Death In This Land Is Liberating

They were indeed very dark and disturbing. They involved b********y, incest, cannibalism and other things that we in modern civilization would like to pretend were not part of human history. It is much more productive and educational for an artist to deal with his dark feelings through visual/performing arts than the way some people do, by taking an assault rifle and snuffing out the lives of others.

if only normal, comfy points were allowed it'd get boring on BP (no b******l pun intended, ghe)

Terry Wickham || The phrase 'art' is not a trophy, or an accolade that can only be awarded to the best, least controversial creations. No matter how much you hate a painting, it's still art and some other people will still like it. So, to answer your question- yes. That would be art. It'd also, however, be murder, illegal and frankly disturbing. But what that has to do with Laura Makabresku's photography, I've no idea- as I see no torturing or literal murder, etc. Sure, you may not like it, and I do respect that, but it's art. Of course, that's just my opinion and if you disagree with it, that's fine- but I'm an argumentative twelve year old and I don't wish to offend anyone.

Really, just because someone c "created it's art"? How about someone documenting through photography, torturing, then killing a helpless person? Would you still consider it "art" since someone created! This is the same kind of silly and outlandish clothing designs, or some "abstract" painting by some monkey, that we are supposed to ooooh and aaaaaaah about it, just because the creator created. ;0(!