas Kathy Griffin promoted violent messages about a real person.
Yes, they could be interpreted as symbolic by a certain audience, but many peoplee aren't that sophisticated.

On top of that, I don't think that Any country would take lightly such messages about their head of state.

That rubber head is no more alive than Muhammad. And Kathy Griffin isn't promoting anything. If you feel this work intimates the person holding that bloody head is satisfied to be doing so, or is somehow urging you or others to violence, then that's your interpretation. It's delicious, though. I'm more into this idea of yours that there is this guerrilla segment of society, lacking in all self control, and yet lying in wait to be triggered by pop art to partake in an as-yet-named bit of the ol' ultraviolence.

 

[InternationalFunboy]

Cleaver, I'm not going to quote your post, but I agree with you on all points. Well said, and thank you.

 

[hashtag34]

That rubber head is no more alive than Muhammad. And Kathy Griffin isn't promoting anything.

If you feel this work intimates the person holding that bloody head is satisfied to be doing so, or is somehow urging you or others to violence, then that's your interpretation.

It's delicious, though. I'm more into this idea of yours that there is this guerrilla segment of society, lacking in all self control, and yet lying in wait to be triggered by pop art to partake in an as-yet-named bit of the ol' ultraviolence.

What I was trying to say : that I partially agree with your post.

To the more discerning observer, this was clearly symbolical or a metaphor, even a piece of art, as you mentioned. And I took it in a similar way.

But let's not forget about a small % among the impressionable, low IQ or mentally ill, who might possibly read other messages into it..
I wouldn't push it too far, saying that they would engage in certain acts because of the picture. But it primes the brain, and better avoid things that hint to violence, even if controversial.

 

[Pawleys16]

Wondering

If that was a comedian holding up Obama's head would the leftist/liberals be having the same reaction?

 

[hashtag34]

Anyway, I agree with Ann:
this is a great thread.

 

[InternationalFunboy]

That dichotomy of reaction underscores the point of the OP.

There is that old quote about pornography being hard to define but I know when I see it. That's only true for the person who views and image and finds it pornographic.

As far as photography and special effects as art go, if not tge specific subject matter, it would be, to me, wholly unremarkable. Nothing about it seemed especially well executed, if you'll pardon the pun.

I've no talent for identifying how to make an image "right" but can see when lighting and composition feel right. That might be the point here, that I am missing in that they wanted a stark, unexpected bit of gore on a bright, sun-lit day.

Amidst all this discussion I saw an image posted up apparently of Game of Thrones with some heads on pikes. That image was far better in every way. I don't know if the image I saw was simply a scene grab from the show, or whether it was a purposeful, still image created to promote the show that happened to feature the heads.

I get why you might want it. I used to work not far from the former home of American Continental which was located in the Arizona Biltmore area. Long after they and others caused the Savings and Loan bailout scandal, Charlie Keatings headquarters lay vacant, but the sign was still in place. I considered swiping itvas a return on my taxpayer dollars as a nice little piece of American History. I didn't end up doing that not out of any sense of propriety or for lack of equipment to effect the heist, I just simply never got around to it.

I acknowledge that dichotomy, and I agree with you, but I can't get with Ann's correlation at all. I won't agree that real people losing real heads isn't, in fact, art to someone. Besides that though...dark as that concept may be, it's still a concept....no one involved in creating this piece of art is chopping off anyone's heads. The correlation is farther fetched than what hash was saying.

This picture would take up a small place on my wall with other weird or iconic images that I steal from the internet. File it between Kim Kardashian bowling in high heels and a photo-collage of various barrel-type inventions that people used to go over Niagra Falls in the early 20th century.