Socially (Ir)responsible Artwork

This week's reading may have turned me into a terrible person. (You be the judge.)

After seeing the comment "[w]ith the human population approaching 7 billion, it is unwise to pursue a project that squanders natural resources" (p.117), suddenly all I could think about was vaguely inappropriate reasons to violate that statement. I blame this on my process-focused, er, process. (Per the text, let's just call this divergent thinking. It sounds so much more legitimate. But I digress...)

I mean, what if waste is the point of the piece?

There's a certain amount of circular legitimacy in an extravagantly wasteful process, don't you agree? I don't necessarily think that artists should limit their physical creations in favor of digital works either, which admittedly take up less space and use fewer resources.

Apparently, I'm not the only one who thinks terrible things like this. Take a look at the tongue-in-cheek guide I found to creating Socially Irresponsible Artwork. (If you think this is as awesome as I do, you can own it for $8 here.)

Then again, just by being in this class, it's possible that all of us are already so awesome that we shouldn't be worrying about this so much. According to this article by Science Daily, "[p]eople with an active interest in the arts contribute more to society than those with little or no such interest." So maybe it's not just Peter making a difference...and really, isn't it always the case with "art" that enjoying a sense of elitism is kind of the whole the point? ;)