Poll: Bloodstained Art

[Dfskelleton]

I see this no diffent than some of David Lynch's more bizzare works or H.R. Gieger's paintings or Junji Ito and his works: shifting the human body into something more, something disturbing, something that evokes responses from us because it's not much different than us. Take Junji Ito for example: a man forcing his body into a spiral shape, thus crushing his entire bone structure and killing himself. The image is utterly alien and horrific, yet vaguely familiar, and worst of all, it could happen. It would take a lot of effort, but it could happen. And it would be horrific.
Now that that's down, let's get to blood. Blood is a squeamish topic: some are mortified by it, some are fascinated, and some find it beautiful. While there's always subgroups, these are the main reasons people react this way. Those who find it horrific obviously won't appreciate the art. Those fascinated by blood will be intrigued by the images and possibly desire to see more. Those that find blood beautiful are going to enjoy the art and recognize as so.
As for me, Blood is technically pretty on it's own, but if there's an obvious human owner to the blood within view, it's a lot different.
Although, I might add that your mothers supposed trip has large amounts of "Pickman's Model" type feelings. Could it have been a dream brought about by the story, or perhaps random memory of it?

 

[KefkaCultist]

I vote that I find it fascinating. I always love seeing the amount of work in make up for scifi/horror/etc. movies and this is kinda similar. It is definitely art because it is a medium through which a person can express their emotions.

[cheesy line]
Sure, there are "over the top" ones, but can we really put a limit on creativity?
[/cheesy line]

Maybe I'm just more exposed to stuff like this since I see it pretty commonly from listening to the metal genre of music through bands like GWAR, Rob Zombie, and Mushroomhead just to name a few that add gory make-up at their shows.

 

[Irony's Acolyte]

Meh, the pics you showed were either nothing special or kind of cool. Of course I find some of the stuff like this strangely interesting. So maybe it's just me.

Some of this does seem like it's just playing off the knee-jerk response to certain bodily fluids. Blood doesn't really freak me out that much, but I'll admit some of the other fluids can be unsettling.

Eh, art is subjective.

 

[scw55]

It really depends.
Unfortuntaly, subjects like BLOOD, EYES, DRAWG0NS and other such things are incredabley cliche and can look "good" with little effort. As a result 99% of art featuring such things as a subject matter is crap (cough deviant art).

However, no doubt there are actually good paintings/drawing/other forms of art with blood splatter which are actually good pieces of work. Only if the blood actually adds something to the image, and not just a cheap way of making it shocking.

With art you have to question why?. If the answer to that question with regards to anything including blood is shits and giggles then it's extremely likely it's a terrible piece of work. If the answer is or I don't know then there is hope.

I'm able to look at images now critically and not feel too appauled. I do notice immediate responses, but I don't let them bother me.

Blood as a medium actually interests me. Not in a morbid sense. But in a sense that the pigment changes colour depending on it being liquid or solid. When dried it has nice natural looking shades of red and brown.

In summery. It's all about perception, execution, and if the artist is a whiney emo kid, or even worse, someone who wants to be a whiney emo kid. Not all works of art with blood are terrible, only the vast majority.

Image 1: Looks like the artist went "LOL RED".
Image 2: Trying to look gothic.
Image 3: The realism looks interesting.
Image 4: Really creepy. But the blood adds nothing. Infact the blood ruins the image.


(edit: In my opinnion, a piece of art work where you spend more effort creating the "story"/"message" behind it than actually making it is a bad piece of work and shouldn't be called art. Just a brialliant lie)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Edit2: I suppose you have to question what is Blood?.
Blood symbolises life. Death. Injury. Pain. Rejuvination. Blood is part of the body. Natural. Nurishing. Vital. There are many parasites and animals that feed off the blood of other animals. Blood is mentioned in the context of vampires and rituals of the occult in fiction. There are people with phobias of blood. Blood is an interesting subject. It's a shame that most artists who use blood don't care about its symbolism. And abuse it's "shock tactics".

 

[lacktheknack]

Although, I might add that your mothers supposed trip has large amounts of "Pickman's Model" type feelings. Could it have been a dream brought about by the story, or perhaps random memory of it?

Which story, what my Mother told me or "Pickman's Model"?

I've never read Pickman's Model, and the bit with my Mom happened mere weeks ago, and it upset her enough that she's mentioned it several times since. I saw the Facebook photo only yesterday.

And my Mother left the house saying that she was going to the reunion, then came back five hours later saying she had a pleasant time except for this one disgusting display... so I don't think a dream is part of it.

 

[Brandon237]

Eww, uhm, not my thing thank-you. Anyway who gets turned on by that may want to avoid people in white coats... If any of you do read this, I am sorry, but... no

 

[similar.squirrel]

I have a hard time believing that mentally stable people find this kind of thing aesthetically pleasing, or even attractive. But art isn't necessarily about overwhelmingly positive feelings elicited by a piece.
I personally don't like those photographs, but that's mainly because they look amateurish. The subject matter doesn't really bother me.
Take a look at the work of Francis Bacon; would you feel the same about that?

It's strange, because I find torture-porn films like Hostel, SAW and The Human Centipede to be absolutely reprehensible on every level [I've only seen Hostel, but trailers and the imagination have granted me more insight than I could ever want concerning the other two]. Perhaps it's a matter of audience.

 

[similar.squirrel]

I have a hard time believing that mentally stable people find this kind of thing aesthetically pleasing, or even attractive. But art isn't necessarily about overwhelmingly positive feelings elicited by a piece.
I personally don't like those photographs, but that's mainly because they look amateurish. The subject matter doesn't really bother me.
Take a look at the work of Francis Bacon; would you feel the same about that?

It's strange, because I find torture-porn films like Hostel, SAW and The Human Centipede to be absolutely reprehensible on every level [I've only seen Hostel, but trailers and the imagination have granted me more insight than I could ever want concerning the other two]. Perhaps it's a matter of audience.

 

[similar.squirrel]

I have a hard time believing that mentally stable people find this kind of thing aesthetically pleasing, or even attractive. But art isn't necessarily about overwhelmingly positive feelings elicited by a piece.
I personally don't like those photographs, but that's mainly because they look amateurish. The subject matter doesn't really bother me.
Take a look at the work of Francis Bacon; would you feel the same about that?

It's strange, because I find torture-porn films like Hostel, SAW and The Human Centipede to be absolutely reprehensible on every level [I've only seen Hostel, but trailers and the imagination have granted me more insight than I could ever want concerning the other two]. Perhaps it's a matter of audience.

 

[similar.squirrel]

I have a hard time believing that mentally stable people find this kind of thing aesthetically pleasing, or even attractive. But art isn't necessarily about overwhelmingly positive feelings elicited by a piece.
I personally don't like those photographs, but that's mainly because they look amateurish. The subject matter doesn't really bother me.
Take a look at the work of Francis Bacon; would you feel the same about that?

It's strange, because I find torture-porn films like Hostel, SAW and The Human Centipede to be absolutely reprehensible on every level [I've only seen Hostel, but trailers and the imagination have granted me more insight than I could ever want concerning the other two]. Perhaps it's a matter of audience.

 

[similar.squirrel]

Bother. I don't know why that posted four times. My connection is trying to embarass me, perhaps.
I would appreciate it if a moderator rectified the situation, as would the other posters. Thank you.

 

[Dfskelleton]

Although, I might add that your mothers supposed trip has large amounts of "Pickman's Model" type feelings. Could it have been a dream brought about by the story, or perhaps random memory of it?

Which story, what my Mother told me or "Pickman's Model"?

I've never read Pickman's Model, and the bit with my Mom happened mere weeks ago, and it upset her enough that she's mentioned it several times since. I saw the Facebook photo only yesterday.

And my Mother left the house saying that she was going to the reunion, then came back five hours later saying she had a pleasant time except for this one disgusting display... so I don't think a dream is part of it.

Oh, it's just that your mom's story seemed to me to be similar to "Pickman's Model". Maybe it's because I enjoy that story a lot, and I'm finding references to it whether intended or not.
Here's the general overview of the story:

Spoiler

It starts with an unnamed protagonist talking to his friend Elliot, who was curious about the protagonist's affairs with an artist named Richard Upton Pickman. Pickman is a sort of legend in Boston (where the story takes place), because Pickman's art was so horrific and disturbing and detailed that he couldn't sell his art or join any art clubs due to how absolutely terrible it was. The protagonist begins to tell of his one night when he asked Pickman if he could see some of his art. Pickman accepts and invites him over. Our hero then begins to describe the absolute horrors within the paintings, and how realistic they were. Pickman then leads the protagonist into his cellar where he paints most of his art. At this point, the main character is absolutely horrified. At the end of this cellar is a large red sheet over a painting, which is apparently Pickman's masterpiece. Pickman uncovers the image to reveal what the main character describes as the most horrific, brutal and terrible thing he's ever seen. He continually comments on how real the painting is, when pickman goes away to investigate a noise that he says is simply rats. The main character spots a crumpled piece of paper on the wall next to the painting and quickly pockets it while Pickman is away. After leaving, he returns home to view what is on the paper. He then tells Elliot that he burned the image, for it was not a background, but it was a real photo from real life depicting what was on the "masterpiece". Pickman's terrors were modeled off of real pictures he took.

Yeah. If you don't think it's similar to what your mom described, then it's probably just me trying to relate things I read with other things I read.

 

[godfist88]

are you sure this person isn't a vampire?

seriously though, i can see how some people may find it intriguing, art is about pushing boundaries of convention after all. (and expression, no matter how gross it may be.)

 

[Chemical Alia]

I wish I could see an example of this kind of art, it's kind of hard to visualize it. If it was created just to portray the subjects as somehow attractive, then my guess is it's just some fetish art. But with any art, I'd really have to see it before I could make a judgment on the intent. Not all art is meant to be beautiful or pleasant. We can thank provocative and controversial artists like Andres Serrano for works like Piss Christ that lead to the removal of funding for the National Endowment for the Arts, but for as vulgar as that work was seen by many people, it had a profound impact.

Was it real body fluids, or just photoshopped/rendered somehow? It'd be pretty gross if it was a health hazard.

 

[lacktheknack]

Oh, it's just that your mom's story seemed to me to be similar to "Pickman's Model". Maybe it's because I enjoy that story a lot, and I'm finding references to it whether intended or not.
Here's the general overview of the story:

Spoiler

It starts with an unnamed protagonist talking to his friend Elliot, who was curious about the protagonist's affairs with an artist named Richard Upton Pickman. Pickman is a sort of legend in Boston (where the story takes place), because Pickman's art was so horrific and disturbing and detailed that he couldn't sell his art or join any art clubs due to how absolutely terrible it was. The protagonist begins to tell of his one night when he asked Pickman if he could see some of his art. Pickman accepts and invites him over. Our hero then begins to describe the absolute horrors within the paintings, and how realistic they were. Pickman then leads the protagonist into his cellar where he paints most of his art. At this point, the main character is absolutely horrified. At the end of this cellar is a large red sheet over a painting, which is apparently Pickman's masterpiece. Pickman uncovers the image to reveal what the main character describes as the most horrific, brutal and terrible thing he's ever seen. He continually comments on how real the painting is, when pickman goes away to investigate a noise that he says is simply rats. The main character spots a crumpled piece of paper on the wall next to the painting and quickly pockets it while Pickman is away. After leaving, he returns home to view what is on the paper. He then tells Elliot that he burned the image, for it was not a background, but it was a real photo from real life depicting what was on the "masterpiece". Pickman's terrors were modeled off of real pictures he took.

Yeah. If you don't think it's similar to what your mom described, then it's probably just me trying to relate things I read with other things I read.

I don't really see the connection... but oh well.

 

[II2]

lacktheknack, you're sporting one of the most delightfully warped body horror avatars among the user base and you react of THIS?

Anyways, the first image in your spoiler is very attractive because of an effective use of color and composition as well as very clean (if out of focus), attractive, symmetrical facial features w/ pale skin and black hair juxtaposed against a chaotic red splatter. The rest don't really draw the eye on the merit of conceptual or technical execution or the attractiveness of the models. If anything, the heavy handed Photoshop job is grosser than the subject matter (most prominently in the 2nd and 4th entry).

So... Can it be sexy/interesting/compelling? Yes, absolutely. But for every well done image of this sort you see, there will be a lot of crappy rimshots and overdone, cliched "shocking" art.

Also, I thought this thread was going to be about artwork that actually used real blood to as a medium to paint on a canvas or paper... May wish to choose a less ambiguous title in future. Suggest: "Gorerotica?"

Coming back to my first point though, your avatar is more fascinating, disturbing and edgy than any of the full size pics you posted...

 

[lacktheknack]

lacktheknack, you're sporting one of the most delightfully warped body horror avatars among the user base and you react of THIS?

Anyways, the first image in your spoiler is very attractive because of an effective use of color and composition as well as very clean (if out of focus), attractive, symmetrical facial features w/ pale skin and black hair juxtaposed against a chaotic red splatter. The rest don't really draw the eye on the merit of conceptual or technical execution or the attractiveness of the models. If anything, the heavy handed Photoshop job is grosser than the subject matter (most prominently in the 2nd and 4th entry).

So... Can it be sexy/interesting/compelling? Yes, absolutely. But for every well done image of this sort you see, there will be a lot of crappy rimshots and overdone, cliched "shocking" art.

Also, I thought this thread was going to be about artwork that actually used real blood to as a medium to paint on a canvas or paper... May wish to choose a less ambiguous title in future. Suggest: "Gorerotica?"

Coming back to my first point though, your avatar is more fascinating, disturbing and edgy than any of the full size pics you posted...

My avatar is edgy? Well that's odd, I found it absolutely hilarious...

<youtube=dZfmPREbTd8>

Did you laugh or cry? Everyone does one or the other.

I think the thing that disturbs me most about the bloody art things is that Some people genuinely think it's beautiful. It's such a reversed twist on what I've always perceived as and been told is beautiful that I got freaked out by it.

 

[II2]

... *snip ... Coming back to my first point though, your avatar is more fascinating, disturbing and edgy than any of the full size pics you posted...

My avatar is edgy? Well that's odd, I found it absolutely hilarious...

<youtube=dZfmPREbTd8>

Did you laugh or cry? Everyone does one or the other.

I think the thing that disturbs me most about the bloody art things is that Some people genuinely think it's beautiful. It's such a reversed twist on what I've always perceived as and been told is beautiful that I got freaked out by it.

I lol'd mirthfully. Thank you for that link.

Hmmm... yeah, "Edgy" is kinda a a term made ambiguous by all the loaded, sometimes contradictory meanings it's laden with. I guess I just meant that without "advertising itself" as creepy or dark, it manages to succeed at doing so more than most of the 'gorerotica' that was the original subject of the thread - even if it DOES also make me laugh. (At least, in my book)

I follow your logic though on your feelings to the extent you describe it, but I don't feel that way myself. This is very much a different reactions for different factions type of scenario, I think.

Anyways, thank you again for linking my up to Cyriak's work. You're the man(?) of the hour! =)

 

[lacktheknack]

... *snip ... Coming back to my first point though, your avatar is more fascinating, disturbing and edgy than any of the full size pics you posted...

My avatar is edgy? Well that's odd, I found it absolutely hilarious...

<youtube=dZfmPREbTd8>

Did you laugh or cry? Everyone does one or the other.

I think the thing that disturbs me most about the bloody art things is that Some people genuinely think it's beautiful. It's such a reversed twist on what I've always perceived as and been told is beautiful that I got freaked out by it.

I lol'd mirthfully. Thank you for that link.

Hmmm... yeah, "Edgy" is kinda a a term made ambiguous by all the loaded, sometimes contradictory meanings it's laden with. I guess I just meant that without "advertising itself" as creepy or dark, it manages to succeed at doing so more than most of the 'gorerotica' that was the original subject of the thread - even if it DOES also make me laugh. (At least, in my book)

I follow your logic though on your feelings to the extent you describe it, but I don't feel that way myself. This is very much a different reactions for different factions type of scenario, I think.

Anyways, thank you again for linking my up to Cyriak's work. You're the man(?) of the hour! =)

Man, yes. Enjoy the insanity.

And yeah, that's the general consensus... that everything has an audience.

 

[MasterOfWorlds]

I don't really find it super offensive or anything, but I don't really care for it. I've seen some odd things when it comes to art though, so I might just be desensitized to it.

Captcha: 1989: ewbcoun