What's new

Is it artistic or is it just offensive?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here's another angle. In this one you can see that his head is down.

558148813_hoUJ9-XL.jpg
 
Interesting...

The only thing in world I find offensive, is being offended... and in truth, I really just find that silly but it's more amusing to say it the other way.

People deem things offensive based upon their own personal, cultural, religious, etc. positions and experiences in life. Very obviously what is offensive to one person may not be to another. This has all been said and tends to be clearly understood.

But what I don't get is why people don't take the next step... which is simply that there are really only two acceptable options in the realm of "offense".

1. Be offended by everything.
2. Be offended by nothing.

Simply stated if you allow yourself to be offended selectively, you are effectively saying that your position on issue X is right, and not only is the other person wrong but they are wrong at a level so extreme as to illicit deep emotional reaction from you... and they should change their view. And yet... so often is the case where reversing direction would please you... and offend them. Who is right? Who is in the position to judge what is right?

From taking pictures of strong arms with Nazi symbolism to Howard Stern to flag burning to hate... if you accept one, you must accept all. Why? Because they are expressions of thoughts, ideas, feelings and emotions. They have no impact on your other than vibrating the drums of your ears and firing the optical nerves in your eyes.

To speak such words... make such images... express such thoughts... these are the basis of freedom. True freedom. It is a blessing and a curse, but the curse is an irritant and the blessing is something far far greater.

So...

Would I hang the picture in my living room? No.

Is it offensive? I can say, with pride... no. Not at all. Nothing offends me.


Very well said!
 
If you wanted the dark ominous look I would take your light setup, and maybe toss some hard, directed light on the arm band and the, and maybe another light on his face (from one side), so that everything else is in black except the armband/arm and half the mans face. That to me would go for the dramatic ominous.
 
I sent a picture of Che Guevarra to a friend, he wondered why and became more inquisitive. "That's Che on your pics?" I replied, "Ya, and I know that you are a Cuban spy" and which he really is, spying on a person of interest for so many years nobody knew about it but me. He was dumbfounded. www.cicentre.com Read the headlines. Click on Daily CT News. Moral of the story. Give everybody the chance to interpret it his/her way.:lmao:
 
Last edited:
Is it offensive? I can say, with pride... no. Not at all. Nothing offends me.
Well said. I'm with you, nothing offends me. That's why I asked others what they thought... I sometimes think I'm an insensitive !@#$. :)
 
ANDS!, I bumped the brightness a bit in the image on the original post. Do you see it as an improvement? Would you like a side-by-side comparison of the old vs. the new?
 
I never get offended, especially about stuff like that, but if you wanna know why I think someone would get offended is because of the huge arm. It takes it and makes Nazism seem strong, powerful, and energetic. Some people might see it as a promotion of white supremacy.
 
Shock value "art" is not the same as art which was used by a group that killed over 6 million Jews.

That is what people commonly think about but NOT the total story. As the Germans invaded other countries it also meant millions of dead and wounded in each country. The total must be astronomical. Two of my uncles were killed in Europe, one on D-Day and one in the Battle of the Bulge, millions of others were killed..

In Nam, they quote the 54,000 US Soldiers killed in ten years. In Korea 53,000 in three years. In Nam one out of 16 who served died, in Korea one out of every nine. But in Korea a much worse war that does not tell the whole story. There were men from 45 countries fighting in Korea. There were about 10 times as many killed in Korea than Nam, in only three years. Ten times as many captured and wounded, in just one small country. While Hitler overran many countries, killing all the way.

If I were you, Id check with your family and find out how many of them suffered or died due to Hitler (a LOT of Germans also died) and never use that image. You may even offend members of your own family. It offends many generations all over the world.
 
45 countries, should have read 35 countries, am so used to forums which allow you to edit your message, forget to double check here.
 
It's not about what offends you (or me), it's what offends others. As an artist, your work will reflect your personality (at times). It's an extension of you. If you want to be perceived as a intolerant, Nazi loving, Jew hater, then this image is great.

I personally am not offended by this image. If it were an image of something that is traditionally offensive to my peoples, I still would not be offended because I know that there are just some ignorant fools out there. Point is that there are probably lots of people out there that WOULD be offended. Therefore I would not want any part of that.

That image would stir emotions in them that you, nor I, are probably capable of comprehending.
 
Sometimes being offended is a good thing. And the people who think its taboo, or too far, or stuff like that, are the people who are moved the most by the image.

People forget that photography isn't supposed to make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Its kinda that sick feeling you get when you see Nazi propaganda and stuff. Sometimes its good to offend, so people don't forget.
 
Interesting...

The only thing in world I find offensive, is being offended... and in truth, I really just find that silly but it's more amusing to say it the other way.

People deem things offensive based upon their own personal, cultural, religious, etc. positions and experiences in life. Very obviously what is offensive to one person may not be to another. This has all been said and tends to be clearly understood.

But what I don't get is why people don't take the next step... which is simply that there are really only two acceptable options in the realm of "offense".

1. Be offended by everything.
2. Be offended by nothing.

Simply stated if you allow yourself to be offended selectively, you are effectively saying that your position on issue X is right, and not only is the other person wrong but they are wrong at a level so extreme as to illicit deep emotional reaction from you... and they should change their view. And yet... so often is the case where reversing direction would please you... and offend them. Who is right? Who is in the position to judge what is right?

From taking pictures of strong arms with Nazi symbolism to Howard Stern to flag burning to hate... if you accept one, you must accept all. Why? Because they are expressions of thoughts, ideas, feelings and emotions. They have no impact on your other than vibrating the drums of your ears and firing the optical nerves in your eyes.

To speak such words... make such images... express such thoughts... these are the basis of freedom. True freedom. It is a blessing and a curse, but the curse is an irritant and the blessing is something far far greater.

So...

Would I hang the picture in my living room? No.

Is it offensive? I can say, with pride... no. Not at all. Nothing offends me.


Very well said!

Not really it makes a lot of assumptions that are not true.
As a Psychologist they jump out all over the place. Hitler offended almost the entire world, he not only offended them, he war responsible for the death of possibly a total of a Billion people while he ruled. There is a lot more to that than "being offended." The symbol represented HATE for decades and promoted HATE. It is more interesting as a Psychologist, that a person of German decent made those statements.
 
You should be able to edit your own post, I can. It's a little button in the lower right side of the post.

I am of English/Dutch decent. As noted, this is a trophy of war brought home by a relative that fought Nazism. No one in my family would care about this image, it's just an image of that trophy, nothing more. Most of my family members are like me, they are very hard to offend. I don't think you could post an image that would truly offend me. I might find something distasteful, but not offensive.

I've looked at art that was distasteful and found that I was strangely drawn to it in some cases. It caused me to think, something art rarely does. Often I look at a pretty painting or picture and think "that's well done" and move on. Other times I look at something and it causes me to stop and really think. Images of WWII do this to me for some reason, both images of US forces and Axis forces. Mostly I'm drawn to the Axis forces, and Germany in particular, because I have to wonder how it happened. How did they come into power. How did they sway so many people to their side? How did they hide their true nature from so many for so long?

That, and the Germans were masters of propaganda. The swastika is a powerful image in and of itself. Even without the stigma of what the Nazi's stood for, it's a powerful symbol.

Unlike others I don't think we should try to erase Nazi Germany from the history books. I don't think we should ban all references to it or hide its symbols away. I think it's important to remind people of what can happen if bad people are allowed to take power and just how destructive governments can be.
 
Look at it this way. This image has probably created more buzz and controversy than any of your other photos. If not, its definitely up there.

So, maybe its perfect. I mean, who cares if you offend someone? Some people are offended way too easily, and they always want you to cater to them. If we did EVERYTHING making sure we didn't offend anyone, than we'd have no freedom of expression.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom