CHANGE MY LOCATION
Local
California News
Multimedia News
Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit
SEE HOW THIS STORY DEVELOPED
Related Topics: SAN FRANCISCO
SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - A San Francisco Art Institute exhibit that shows video clips of animals being killed by hammer blows has provoked controversy.
The art school, which dates back to 1871, opened the “Don’t Trust Me” exhibit on Wednesday at the Walter and McBean Galleries on Chestnut Street. The exhibit, by Paris-based artist Adel Abdessemed, consists of video screens that show six animals — a sheep, a horse, an ox, a pig, a goat and a doe — being struck and killed by a hammer.
According to the university’s description, “Each killing occurs so quickly that it’s difficult to determine definitively what has happened.”
San Francisco resident and self-proclaimed animal lover Bob Gain said he was “disgusted and appalled” when he heard about the exhibit and cannot believe that “something like that is tolerated” in San Francisco.
“I don’t think that the killing of other creatures and doing it in such a way constitutes art,” Gain said. “I think it crosses a line.”
The San Francisco Art Institute issued a statement when asked to respond to criticism of the exhibit.
“SFAI would like to make it very clear that the Adel Abdessemed exhibition ... is an instance of a long-standing and serious commitment, on SFAI’s part, to reflection on and free and open discussion of contemporary art,” the statement said.
The images are “of events that took place — and regularly take place — in the real world, on a regular basis.”
The university said that video “can imbue images with a particularly powerful, ‘real time’ quality — a quality that some people may find disturbing.”
The exhibit is scheduled to remain on display until May 31.
Comments from Examiner Readers
2:20 PM MST on Tue., Apr. 1, 2008 re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
9:58 AM MST on Sun., Mar. 30, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
6:40 PM MST on Sat., Mar. 29, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
12:35 PM MST on Thu., Mar. 27, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
7:31 AM MST on Thu., Mar. 27, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
3:31 PM MST on Wed., Mar. 26, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
3:30 PM MST on Wed., Mar. 26, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
3:11 PM MST on Wed., Mar. 26, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
1:24 PM MST on Wed., Mar. 26, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
12:06 PM MST on Wed., Mar. 26, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
10:20 AM MST on Wed., Mar. 26, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
10:04 AM MST on Wed., Mar. 26, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
6:53 PM MST on Tue., Mar. 25, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
5:42 PM MST on Tue., Mar. 25, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
3:46 PM MST on Tue., Mar. 25, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
1:35 PM MST on Tue., Mar. 25, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
10:16 AM MST on Tue., Mar. 25, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
9:39 AM MST on Tue., Mar. 25, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
6:18 PM MST on Mon., Mar. 24, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
3:12 PM MST on Mon., Mar. 24, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
3:00 PM MST on Mon., Mar. 24, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
1:03 PM MST on Mon., Mar. 24, 2008
re: "Art Institute stands behind violent exhibit"
Report as inappropriate
Outraged Reader said:
What ever happened to landscape painting? Art today is disgusting. If I wanted to know what was happening in Mexico I'd read a newspaper. I heard this so-called artist raped and tortured the animals before he killed them.
2 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
ms jackson said:
The students and instructors at the SFAI behave like farm aniumals and look like slaughtered livestock themselves, so this could not be more appropriate / except that one plug penny of my tax dollars has gone to support this tripe - the NEOA should reconsider the regulations and rules behind their (we taxpayers') grants; rule one: Defund the SFAI at Once.
3 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
We live in a sad, sick world. I am truly ashamed to have even read this article. Shame on SFAI.
3 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I am extremely happy to report that SFAI has shut down the exhibit this morning, thursday march 27th, pending a hearing this monday at 12 noon on the main campus in the lecture hall at 800 chestnut street. I encourage everyone to come and put an end to this exhibit depicting the malicious killings of these 6 animals.
4 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
from a purely economic standpoint, can we as taxpayers continue to pay for violence prevention programs in schools while the National Endowment for the Arts gives grant money to this institution and the city of San francisco hands over hotel tax money in support of this exhibit. Go to the institute on Monday at noon and demand that all responsible parties be removed from their jobs. The next victims will be human. Many serial murderers and school shooters began by killing animals.
3 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
The artist may indeed be raising a thought-provoking point in his work - but some things are better left as thought-experiments - not actions. The decision to enact these killings in 'real life' rather than to come up with a more creative way to address this issue in his art without materially adding to the anguish and pain in the world makes this artist not only ethically questionable, but also artistically lazy. The artist may indeed be raising a thought-provoking point in his work - but some things are better left as thought
9 agree | 5 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I doubt the Institute would have defended an installation that was identical, except substituted the killing of human beings instead of animals. The defense of the artist, that the death of these animals was going to happen anyway, could be applied to humans who were sentenced to death by the state. Why not kill them wth a hammer and put that video in in a gallery? If one believes that animals are sentient beings, with consciousness and emotions (as anyone who has ever had a pet knows they are), then this artist's piece is no different than that. The artist may indeed be raising a thought-provoking point in his work - but some things are better left as thought
6 agree | 5 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Thank goodness I didn't actually see the "exhibit," or those miserable images would be nightmares. I am nauseated at his cruel, violent acts and am absolutely STUNNED that the museum board would allow this abomination in their venue. If Mr. A.A. and the board want people to witness "real time quality," show what actually goes on in slaughterhouses and hunting and war........but to go seek animals out just for this leaves one speechless. By the way, what monetary remuneration did this "artist" receive?? ..... and the President and other members of SFAI can collect their salaries with no guilt or revulsion?! I'm definitely writing to Pres. Charles Bratton and will let everyone I know, about this horrible situation.
6 agree | 5 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
You have started a WAR with animal protesters. This is very disgusting and if anyone that sees this I hope it's etched in their minds FOREVER!!!!!!!!!
12 agree | 5 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Its obvious they want extreme reactions from the viewers.Thats what artists and curators expect and want.I just think its SAD.I'll sign the petition and won't visit those gallerys that support it. Don't give them what they want.
8 agree | 6 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
How inhumane! This is not art is is murder. The murder of innocent animals. How dare the The SFA Institute support such an act. If it was humans being slaughtered like that would they consider that art. Is the Holocaust "art". Is the death of our solders"art" the Rwanda bloodbath "art". They should loose all federal/state funding and the should be boycotted. Shame on them. of itself. I wi
6 agree | 5 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Think for a Minute About What the SFAI said... said:
"The images are of events that took place and regularly take place in the real world, on a regular basis." Actually, NO. Slaughterhouses, maybe. But deliberately buying, selecting six animals (that we know of), confining them, bludgeoning them sensless and watching them die (or causing their death) AND filmining it... that's QUITE a lbit out of the ordinary, one of those more extreme warning signs that police look for and had an officer wandered over there, MrArtist would have been arrested and convicted. Clearly, to make such thoughtless (and irrelevant) remarks, the board's institute must be... Venal? Stupid? ?
9 agree | 6 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Isn't the question of whether or not this qualifies as "Art" rather moot. It does not seem to be impossible that an act or work could in fact be immoral and (more importantly) illegal and still considered by some as art. Even IF this is the case, it does not exempt the artist from the ramifications of violating the law (if it was if fact done). In this case, this seems like a clear case of animial cruelty and the violator (Artist or not) should be severely punished. I would think the gallery culpable as well. The tag "art" certainly does not exempt anyone from illegal actions. As a final aside, this guy is a total idiot. I hope he spends time in jail (maybe he can consider that a work of art as well), JL Seattle
9 agree | 5 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Caring Individuals Taking Action said:
Please do something, if you disagree with this man's "art". Let your voices be heard. Write to the President of the San Francisco Art Institute!! Do it today, speak up against this terrible exhibit. Remove "Don't Trust Me" exhibit now! President Charles Bratton San Francisco Art Institute 800 Chestnut Street San Francisco, CA 94113 * President Charles Bratton * cc: Chairman John Sanger The San Francisco Art Institute is running an exhibit now through May 31st made up of video images of six different animals -- a doe, a goat, a horse, an ox, a pig, and a sheep -- being bludgeoned to death with a large sledgehammer by someone calling himself an "artist." Entitled "Don't Trust Me," this sick exhibit is nothing more than a disgusting attempt to pass off the brutal abuse and killing of animals as legitimate art. Please Take Action to urge the Institute to remove this deplorable exhibit immediately, and implement a policy explicitly prohibiting exhibits for which animals
9 agree | 5 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
"The images are “of events that took place — and regularly take place — in the real world, on a regular basis.”" If the "artist" wants to show video of animal cruelty that regularly take place in the real world, all s/he had to do was to show PeTA's Meet Your Meat, a clip from a Barnum & Bailey circus or a segment from the latest national news regarding the treatment of downed dairy cows in Chino. If art is meant to get people to think and discuss, then those images will start the ball rolling! And shame on the SFAI! Supporting artists' messages is essential but it should not be over shadowed by allowing displays of blatant cruelty toward anyone! Do the words "ethical responsibility" and "conscience" have any meaning in the world of art?
8 agree | 5 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
The "artist" should be jailed, or soon people will start killing other people and call it "art" to avoid jail!
7 agree | 6 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Killing is Art? Let's open the prisons and call them artist! Appauling! How low can humans go? We know that is going on in the "real" world - however we would not call it art - would we? There are other ways of drawing attention to animal cruelty and make people think. You don;t have to go out of your way to kill a few more inocent beings. What have the animals done to deserve this? I know what - they came across your path - that is what. After ehibiting trash and calling it art now this US artist can keep company with the San Salvador artist who starves dogs to death! Each exhibiion house just steppef over the line and in my opinin made themselves guilty as solisiting, advertising and colaborating in a criminal act.
9 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Why did no one feed this poor dog? Why is this artist not getting arrested for animal cruelty? This is sick. I thought San Francisco people were more humane than this.
4 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
"This is the problem when something is tagged as art and that uses inhumane imagery. The only reason that this is being tolerated is that it is animals being killed and not humans. If humans were shown being killed this violently, there would be no question that this would not be permitted. It just goes to show that animals are still viewed as having a diminished stature. What a pity for the human species that we can persist in this irrationality." -Couldn't have said it better myself!
5 agree | 5 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
This is the problem when something is tagged as art and that uses inhumane imagery. The only reason that this is being tolerated is that it is animals being killed and not humans. If humans were shown being killed this violently, there would be no question that this would not be permitted. It just goes to show that animals are still viewed as having a diminished stature. What a pity for the human species that we can persist in this irrationality.
10 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Larry L said:
Whaddaya expect when the government hands out grant money to every pierced, nosering-wearing, dyed-hair misfit in black clothing, merely because he or she calls himself or herself an "artist"?
8 agree | 8 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Using pictures or videos of actual animals in state of distress, harm, or abuse is NOT art. We wouldnt tolerate calling this art this if they videos were of actual humans nor should we tolerate this with animals involved. This is not art.
8 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree