Republicans offended by new Bush p0rtrait...

[Karlos]

I couldn't help but be mildly amused at this.

"This picture is very distasteful. Why would anyone want to make a picture of our President from pornographic material?"

Why? Well, why not? I thought it was rather apt, really. After all, as well as being a Bush, he's also demonstrated himself to be a complete tit, ar*e, d*** and c*** on numerous occasions. I suppose he's also a pussy for avoiding service during the Vietnam war too :lol:

Well, it tickled me anyway. YMMV.

[cecilia]

on the artists site here's what the original looks like

hee hee, how cute.   :lol:

[Cymric]

I didn't notice the portrait was tiled from pr0n until I saw the closeups. The artist must have had a blast with this one, although I'm sure he's now seen enough pr0n to last a lifetime.

(Probably. You never know with males.)

[KThunder]

how many times have we seen this before, some artist grabs headlines for a little while by making a controversial piece of art. with mother theresa, the pope, Christ, mohhamed etc.etc.


that said it is a visually interesting piece. contemplative pose, strong lines; respectful if you ignore the composition.

i generally have a very poor opinion of most modern "artists" but this isnt in the class of feces/vomit smearers and others who have little to say but say it loudly.  and i would say it is above the level of mad magazine characitures, but i wouldnt expect to see it in the whitehouse

[Karlos]

respectful if you ignore the composition

As Cymric suggested, from a distance it's not immediately obvious that it's made from porn images. Once you realise that, however, it's impossible not to notice that the tonal quality of his mouth is seemingly rendered from close ups of people's sphincters... :lol:

...but i wouldnt expect to see it in the whitehouse

Conversely, I imagine several pieces of "Whitehouse" may well be in it...

[cecilia]

isn't it funny that some people are "offended" by this picture  - but NOT offended by the fact that bushCo lied about starting a war and that many many many people are dead?

how ironic   :roll:

[CannonFodder]

Very apt use of imagery for this portrait.  The man is a complete twat afterall.

[Boot_WB]

KThunder wrote:
how many times have we seen this before, some artist grabs headlines for a little while by making a controversial piece of art. with mother theresa, the pope, Christ, mohhamed etc.etc.

So, let me get this straight.
You''re comparing a derogatory picture of GWB to being on a par with a derogatory picture of Mother Theresa of Calcutta, The Pope, Christ or Mohammed?!?
Actually, with the Pope, you might have something, but I think the others are in a slightly different league.

Personally, I like the superficial irony of an apparently respectable image of a man who, upon closer inspection, is composed of many obscene things.
More of a 30-second laugh than a respectable work of art worthy of exhibition though imho.

[Karlos]

cecilia wrote:
isn't it funny that some people are "offended" by this picture  - but NOT offended by the fact that bushCo lied about starting a war and that many many many people are dead?

how ironic   :roll:

Quite. Even if you aren't moved by the spiralling numbers of dead iraqi civillians that the military can't even be bothered to count, surely the racks of fallen US servicemen in their flag draped boxes ought to give one pause for thought.

Oh no, that's not nearly as bad as this, right?

[KThunder]

Boot_WB wrote:
So, let me get this straight.
You''re comparing a derogatory picture of GWB to being on a par with a derogatory picture of Mother Theresa of Calcutta, The Pope, Christ or Mohammed?!?
Actually, with the Pope, you might have something, but I think the others are in a slightly different league.

...

no im just saying that art used in this way is at best a political cartoon. insiteful? amusing? irritating? perhaps but not art for arts sake. i said nothing of it being derogitory, or amusing, or offensive.

this artist is from what little ive seen a capable artist, but selling yourself with a controversial piece even if it is popular isnt neccissarily a career builder.

[Cymric]

KThunder wrote:
this artist is from what little ive seen a capable artist, but selling yourself with a controversial piece even if it is popular isnt neccissarily a career builder.

Ah! But isn't that more or less the definition of True Art? To make controversial works, to confront the masses with their own shortcomings and vices and fears and dreams and desires?

[Matt_H]

Interesting how the love/hate split in the comments in the original link seems to be perfectly divided on national lines.

...and how my insecure fellow countrymen can only express themselves using logical fallacies. Sigh.

Good find, Karlos.

[KThunder]

@Cymric
or being upset at not recieving a commision and making a tawdry political statement... i suppose
next year president bush will be out of office and this piece of art will be worthless. kindof like a political cartoon in the sunday times in fact in karlos's original post he said that he was "mildly amused" that is exactly how most people would describe political cartoons they happen to agree with.
(i usually dont use the word tawdry but i think it fits quite well to a structured collage of porn)

Matt_H wrote:
Interesting how the love/hate split in the comments in the original link seems to be perfectly divided on national lines.
...and how my insecure fellow countrymen can only express themselves using logical fallacies. Sigh.
...

i assume you are levelling that at me?
ive said it is an interesting piece amusing to me only that someone took the time to go through enough porn to get a good match for form and skin tone. i dont think i love it or hate it. i do get rather sick of muckraking though, wich is what i would call all of this petty name calling etc.
how exactly am i insecure and what logical fallacies are you refuring to?

[KThunder]

Boot_WB wrote:
...
 
More of a 30-second laugh than a respectable work of art worthy of exhibition though imho.

i think i agree with this (and Boot_WB is from the UK)

[Matt_H]

KThunder wrote:

Matt_H wrote:
Interesting how the love/hate split in the comments in the original link seems to be perfectly divided on national lines.
...and how my insecure fellow countrymen can only express themselves using logical fallacies. Sigh.
...

i assume you are levelling that at me?
ive said it is an interesting piece amusing to me only that someone took the time to go through enough porn to get a good match for form and skin tone. i dont think i love it or hate it. i do get rather sick of muckraking though, wich is what i would call all of this petty name calling etc.
how exactly am i insecure and what logical fallacies are you refuring to?

My apologies, as I should have been more clear. I meant it regards to those posting at the linked website.