the rape tunnel

{trigger warning - source material discusses rape in a dismissive, denying manner}

{addendum: apparently, it's a hoax. but the sentiment still stands.}

art should heal.
promote discussion.
uplift.
agitate.
inspire.

of course, art often depicts pain.

sometimes the artist opts for some level of self-harm. not big on that, but they are the purveyor of their domain.

that said, i would maintain that art should not hurt the observer--unless it is in the context of revealing a stark truth or reality in the interest of unpacking, analyzing, and reevaluating said truth for the betterment of the community/society as a whole.


but since when is deliberately setting out to rape someone art?  and what's with the cavalier attitude?

[Sheila Zareno] But rape is way more extreme than [his last project which involved] a punch to the face. Is your intention to ruin people’s lives?

["artist" Richard Whitehurst] Possibly. I’m not necessarily concerned with the positive or negative effects of this project so long as there is some effect on people’s lives. I’ve merely set up a situation where there is potential to impact people in meaningful ways. Maybe I won’t be able to rape everyone who crawls through the tunnel, but the door is open for all kinds of scenarios; rape, serious injury, maybe even death. I might even get arrested.

Right now the installation isn’t even complete, and I’ve riled up a substantial portion of the local population. The installation as an idea is powerful enough itself.

um, what?

cloaking your misogyny and misanthropy behind "art" is...pretty fking lame, dude.