A twisted use of Mickey's likeness for "art"

[challer]

It may be me, but someone needs to explain to me how this qualifies as art.

http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=181498

Mickey Mouse, a swastika, and a nude woman's body
By ASSOCIATED PRESS
7/15/2010
'NaziSexyMouse' poster causes stir in Poland.

WARSAW, Poland — A huge outdoor art poster that blends Mickey Mouse's image with that of a swastika and a nude woman's body is causing a stir in Poland, where memories of the suffering inflicted by Nazi Germany remain strong.

The poster, which went up in June in the western city of Poznan just steps from a synagogue, is an Italian artist's take on what he calls the "horrors" of the American lifestyle and is one piece of artwork in a contemporary art exhibition opening in the fall.

But the reaction shows that there is little appetite in Poland for satirical or artistic uses of images linked to Nazi Germany, which invaded Poland in 1939 and built ghettoes and death camps across the country in which millions were murdered.

"This art provocation is a form of violence against the sensitivity of many people," said Norbert Napieraj, a city council member who asked prosecutors to ban the poster.

Prosecutors, however, determined that the poster is art and does not violate the country's laws against glorifying Nazism.

The poster has been vandalized twice since it first went up, and on Tuesday was no longer stretched across a building in the city center. Despite the uproar, gallery director Maria Czarnecka said she plans to put it back up.

"Art should be provocative and controversial," she told The Associated Press, insisting that the poster does not seek to propagate Nazism but instead wants to explore "symbols and how they work."

"The Mickey Mouse head and swastika are on the same level — they don't mean anything and they are both part of the globalized world," Czarnecka said.

Jewish leaders, who have been outraged at the poster, would disagree, saying the swastika still means something very real to many Poles, Jews and non-Jews alike.

The head of Poznan's Jewish community, Alicja Kobus, 64, described being overwhelmed by revulsion when she first saw the poster. She had just been with Jewish visitors from Holland to the synagogue, which the Nazis turned into a swimming pool.

"It is a shock for people who still scarred by the hell of the Holocaust," she said.

The work — "NaziSexyMouse" by Italian artist Max Papeschi — is part of a series works that blend iconic American cartoon figures with images of warfare or destruction.

Papeschi explains on his website that the series — which he dubs "Politically-Incorrect" — is meant as commentary on the United States, revealing "all the horror of this lifestyle."

His images — Mickey Mouse as a Nazi or Ronald McDonald as a machine-gun bearing soldier in Iraq — lose "their reassuring effect and change into a collective nightmare," Papeschi said.

"NaziSexyMouse" also went on show this week in Berlin as part of an exhibition at a sister gallery. But the image has not been displayed publicly there and has sparked no outcry.

A Berlin art gallery manager said older people often do not understand that the combination of pop culture icons like Mickey Mouse and historical symbols like the swastika are meant to be satirical.

"For the younger generation, this painting is just a joke; older people sometimes don't like it or don't find it funny, but nobody has taken any offense so far," said Agnes Kaplon, manager of the Abnormals Gallery in Berlin.

A Russian art exhibition that also used Mickey Mouse's image has also been at the center of a legal case in Russia. Two Russian curators who angered the Russian Orthodox Church with an exhibition that included images of Jesus Christ portrayed as Mickey Mouse and Vladimir Lenin were convicted Monday of inciting religious hatred and fined, but not sentenced to prison.

 

[disneym2m]

Yeah...I agree. If I hadn't read the article, I wouldn't have understood what the three images blended together was suppose to mean. I understand what the artist was trying to say, but my grandfather who fought in WWII and liberated concentration camps would NOT be happy over this "artwork".

Interesting.....interpretation of America.

 

[kaligal]

He wants attention and the idiots are giving it to him.

I had to stop reading toward the beginning when they were going to talk about what the guy who put it together had to say. But let me guess, he doesn't like Jews and Americans, right?? No desire to hear what the whack job has to say.

I wouldn't ban the thing (always big on the free speech, no matter how disgusting), but it would be hung in a building that I owned over my dead body. I mean that literally and not "I think the word 'literally' means 'figuratively'", but in the actual, literal sense.

 

[DisneyKevin]

He has the right to artistic expression and most artists look for an emotional reaction to their work.

You have the right to respond in whatever way you feel is appropriate.

If you react with disgust, anger and repulsion, the artist has succeeded in getting an emotional response.

This is how I react to Bob Dylan.

 

[Ava]

I understand the artist's point & agree he has a right to free speech, but I also understand why the people of Poland are upset at having it publically displayed. Also, the swastika is not just an historical symbol; it's still used by neo-Nazi groups to spread hatred & fear. At least once a year I hear a story on my local news about a swastika being painted on a synagogue in Brooklyn.

 

[challer]

I don't think anyone's questioning his rights. Of course he has a artistic/cultural right and, in many societies (but not all), also the legal right to his artistic expression. The question is not his right - it is his taste. Sure, he got a rise out of me. As a person who grew up hearing about life in Nazi Germany from my Grandfather, I always will look at the swatzika in a light other than "art."

I just wonder if he would use that imagery in his art if he lived through the constant death of a concentration camp.

 

[DisneyKevin]

After reading the article....love it or hate it....the artist has gotten your attention.

Enough attention I might add, to bring it to other people's attention.

Again....love it or hate it.....you are talking about his work.

I think most artists would consider this a success.

The artist achieved an emotional response.

 

[FlightlessDuck]

I don't get how the piece represents the ""horrors" of the American lifestyle.

He seems to have warped opinions of American society. The neo-Nazi movement is small and underground in this society (although some people will suggest that any criticism of Israel is tantamount to antisemitism). Perhaps the artist is exagerating the use of the Swastika to criticize other political points of view in the US?

America is actually a rather prudish society compared to parts of Europe. So I don't get the naked woman.

Mickey Mouse, I assume is supposed to represent mass-produced art in the United States.

In the end, it looks like the artist is just trying to be controversial for the sake of media attention.

I agree with Kevin that art is about drawing a reaction from an audience, but it seems that this artist isn't trying very hard to actually say anything. Rather, the artist is just looking for some media time.

 

[SweaterInJune]

I was in Poznán this past January, as well as Kraków. The wounds inflicted during the holocaust are still very apparent. People must also remember that it was not just the Jews who were affected, and not just soldiers. Many non-Jewish Europeans were also victims and encamped.

My fiancé and I found Poznán to be charming. It was our favorite of the cities we visited in Poland. It saddens me that people there would find this appropriate--even as art. I, for one, would have been absolutely appalled to find this on display.

I'm young, Christian, and have lived in Germany--and no, this is NOT a joke to me. I can't believe someone could say that either...


Yes, Kevin, you are correct...as far as creating emotional art, he has done this. I don't, however, believe he has achieved his intention though...


Another note of "art" and holocaust in the news... What do you think about this?

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=11173901

 

[DisneyKevin]

Yes, Kevin, you are correct...as far as creating emotional art, he has done this. I don't, however, believe he has achieved his intention though...

I never said I agreed with him or that his art made his point.

I merely suggested that most artists look to evoke an emotional response and have their work seen.

Based on the OP....he has been successful.

The artist not only evoked an emotional response, but it was a strong enough response to get the OP to share it with others.

Whether you agree with the artists POV or not.....in this case his art is successful when using the parameters of response and getting the world to see his work.

Throughout history, art has been used to incite. Again... love it or hate it....using that parameter....this piece is successful.

 

[SweaterInJune]

I never said I agreed with him or that his art made his point.

I did not mean to imply that you did. Those were two separate thoughts.

I have a great love of art and hold a Bachelor of Fine Arts and in no way am I suggesting it is not art--this is just...not right to right to hang from a building.

I'd like to see how all of these things collectively symbolize this country, or any other for that matter. I don't get it. The other pieces described in the article have an assumed observable connotation, but this, I don't understand.

 

[metalis4ever]

The article makes a great point that "art of this nature is meant to be satirical" Once one gets past the initial shock and look at it from both the emic and etic perspectives it can have contemplative values. Each and every one of us have different worldviews and would interpret this differently but that doesn't make it overtly offensive especially since this work of art was not created maliciously. It's not like this was spray painted on the side of a Holocaust Memorial it was commissioned.

In any case as others have stated the artist has been successful as it has gotten others to discuss and share the work.

 

[dalt01]

when i was a teen some of us "cool" guys took to wearing a "surfers cross"...now for some reason the WW2 vets in town....and there was no shortage of them........figured they looked just enough like swasticas to qualifys us as possible troublemakers............the thought never crossed our minds but it did not matter and we took quite a bit of flack for it. the point is they were all up in our faces over a percieved problem that did not exist and that neckwear could do them no harm. nor can this, weather on a bill board, magazine cover, subway wall, etc. shock art has always existed. and as i said in response this in another thread......the artist should have used a minnie head.

 

[metalis4ever]

when i was a teen some of us "cool" guys took to wearing a "surfers cross"...now for some reason the WW2 vets in town....and there was no shortage of them........figured they looked just enough like swasticas to qualifys us as possible troublemakers............the thought never crossed our minds but it did not matter and we took quite a bit of flack for it. the point is they were all up in our faces over a percieved problem that did not exist and that neckwear could do them no harm. nor can this, weather on a bill board, magazine cover, subway wall, etc. shock art has always existed. and as i said in response this in another thread......the artist should have used a minnie head.

I agree a Minnie head would have taken this to higher levels, but then again the artist may have purposely used the Mickey head on a female body in order to take a shot at the Patriarchal views maintained by most major civilizations since the birth of agriculture...Just a thought...

Regarding your valid point about perception I couldn't agree with you more...I was always taught even through College that "perception is reality" However, I have come to the conclusion that perception is not reality but rather just another word for ignorance. In other words its our ethnocentrism getting the better of us, which happens to us all from time to time even the most open minded of us

I guess that is no more apparent then when a piece of art such as this is brought to the attention of the mass media......

Just for the record, I am not calling anyone on here "ignorant" or "close minded" nor am I implying such, just having a conversation

 

[challer]

I will leave the "Art vs. Look-at-me" debate to others.

 

[dalt01]

I will leave the "Art vs. Look-at-me" debate to others.

doesnt one serve the other?

 

[DisneyKevin]

I will leave the "Art vs. Look-at-me" debate to others.

I guess I'm confused.

As you started this discussion and brought this to our attention...were you just looking for us to agree with you?

 

[FireDancer]

Art is all about perspective. If the swastika, Mickey Mouse, and a female body are what represents a "commentary on the United States" to the artist so bit it. They wouldn't be the first 3 that pop into my mind (well, Mickey maybe), but I am not the one who painted the picture. Much of the time perspective is like opinion. It is neither right nor wrong, only different.

I am not offended by it. There is a big difference between using Nazi symbolism to glorify their ideals and using it as a satirical device, analogy, or metaphor for something else.

As for "how does this qualify as art", I would ask the same question about some of the modern art that is nothing more then objects placed in a display. I was in a museum that had 3 unopened paint cans sitting on the floor with some nonsense description of what it symbolized. I have that sitting in my basement but wouldn't call it art.

 

[dalt01]

Art is all about perspective. If the swastika, Mickey Mouse, and a female body are what represents a "commentary on the United States" to the artist so bit it. They wouldn't be the first 3 that pop into my mind (well, Mickey maybe), but I am not the one who painted the picture. Much of the time perspective is like opinion. It is neither right nor wrong, only different.

I am not offended by it. There is a big difference between using Nazi symbolism to glorify their ideals and using it as a satirical device, analogy, or metaphor for something else.

As for "how does this qualify as art", I would ask the same question about some of the modern art that is nothing more then objects placed in a display. I was in a museum that had 3 unopened pain cans sitting on the floor with some nonsense description of what it symbolized. I have that sitting in my basement but wouldn't call it art.

the "unopened" cans of paint symbolized a bottle of beer, doritos and a football game

 

[challer]

I guess I'm confused.

As you started this discussion and brought this to our attention...were you just looking for us to agree with you?

Agree with me? I shared the article because Disney fans mightbe interested and I said:

It may be me, but someone needs to explain to me how this qualifies as art.

There is nothing to agree with here. It is a statement that shows my confusion as to how this would be considered art. It is not an opinion that one can agree or disagree with.

I realized as the thread progressed that getting into a debate as to where the line is drawn between art and just attention grabbing pictures will go nowhere except see how people draw the line at different points.

That's all.