Portrait of Guillermo Habacuc Vargas
Seventy artists exhibiting their work simultaneously in four separate galleries in Barga Vecchia. Paintings, photographs, etchings, prints, poetry, video, music and drawings all with the central theme of dogs and the relationship we have with these animals.- The Cave Canem exhibition is almost ready to open.
The works will be shown in the two Museum of Memory galleries, the Galleria Comunale and the Gallery Marzocco in Piazza Angelio. The opening for the exhibitions is set for 3.30 pm on Monday 1st November and the exhibitions will all be open daily until Sunday 7th November.
How about a sneak preview for the barganews readers? A very interesting painting entitled “Portrait of Guillermo Vargas” by Gabriele Levrine. Interesting not just for the pure aesthetic of the painting but also for the reason behind why the painting was created. The whole story is based around the internet, the image itself of Guillermo Vargas came off the net and the ensuing backlash involved thousands of people all connected (and duped) by the internet.
You must have heard the story by now; how back in October 2007 Costa Rican artist Guillermo Habacuc Vargas captured a stray dog and chained it in a gallery without food and water with a big sign on the back wall made of dog biscuits stating “Eres Lo Que Lees” (”You Are What You Read”). According to the story, people watched the dog called Natividad perish in the gallery from lack of food and water. There’s only one small problem: Most of this story is pure invention – the proverbial feather that turned into five hens. For the dog did not starve, nor die!
Thousands of blogs and web sites are asking for you to sign a petition to prevent the artist from partaking in a new exhibit this year around the same theme. And hundreds of thousands have signed the petition, joined Facebook groups and sent emails, hate letters and even death threats to the artist as well as the galleries involved. Read on to see why you should check your sources before joining the witch hunt.
I first came across this story several months ago on a blog. Having all the tell-tale signs of being an internet hoax, I thought little of it. Then yesterday I got 10 invites to join a Facebook group about a petition to stop the artist from repeating the exhibition. The group had grown 70,000 members strong and I started to worry, not for the dog but for my friends who so willingly let themselves be caught by the dragnet of mass suggestion.
You see, the story of the artist killing a dog in a gallery makes no sense: First off, no gallery owner in their right mind would ever allow something like this to take place, for obvious reasons. That people believe it could have happened can be chalked down to the western world’s arrogant and misinformed view of the third world – views like “It probably happened because in Nicaragua they have no laws.” Secondly, the information about the dog not being fed and its eventual demise is purely circumstantial. There are no images, video or other documentation of the dead animal, and all the blogs, groups and petitions cite the same (badly written) source. Thirdly, it is unclear where the story originated. There is mention of an original article in a local newspaper, but no links nor quotes. This, combined with the fact that there is not a single reference to the story in any major news outlet worldwide makes it pretty clear that the story’s origin is shaky at best. Considering how hungry news media is for precisely this kind of story, the fact that they’re not covering it tells us a lot about the story’s validity. Finally, the gallery put out a public statement saying that the dog had been fed throughout the exhibition and had escaped after the first day. The Humane Society validates this on their website:
According to local animal welfare organizations, the dog was in a state of starvation when he was captured from the street for display in the exhibit. We have also been informed that the dog spent one day in the exhibit and later escaped the gallery.
I am writing this not only because the very premise of what has become a giant online witch hunt is false, but because however ethically unsound and fundamentally stupid the artist might have been in the conception and execution of this exhibit, his message is being proven every time another ignoramus signs the petition:
The inscription on the wall behind the dog (spelled out in dog biscuits) read “Eres Lo Que Lees” or “You Are What You Read”. The meaning? Although you don’t really care about the dog starving right in front of you, you’ll be outraged about its starvation when you read about it. It’s a well known fact that our moral judgments are often based on those of people we consider “moral authorities” rather than our own reasoning. As a result, the people at the exhibit who were largely unaffected by the actual display of the dog, would be outraged when they read about it in the news the next morning and thus “became what they read” because the newspaper (the moral authority) told them they should be outraged. And the artist was dead on. Although I doubt he realized just how big this thing would grow and how people are a little too willing to jump on bandwagons and throw rocks even if they are destroying their own glass houses.
The moral of the story is like a tall glass of vinegar: With the unlimited access to information comes the heavy responsibility of critical thinking. Not everything you see is what it seems, even if your friends think it is. This is especially true when it comes to the internet. It’s not always easy to tell what is real and what is fabrication, and until someone invents bullshit-detecting glasses, everyone has to learn to do due diligence and research what they find on the internet thoroughly before starting wide reaching campaigns to ruin other people’s lives.
Let this be said: Although I understand what Guillermo Habacuc Vargas was attempting to do with his exhibit, I strongly disagree with his actually putting it to life. Even though he fed the dog and let it go after the exhibit was over, he made the dog into an object displayed for the amusement of others. And that’s wrong. But so is any other dog show. On the other hand, I strongly disagree with the actions of those who have put this petition in motion. Since it is based on the false premise that the dog was killed by the artist, it is in fact a defaming document now signed by hundreds of thousands of people. Not only is this in itself a crime, but it belittles the true plight of the millions of people and animals subjected to real cruelty every single day. If you really care and want do make a difference, don’t sign random petitions, join Amnesty International, help stop the genocide in Darfur or volunteer for the SPCA.
