The expression is priceless....

Many animal lovers find it hard to part with their pets when they die.

So when cat Orville, named after the famous aviator Orville Wright, was run over by a car, his artist owner decided to turn him into a permanent piece of artwork as the ultimate tribute by transforming him into a flying helicopter.

Dutch artist Bart Jansen first stuffed Orville before teaming up with radio control helicopter flyer Arjen Beltman to build a specially-designed flying mechanism to attach to the cat...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2154283/Cats-away-Artist-turns-dead-pet-flying-helicopter-killed-car.html?ITO=1490

Read this in the paper today and I really don't like it.

That is so sick. Good gawd.

Totally sick and depraved.

Laurie

Oh Gawd, I hope that does not catch on!

I have added ashes to my statuary work for memorials and I have seen mounted pets before --- but, dead, mounted and flying, in my opinion, that is taking it way to far! And again, my opinion, this is not art, it is cruel and sick and totally neglects to honor the anima'sl spirit.

OMG ... I had to hide my cat's eyes while I was reading this. Really sick.

A HA HAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA!

I can't believe he didn't curl the tail up, creating a natural vertical stabilizer.  Doh!

OMG Owl and Klebnor, you guys are so bad ;).

I held my kitties eyes too ToxicWolf...LOL.

I would never do anything like that to a creature that I loved.

I even buried my lizards when they died

Laurie

Can we turn him into a helicopter when he dies? 

~Shane

I'm glad I'm not the only one who doesn't like this idea. Stuffing a pet is bad enough, but kinda of understandable. Turning the poor thing into a toy is going to far.

It is certainly not what I envisioned when I saw the headline; I thought he put the poor beast's ashes into the resin used to build it or something.  However, I will say that the taxidermy appears supurb...

Well, it doesn't quite sink to the level of people paying to see what are most likely executed Chinese prisoners - skinned, resined and put on exhibit. Still bizarre rather disturbing though. Considering all the obscure laws, there must be one about flying dead animals.

:ohmy:

wow.. thats just to weird to me.

Quote - Well, it doesn't quite sink to the level of people paying to see what are most likely executed Chinese prisoners - skinned, resined and put on exhibit. Still bizarre rather disturbing though. Considering all the obscure laws, there must be one about flying dead animals.

Yeah, he'll probably have to pay a fine if he flies it through Alabama on a Tuesday.

A cat will just eat your eyeballs if you die. Humans are weird.

Now thats just beyond sick, and if anyone thinks thats funny then they are one seriously pathetic person.

I see now that he's an artist, so I'll cut him some slack. He's not a weird guy doing weird things, he's an artist creating art. No doubt it has totemic symbology, perhaps drawing on the Icarus myth, or the phoenix rising from the ashes. Joseph Campbell would understand. To the Phillistines, it's just a flying pussy. Ars longa, felis brevis.

Well, he hasn't harmed anyone or anything but I find it distasteful.

OTOH, as someone pointed out elsewhere, he could really fuck with the neighbourhood dogs.  :) 

But no, I don't like it and I'd never do anything like that with my pet's remains. 

And finally...

When's the Millennium Cat add on pack coming out? 

I wouldn't call that art, if anything it's akin to the victorians did and we overcame those attuides years ago. If that guy calls that artistic it's like saying Mapplethorpe was a great family phtographer. It's done purely for shock value and nothing more. Which isn't about art it's about 'hey look at me'. Which is some a genuinely good artist doesn't need to do, instead they have real skills to put across their visions. Plus after they've done the shock stuff, how can a artist beat that? Emins a good example of that, OK was never any good to start with, but still.

I'd have to look at some of his other work and hear what his motivation was for this particular 'kinetic' piece before deciding if I thought it was purely for shock value. I'm unsure whether something designed to elicit that response is disqualified from being art any more than any other emotion. Lust, disgust, fear...Is it art? We know the bottomless rabbit hole that leads down. I find it distasteful but it leads to thoughts of just what respectful treatment of the deceased loved one is. I know there are cultures that do things with grandma that most of us would find shocking. I wouldn't mind being frozen and shot into deep space for the aliens to find :-)

I buried one of my cats at his favourite spot in the garden.

Another, since I was leaving the house shortly, I had cremated and his ashes scattered around his favourite tree.  I didn't want the chance of someone disturbing his resting place later.

Most of the family pets were buried in a nice spot in the garden. 

I feel, and do take, the same approach as Sam, when it comes to our pets which obviously will always give me a bias against something like this. Though I still think shock is the main aim here, as I can't see much else in it. Theres not even any artistic value in the technical aspect of it, which at least many artists will try when trying to get a point across. But 'can be shock be art' is a dang good question. I think it can at times, but it's how done, whats being put across and like you say what questions and emotions does it ask of us. But it's a fine balance twixt whats art and distastefull stuff. Here it's the latter. Certainly can't disagree about humans treat their loved ones and thats one reason why I like cats. Theres an honesty there. If we kark it to a moggy we're lunch, to other humans it's how much will we get:)

I hope he can practise a bit, so he can do elephants next time. Sheep might do for intermediate level, so we can have flying sheep instead of fluffy clouds.

And after nine lifes, this cat got a tenth. Not too bad.

(Sorry, I'm a dog person myself).

Yeah, a sad idea. But then?? What is art??

To some, even Picasso's are art.
I would not give a dime for them.

Yeah , to cover a crack in the wall untill I could find something better like a Poser1 render with a Poser 1 figure. :-)

I would not give a dime for them. You'll need a lot than that if you want to see them in malaga. If you want good art from a one armed lady, try the biggest church in town. Thats what's the local call their cathedral and it's a stunning place. Makes picasso look seriously dull and talentless.

I know it's drifting off the subject but I like Picasso.  He was, IMO a superb draughtsman and had an extremely well developed sense of form and space.  As much as anything else, I love his brush work; there's a real confidence that only comes from years and years of working with paint.

Arguably the first of the truly modern painters who went way beyond simple representation and for the most part, avoided the simple jokes and shock value of the Dadaists, even though he had kinship with them and the Surrealists.  

I don't think it's OT - it's all art. Personally not a big fan of Picasso, though am rather partial to a bit of the old Henry Moores up in Leeds. Also the early Gormleys as well.

I came to Picasso by way of Dali.  I'd never given Picasso much time before I read how Dali was in awe of him.  That made me read up on him and once I thought I had a better understanding of what he was about I began to see what a great artist he was.

It's a shame so much "modern" art has tainted the public's view of what can be interesting and rewarding work.