Online Execution? Artist straps himself to electric chair, users decide his fate (Warning: GRAPHIC)

[Zephie]

Run time: 02:53 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2w2p6BB7fkE   Posted on YouTube: November 08, 2010 By YouTube Member: RussiaToday Views on YouTube: 2356   Posted on DU: November 09, 2010 By DU Member: Zephie Views on DU: 2021

 
The short description from his website sums up his intent:

The on-line performance Ally / Foe gives an opportunity for the participants to vote for or against the justification of artist Oleg Mavromati. The performance has several stages. If the votes against Mavromati prevail, the artist will release an electric current with certain parameters in his body. This will be a penalty, corresponding to the will of the people who want the artist conviction. If the votes for his justification prevail-the penalty will not be executed. (See Stages and structure of performance). The performance and the voting starts on November 7, 7 pm local Sofia, Bulgaria time.

What is this penalty for? Mavromati is currently prosecuted under law 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for "inciting religious and national animosity" for a scene from a film, which he was shooting 10 years ago. The action took place at the yard of the Institute of Cultural Studies, Moscow. This scene featured a performance art piece called "Do not Believe Your Eyes," created by the character in the film, which involved his crucifixion. This crucifixion was wrongly interpreted by certain fundamentalist Orthodox Christian circles as blasphemous and offensive to Christians. Since the late nineties, these particular religious circles prosecute artists and cultural producers under the law 282, in which defendants can receive a sentence from 3 to 5 years in prison. These prosecutions are result of particular moods against contemporary art in Russia, and created increasing censorship, violation of the freedom of speech and expression of Russian artists.

This on-line voting within the art project is designed, to shorten the connection between the accuser and the accused. Thus, all factors that determine the specificity of the judicial system, under which the accused is prosecuted, have been eliminated. The goal is to reach the most democratic, but also a responsible system of punishment or justification. The punishment or the justification of Mavromati will depend only on the personal decision and the conscience of voters.

website: http://svoichuzoi.org/ (click on ally/foe to access english text and vote - Innocent, I hope.)

[de novo]

1. Damn. The dude is intense, if nothing else.

It reminds me of the psychology experiments when people were giving what they thought to be electric shocks capable of killing people they couldn't see in another room.

[virgogal]

2. I remember that. It was awful to see average people not having the

wits to stop shocking people.

IIRC only one guy did.

[rasputin1952]

3. The infamous Milgram Experiment 1963...

Very few people resisted, even after an actor complained of pain. In oine case, an individual was prompted several times to deliver the shock after the actor in the booth complained of chest pain; it went so far as for the experimenter telling him the $50 check would not be issued unles he continued the test, he refused, he was a man of principle, he stood his ground.

Today, this type of experiment would never be allowed, but the results made people think about how some people are easily manipulated, and rarely go against an authority figure. Here's a link: http://www.psywww.com/intropsych/ch15_social/milgram_1963_obedience.html

[jtuck004]

5. Although standards today preclude it, that experiment was

replicated several times, and in different fashions.

You probably know this, but on average about 60% of people across the range of these experiments just needed
an authority figure, even dubious ones, to perform an act most of us would like to think we would not do. The
many times the experiment has been replicated says the majority of us are wrong.

Millgram didn't even start out to be a social psych professor, but that experiment identified a human characteristic
that has been seen across many populations and cultures, an amazing contribution.

[rasputin1952]

8. There's a lot to to said about how people indeed were in the majority

who would just "follow directions".

I liked the last one w/the 3 guys who showed that acts of dissent, even a single act of dissent, could change things dramatically

[axollot]

12. Sort of explains how Hitler/Nazis could get people to do the things they

did with very little dissent. Scary world we live in. Just because something is popular doesnt mean it's correct and just because it's unpopular doesnt make it wrong. Maddow graciously made that point in Latin - argumentum ad hominem ad populum.
Fear is the great motivator in bringing out the worst in folk that's for sure.

Cheers
Sandy

[jtuck004]

13. Vietnam, Abu ghraib, Afghanistan, any workplace or classroom... n/t

[axollot]

14. true. n/t

[AlbertCat]

4. What "artist"?

Jesus, the words "artist" and "genius" are thrown around and over-used a lot!

[Tunkamerica]

6. so film makers aren't artists? do only real artists deserve free speech?

you might not agree, but it doesn't add one thing to the discussion to say you don't think his art is valid.

[Hissyspit]

7. As are the generalized conservative assumptions about what an artist is.

You might want to go read what's on the website.

[TheEuclideanOne]

9. So, enlighten us.

What are your definitions of genius and artist and how do they differ from this individual?

[harmonicon]

10. You're an expert in the field?

Please, do tell!

[Recursion]

11. I'm pretty sure they mean the performance artist who is doing this whole thing (nt)

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

15. Your OP should actually say "Warning: Stupid"

Damn you, Nicholas Bourriaud, for encouraging this nonsense. "Situational Aesthetics" my butt -- this and 90% of the rest of this type of conceptual performance art is nothing but self indulgence with a thin veneer of graduate school post-modern (excuse me, it's "altermodern" now, I guess) gobbldeygook thrown in for good measure.

I don't care if it's this clown or Damien Hirst or the British dude who "performed" by masturbating in public (gee, I think Diogenes had that one down a few thousand years before) or Lady Gaga's meat dress (itself a rip off of nearly 20 year old conceptual art) -- all of it tries to use spectacle and sh(l)ock to replace technique, style and ingenuity.