Should infuriative arts be removed?
This is a topic that has sparked a lot of controversies and has a lot of subjectivity centring on this issue because there are no firmly drawn ethical boundaries regarding arts yet. There truly are some truly provocative arts that deserve taking down, but just because a piece of art infuriates the viewer does not mean it deserves to be removed. There are two parts to every piece of art: the idea and the medium of expressing it. I think the idea can be as provocative as it can be as long as it has a justifiable reason behind it, such as the lack of empathy in today's society or the depiction of gruesome war crimes during a certain time period. However, I believe that the methods and tools in which this knowledge is conveyed are subjected to ethical boundaries. For example, starving a dog in an exhibit and conveying a message through the callousness of the exhibit visitors is strictly UNACCEPTABLE and is very immoral and unethical to do so. On the contrary, expressing a wildly provo...