Disgusting "art" from slaughtered wild birds (1 Viewer)

I saw what you did there!

Apodemus said:

I saw what you did there!

Click to expand...

LOL, I didn't realise when I was younger that the person in that picture is dead (the eyes are open), I used to think she had a very elaborate and decorative bathroom and rather peculiar postures when washing.

Hi there,

Really hope this does not turn into another domestic cat bashing session, but rather a debate about art. I'm not surprised Tamany's work has caused a stir at all, in fact I'm glad it has in a way, as that is what art should do, provoke a reaction from the viewer.
Yes cats kill birds, lots of them. Lots of things kill lots of birds, lots of them are man made or caused directly by man, whether it be pesticides or pets the issue here should be why do people feel as they do when they see an image of a dead bird? On a simple level perhaps the apparent beauty and frail nature of birds is what makes their death so poignant, perhaps the thoughts such images provoke remind us of our own mortality. Whatever it may be, it is surely a valid and worthwhile line of thought to travel along from an artistic viewpoint....

Will stop harping on lest I become too sentimental, have to keep up appearances and all, wouldn't do to let the cat out of the bag so to speak....

On a more serious note sorry to hear about abusive E-Mails..

Quite superb images on your site Tamany, the Iona and Icelandic images in particular caught my eye...

nickderry said:

LOL, I didn't realise when I was younger that the person in that picture is dead (the eyes are open), I used to think she had a very elaborate and decorative bathroom and rather peculiar postures when washing.

Click to expand...

Cool bathroom. I'll never see that picture quite in the same way again

nickderry said:

LOL, I didn't realise when I was younger that the person in that picture is dead (the eyes are open), I used to think she had a very elaborate and decorative bathroom and rather peculiar postures when washing.

Click to expand...

You are more right than you realise- the model for that painting was one Eliz Siddell who posed for Millais in a bath full of water, heated by oil lamps.

I think that because we know how the bird died, were upset by it, unlike Nicks Sketches, (and any others who have sketched deceased birds on this forum)they were already dead, and sketched in position (or moved) to produce a thought provoking but interesting picture.

Tamany said:

On this note, I would also like to say that I recieved a highly offensive email about a month ago from one of the people who posted on this page. I forwarded the email to the police. He is obviously very angry at me (even this week I had another email) but I do think his attack was uncalled for.

Click to expand...

What exactly do you expect, Tamany?

Your cat, evidently a prodigious hunter, doesn't need to be outside. It won't die if kept inside, whereas, if it is let outside, wildlife clearly will.

I wholeheartedly agree that, in conservationary terms, lavishing time and expense on trying to get rid of cat predation on garden birds would be the equivalent of straightening a picture in a burning down house. Most garden bird species are thriving.
However, that doesn't render what you are doing irrelevant.

The likely reality is that the birds that your cat brings home are not the only ones affected. The shot of the fledgling blackbird shows your cat is still hunting during the breeding season. So, in all likelihood, if the other blackbird you have taken a photo of, for example, was killed at a similar time, chicks will most likely have been left on the nest to starve. Similarly, the birds you see are most likely joined by those that are injured, but then escape to later die of septicaemia from the cat's saliva, those that it eats on the spot, and so on.

The species in your shots aren't nationally threatened. But the cat could be removing local populations, or at least putting them towards unviabilility levels. The sparrow used to be ubiquitous, now it is not, and cats are quoted in some of the papers I have seen, along with other factors, as a possible cause. It is not unthinkable that the same could be happening to other species, and even in the abscence of assuredness, it is better to be on the safe side.

But you would agree, would you not, that anyway these needless deaths of the birds in your local area can and should be prevented by something as simple as keeping your cat inside, at least during this critical season, for at least some of the time? You might not be the only one experiencing the deaths. For example, cats come into my garden to kill birds, and it irritates me greatly when I see the nationally declining bullfinches there getting massacred, something that their owners won't have a clue about when the cats come home for a good stroke.

My reaction, when confronted with these 'gifts', would be horror, and a strong desire not to let them happen again- not at all to make them into some perverse art form, brooding on the more metaphysical side of death etc.!

ColonelBlimp said:

My reaction, when confronted with these 'gifts', would be horror, and a strong desire not to let them happen again- not at all to make them into some perverse art form, brooding on the more metaphysical side of death etc.!

Click to expand...

Though I agree with the desire not to let these events happen again, you really do need to be an artist to understand the desire to create a perverse art form.

I hope we're not going to stray too far from the original post, there are a million and one cat-bashing threads on here, this one's about the artwork!

I found this art interesting, and beautiful in a kinda morbid way. A poignant reminder of death and the fragility of birds. Birds die, every day, in a thousand different ways. Having a cat myself I can sort of see the conflict between forcing the beloved cat to stay indoors (and see it sitting in a window wanting to go out) and letting it out where it can potentially kill something I love. It's a dilemma without a simple answer, and I think this art is thought-provoking. It's not something I would like to hang on my wall, but it makes me think about it and that's enough for me!

Describing this form of art as "disgusting" is personal viewpoint, as with all opinions on art. It's impossible to validate one opinion over another.

I am disappointed the artist felt the need to justify her work and in doing so, removed the element of mystery and curiosity. imo
Take Banksy for example, he is visible by his absence!
For me, the most interesting aspect of looking at Old Masters is the question "what is the artist saying?"

As for the images depicted, I feel they lack any kind of impact.
To me, they look no more creative than a child burying the pet hamster in the garden.
I'm sorry, but the "ring a ring o rosies" look pointless and random.

On the other hand, the images posted by Nick Derry are thought provoking and have enormous impact.

Interesting debate.


note, I am very sorry to hear about the nasty emails sent to the artist and hope the matter is soon resolved.
If the sender is on the forum, can I ask you to stop the personal attacks and debate your feelings here. :t:

Regardless of the artistic merit of these images, I personally feel that no art could be good enough to justify knowingly letting your cat cut a swathe through the local wildlife.

A singing, living, breathing robin is about a bazillion times more beautiful than any picture of a mangled corpse.

ColonelBlimp said:

A singing, living, breathing robin is about a bazillion times more beautiful than any picture of a mangled corpse.

Click to expand...

This, I think, everyone on here can agree upon.

I must say that I'm more disturbed by the art of Frida Kahlo than Tamany Baker but then:
1. I used to play with the dead mice my mother took out of the traps.
2. I have a painting in my kitchen done by my great aunt many years ago of a brace of [dead] mallards hanging by their feet.
3. I used to have a cat who was a squirrel cconnoisseur: he ate only the brains and left the rest for me.

ColonelBlimp said:

Or, in my opinion, she's just using pseudo-artistic bollocks to try and justify making a mockery of loads of needlessly killed birds.

What a fool!!!

Click to expand...

An expert in the art of expression, Blimp style. Not the most convincing line of argument!

As for the Tamany art, so dead birds have been displayed as art, and what? What's the big fuss? At worse, it is no better and no worse than simply disposing of the birds as most persons probably would have done, at best it provokes thought and expression as throughout this thread. In reality, it is probably something else - a morbid fascination by some, an appreciation of artistic expression (not Blimp style) by others, a turn off by the next group, but passive indifference by the majority. The world still turns.


PS 1. bet the artist is well pleased by our 'sickened' original poster, so much publicity to her website. Shucks I, who knows next to nothing about art, would sure never viewed her gallery without the thoughtful direct link to her gallery.

PS 2. whilst I doubt I'll be ordering any of the pieces to hang above my fireplace, or above the cat's bed, I struggle to find the sickening, disturbed and mocking elements.

All I can say on the matter here is that it is up to people what they express in art.

Yes, from a personal 'artistic' point of view, I would not focus my full attention on the same subject of 'death' as a whole as mentioned on post one. i would prefer to try other avenues of 'art' too.

Having to deal with the subject of death to me would be sad. I would feel unhappy having to deal with this type of 'artwork' all of the time. :-C

There again what one person likes, is not always what another likes. That is all I can add about the subject.

Peewit said:

All I can say on the matter here is that it is up to people what they express in art.

Click to expand...

It expresses the selfish and shameless personality of the "artist", who knowingly lets her HOUSEpet needlessly slaughter wild creatures, and then offers hollow rationalizations and self-important hand-wringing blather to try to escape the blame. Congratulations.

bkrownd said:

It expresses the selfish and shameless personality of the "artist", who knowingly lets her HOUSEpet needlessly slaughter wild creatures, and then offers hollow rationalizations and self-important hand-wringing blather to try to escape the blame. Congratulations.

Click to expand...

Hear Hear.

Jos Stratford said:

In reality, it is probably something else - a morbid fascination by some, an appreciation of artistic expression (not Blimp style) by others, a turn off by the next group, but passive indifference by the majority. The world still turns.

Click to expand...

Clearly, there are more important things in the world. But to let your cat wreck a local bird population, and then to try and justify not preventing it from doing so with such rot as " I saw some parallels in coming to terms with the difficult habits of the 'other', whilst also accepting their difference.", smacks to me of the highest selfishness.

bkrownd said:

It expresses the selfish and shameless personality of the "artist", who knowingly lets her HOUSEpet needlessly slaughter wild creatures, and then offers hollow rationalizations and self-important hand-wringing blather to try to escape the blame. Congratulations.

Click to expand...

well said....

The fact we're still talking about her art while many fine images are pushed to the bottom of this thread just goes to show how good her art is. Art is about impact, not what goes nicely above the fireplace.

Well, yes ... and no. I think many artists get too wrapped up in 'impact' and not enough in actual expression. Art should be enjoyed, too. It disturbs me the way a lot of art tries deliberately to be inaccessible. I'm not implying that it should all be eagles flying over a waterfall or old people holding hands, but the idea that art appreciated by the masses is not really art is silly and elitist (Stephen Pinker has a few good things to say about this).

Really, the art itself was never what upset people in this case. Discussing whether or not it is indeed art, or the nature of artistic expression, is interesting. But the extraneous issue that got people riled up in the first place has no bearing on the work's merit. Art should stand on its own.