Recently, there have been a fair number of photos on Ai Weiwei’s blog. And they aren’t of candles! Indeed, they’ve all been fairly interesting, so we’re going to post them here in case you missed them. We’ve ordered them from most recent to least recent, the titles are translations of the titles of his posts, which have no text, only photos.
Some of the photos document evidence of the people monitoring Ai Weiwei’s movements, some of them are more obvious expressions of defiance…
WARNING: Some of these photos may be NSFW/NSF people who don’t like seeing fat, middle-aged men more or less naked.
It’s getting bigger every day 6/08/09
[Security] Monitor 6/07/09
[There are lots of photos in this post, but they're mostly the same so we've chosen a representative sample.]
Monitors, the guy in photo number 7?
[Again, some of these photos are repetitive, so we're posting a sample. For the whole thing, go here.
The titular seventh photo
Jump Again 6/05/08
[Our more, ahem, discerning readers will note that the thing Ai is holding in front of his, er, crotch is in fact the mythical Grass Mud Horse.]
Having Technical Difficulties 6/04/09
Photos from 15 Years Ago 6/4/09
[Originally this was two posts, titled "A Photo from 15 Years Ago" and "Another Photo from 15 Years Ago"]
Oh sweet gods and goddesses in heaven. My eyes. Political message aside, it’s very very very very very (make it trochaic pentameter, or can you? I forgot what I learned in college) disturbing for me, and a lotta people I guess, to look at a naked fat middle-aged man with a beard.
Ai WeiWei is a 小人.
I can understand he dislikes or hates the chinese government or CCP, as his father was tortured during CR, it is reasonable for a son to hate a party that mistreated his fater. (and he left China in 1981. )
But his using his status as the designer of Bird Nest as a shield and using Olympic to spew his hatred is unacceptable. Cuz of his hatred, he didnt even care of embarassing 1.3 billion Chinese. Now he nonstop fart like he ever care people in China.
He is a garbage.
@ Wahaha: Whatever else you think, arguing that Ai Weiwei doesn’t care about people in China when he’s in the middle of a herculean effort to memorialize the students who died in the 5.12 earthquake is patently ridiculous. Glad to see this site has finally gotten our own fenqing, though.
@ wooddoo: I mostly just find it amusing. I probably should put a warning, though.
C.Custer,
What if Martin Luther King, Jr had asked help from Soviet Unions ? what would American people had thought of him and his cause ?
Ai WeiWei is nothing compared to MLK, Jr, like an Ant to elephant.
Here is what he did after the riot in Tibet last year:
http://www.studentsforafreetibet.org/article.php?id=1639
Why didnt he speak out 3 months ago on the 50 anniversary of so-called “dark age in Tibet” ? cuz he found out that if he spewed the BS again, he would very like be classified as a traitor by Chinese people, like Hu Jia.
How Americans would have thought of MLK Jr if he had asked help from Soviet Unions is how Chinese think of Ai WeiWei, Hu Jia etc.
Sorry I m wrong, Ai WeiWei and MLK Jr shouldnt even be put in the same sentence, that is a disgrace to MLK Jr.
Ai WeiWei is a scumbag.
@ Wahaha,
Incidentally, a lot of Americans did accuse MLK of receiving support from the Soviet Union during the height of the civil rights movement. Many of these people were racists, hated the idea of equal opportunities for all, and were just fishing around for an excuse to bash MLK. Others were probably like you (I imagine): they believed that their country’s image was more important than creating a more fair society and they thought MLK was hurting their country’s image. Similar to Chiang Kaishek, they thought that domestic dissent had to be tamped down first if they were ever going to deal with external pressures.
I would have been happy if the U.S.S.R. had, in fact, helped MLK. Too bad they didn’t. Many communists did important stuff in the early days of the civil rights movement. Many Americans stuck up for their Vietnamese brothers and sisters by opposing our war there. I suppose you would call them traitors if you were alive and in the U.S. then. Me, I think international solidarity is a good thing.
But the bottom line, as I see it, is this: is solving problems more important or worrying what other people think of you?
OTR,
You said “Others were probably like you (I imagine): they believed that their country’s image was more important than creating a more fair society.”
You talked about fair society, watch this award-winning documentary film :
http://documentary.org/content/independent-lens-lakshmi-and-me-broadcast-premiere
It will take you one hour. After your watching, if you like, we about “a more fair society.”
BTW, did MLK Jr get much help from Soviet Unions ?
To Custer,
Well I was being a little melodramatic. Still, this evening I went out and bought the latest issue of Vogue China to heal my eyes.
I understand where Wahaha comes from. To many people in the East Asian sphere, solving problems is actually not as important as worrying what other people think of them. That’s why the WAY to express one’s opinions is extremely important here, sometimes more important than the content. One finds the same “problem” with the Japanese too. Should we preserve that tradition? To some extent, yes, because the face culture, though ridiculed by westerners, does help keep people from going to the extremes and maintain stable relationships. But I also understand the reasons for the ridicules which everybody knows.
And to Wahaha, despite all the harping and bone-picking-from-eggs criticism in the West, the Beijing Olympic Games passed with flying colors. So in your logic, we the Chinese people won this battle, not without casualties of course, but we won. So just let it go.
Wooddoo,
Talking about bon-picking-from-eggs, read following :( I will greatly appreciate if you can find some article by scholars that use FACTS instead of empty talks to prove the greatness of democracy.)
http://www.struggle.ws/once/pd_chap8.html
It could not be put more plainly. Parliamentary democracy is a good thing
(in fact it is one of the best thing around) if you wish to preserves the
current unequal order – as the rich do. It delivers the essential result
every time we vote: the rich get richer and the poor get poorer
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article17453.htm
Democracy is for the rich
Or again, modern democracy may be regarded as a dishonest farce used to
keep the masses from getting restless by providing the hope that things
might get better when they have another election.
Reforms are needed in the electoral process so that the power of big money
is removed. Otherwise democracy can never be “of the people” i.e. poor or
middle class people. It will always be class dominated. Democracy will be
for the rich.
Wooddoo,
will you watch the film I put in the post ?
I dont know how you can say ” ….solving problems is actually not as important as worrying….”. Watching the film, you will know that Lakshmi will still hopelessly live in poverty after 20 years, her daughter wont get good education. THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE IN INDIA LIKE LAKSHMI.
TELL ME HOW TO SOLVE IT.
You know what impressed me most in 5.12 earthquake ? not the effort by chinese government. I saw a picture of ruins of elmentary school, there was an English book on the top of ruins. I didnt student English until I was 15 … in Shanghai. I hope you know what I mean.
Wahaha: NO ONE HERE IS TALKING ABOUT HOW GREAT DEMOCRACY IS. Please stop trying to pick a fight where there is none.
If you post about democracy in a thread that has nothing to do with it again, I’m going to start deleting your comments.
There’s nothing wrong with discussing it when it is relevant, however, this is a blog about China, not America or India. We have no interest in serving as a forum for my-dad-is-better-than-your-dad arguments about whose government is better, especially when there’s only one person arguing. Furthermore, we attempt to maintain a civil and focused discussion in our comments threads, but recently, you’ve attempted to turn nearly every thread into a shouting match about democracy. No one else is interested in this line of discussion. Take the hint.
Old Tales Retold, I think the issue might be about foreign influence or people who only have clout because of foreign support. If Martin Luther King Jr. had poor popular support and existed mainly because of foreign funding, what would you have thought about that?
That said, in these photos I see Ai Weiwei having his fun. He’s being a bit juvenile (but of course his pictures probably have good composition and decent artistic value) and I guess that compromises his political message, but I’m not offended at anything.
C.Custer,
When Mainland China was under KMT before 1949, hundreds of thousands of Chinese died for pursuing communism. Will anyone now die for communism ? Not even a dozen. Then what mistakes did those peopel make that caused their lives ? They read textbooks only, didnt study the facts. (or if they had known what Stalin did in Soviet Unions, they wouldve definitely thought twice at least.)
That is why I dont follow textbooks, I dont care how beautiful an idea sounds, I WANT TO SEE THE RESULTS UNDER SUCH BEAUTIFUL IDEA (like freedom). Lot of Chinese believe Democracy is the way to solve the problems in China, I disagree, cuz I believe that although Democracy can solve some problems, it at same time will cause far more problems, which will hurt 10 times more, or 100 times more, or even 1000 times more people.
How do I convince others ? I want to use facts. But China is not a democratic country, so there are no facts from China. So without choice, I have to use examples from other democratic countries like India, Thailanad, Russia.
[comment deleted, irrelevant]
[other content deleted, irrelevant]
There is no perfect system yet that is able solve the problems without causing other problems. So if we want to talk about people’s government, we have to consider which is better for MORE people, NOT FOR ALL PEOPLE.
Cluster,
How could you do that ?
It has everything to do with China. My posts explained why China has far superior infrastructure than India, which is the fundation for China’s economic development and how Chinese govenrment pulled 400 million people out of poverty.
@ Wahaha: If you want to follow results, that’s perfectly fine. And if you want to convince others democracy is bad, that’s fine too, but this is not the place for you to do that. I don’t know how I can make myself any more clear. This is a post that’s about Ai Weiwei and you’re in here talking about the inefficiency of Indian bureaucracy. It’s irrelevant.
You are perfectly welcome to try to convince whoever you like that democracy is bad…on your own blog. This website, however, is not a forum for that. If, or when, we write a post comparing Western democracy with the Chinese government, and discussing which one is better, then these types of comments would be relevant. But here they serve no purpose but to provoke off-topic arguments without much hope of productive conclusion. If you really want to talk about democracy on here, consider writing an essay about it and emailing it to me; if it passes muster I will post it as a guest post.
However, I’m not going to explain again the rules regarding STAYING ON TOPIC in your comments on posts that have nothing to do with what you’re talking about.
Low, Custer, you delete all my post.
Free information, what a joke !!!
Custer,
Let me repeat :
My post explained how china has far superior infrastructure over India, which is the fundation for china’s economic development and how Chinese government pulled 400 million people out of extreme poverty.
If you have guts, show this post.
I told you I would if you kept posting about things that are off topic. If you want to express yourself freely, get your own blog. Our comments section is not a forum for you to spout randomly about whatever you feel like. I have made this very clear to you several times, yet you continue to ignore me. What other choice do I have?
Then explain why my posts were deleted.
BECAUSE THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS POST.
BECAUSE THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS POST.
BECAUSE THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS POST.
BECAUSE THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS POST.
BECAUSE THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS POST.
BECAUSE THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS POST.
BECAUSE THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS POST.
BECAUSE THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS POST.
BECAUSE THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS POST.
BECAUSE THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS POST.
PLEASE read that sentence over and over again until you understand.
I was explaining why China has better infrastructure, does that offend you ?
Is 6/4 related to China ?
and in your opinion, it is about democracy in China. and If I had posted there, you wouldve deleted my posts too.
So basically, you only allow people to talk what you think is related.
OH. MY. GOD.
NO. It has nothing to do with WHAT your opinion is. Let’s try this ONE MORE TIME. Read this carefully, because I’m not going to say it again:
This website is a blog. We post articles about SPECIFIC TOPICS. When you comment on those articles, you are supposed to comment ONLY on topics IN THE ARTICLE. Go to other posts on this site and read other people’s comments. You will notice that they are responding to the original posts.
You, however, continue to post the same thing in every comment you make, comparing democracy and CCP-style government, making the argument that the current style of government is better for China, BUT THAT ARGUMENT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ORIGINAL POSTS YOU ARE COMMENTING ON.
It isn’t that I disagree with you, it is that your comments are off-topic.
I don’t know how I could possibly BE any more clear.
I never said 6/4 was about democracy in China. In fact, the whole point of my most recent post was that it WASN’T all about democracy.
This is the problem. You ignore what everyone else is actually saying, which leads to unproductive discussion. That’s not something I want on my site.
Then, What are purposes for starting these threads ?
By the way, I didnt start talking about Democracy, Wooddoo claimed that I dont care solving the problems. my posts woudve showed him how problems (infrastructure) were solved.
Later
The “threads” (posts) have several purposes:
1) To spread news about China to the English speaking community.
2) To translate interesting Chinese-language materials into English so that more people can hear Chinese perspectives.
3) To offer analysis and opinions on Chinese affairs past and present.
As for the comments on posts, they serve two purposes:
1) To provide a forum for reasoned, civil discussion of issues relating to China. To ensure that these discussions remain productive, we attempt to ensure that comments are related to the posts they are attached to.
2) To offer us feedback on the quality of our posts so that we can continue to improve.
If you just want to vent about China-related issues, there are many forums for that. Fool’s Mountain frequently posts guest pieces, and both Fool’s Mountain and the Peking Duck routinely offer “open threads” where commenters can talk about whatever issue they want.
ALSO: Just so you know, I didn’t delete any of your comments completely. A couple of them got picked up automatically in our spam filter because it thinks they are — you guessed it — off-topic.
Aiya… I may be partially responsible for this… The MLK discussion seemed to be more or less on point, though, as revolved (at least at first) around a comparison between two people, MLK and Ai Weiwei, who were / are reviled by some in their respective home countries for allegedly selling out to foreigners. Just to finish that line up, I ought to reply to “Inst” (comment 12).
I think the distinction Inst makes is meaningful. Ai Weiwei is not at the head of a huge movement in China like King was and he (Ai Weiwei) does sometimes seem to be kept afloat by a foreign echo chamber, much like, say, Michael Moore is in the U.S., much as I like Moore. But would it not be easy for anyone to lead a real movement in China today (even the anti-Japan protest leaders got shut down eventually).
One might add that even in an America still recovering from McCarthyism, hounded by a brutal FBI, and beset in the South by Jim Crow laws and in the North by more subtle forms of segregation… it was easier for MLK to raise funds than it is now for Chinese to legally fund Chinese dissidents. I would imagine that King did get money from abroad (if someone can confirm or debunk this, I’d appreciate it), but he could largely rely on a network of churches and civil society organizations. It therefore seems a little unfair to jump on Hu Jia or Ai Weiwei just because they don’t screen their funding for people with funny accents.
Now, I hope I haven’t restarted the “debate” over what India’s infrastructure and caste system prove about liberal democracy the world over…
Bad, confusing grammar in the above comment of mine. Apologies!
OTR,
At least 40% Americans strongly opposed the Iraq war before the war started, but what they do AFTER war started, they supported their brave soldiers wholeheartly, ALTHOUGHT THEY DISLIKE BUSH AND HIS GOVERNMENT.
Now look at Ai WeiWei, he might hate CCP, he might hate the government in China (see the picture he showed a middle finger), but Billions of yuans and numerous efforts by millions of Chinese were invested in preparing the Olympic. DID HE RESPECT THAT ? NO, HE DIDNT.
If he didnt respect the work by millions of chinese, how the heck would he care for Chinese ?
Maybe it is OK in West culture that an individual take such opportunity to embarrasss his country, but definitely not OK in East culture.
He is an @$$, simple as that.
C.Custer,
You started a thread about Ai Weiwei, a “famous” dissident in China; you started a threat about 6/4, the most sensitive political issue in China. Unless you had expected 3 or 4 posts, these threads would always turn into political debates about system, CCP, human right, democracy, etc.
When I first came to this blog, I found that there werent much debates. Now I know why.
Nowadays, it is very hard to explain why so many Chinese people rather keep the current situation in China than a democratic system, it needs lot of patient explanation WITH FACTS. Most Chinese simply keep silence against the accusation by West-minded accusation, I choose not keeping the silence. What you are doing is acutually forbidding me to explain, I get it.
BTW, are you a HRW member or a member of similar group ? No disrespect, but if you are, you better watch the film “Lakshmi and me”. Listen to this : Lakshmi’s sister said ” I am tired of this human existence “. (she was talking about herself.)
Wahaha, Ai Weiwei’s middle finger photograph is part of a decade-long series called Study in Perspective (透视学), in which he captures his extended middle finger against various famous landmarks off in the distance — the White House, the Eiffel Tower, and so forth (link to some examples: http://bbs.breezecn.com/read.php?tid=125041 ).
Yeah, China, with a political system that allows someone to kill tens of millions of its people and honored this scumbag by placing his green corpse in TAM is the fairest of them all.
*sigh*
No, I am not a member of HRW or any similar organizations. I know you want me to be some anti-China biased Western thug because that would fit well with your prejudices, but here’s the thing: I’m not. Neither are the other people you’re arguing with.
I’m excited to see you actually addressed the topic though! And I’m curious, how exactly did Ai Weiwei disrespect the effort of the Chinese people during the Olympics?
C.Custer,
If I has prejudices, then you saw tens of millions of educated Chinese had prejudices last year. ( as not well-educated usually dont care about politics.)
Here is my answer to your question :
Suppose you bought your dream house next to Ai weiwei’s house. You spent 6 months and lot of moneys deocrating the house and fixing the problems like plumbing, toilets, heating system, etc. Ai weiwei watched your working hardly but didnt make any suggestion.
After 6 months hardworking, you held a party for your relatives, friends and your neighbor, including Ai weiwei. In the party, Ai weiwei talked about how small the bathroom of master room was, how the house didnt have enough closets, how the color of living room didnt fit.
Did he tell the truth ? maybe.
Is he an @$$hole ? definitely.
JD,
If the picture is singled out, your explanation may holds water. There was another picture in which a woman showed her underwear, plus so many “F—” words., so you know …
Bill,
As I am not allowed to fully explain, I try as briefly as I can.
1) One person dictatorship.
2) Meritocracy.
3) Oligarchy
4) authoritarian
5) democracy.
The system you talk about is #1.
It has been argued that China is #2 + #4 + collectivim.
It has also been argued that lot of democracy is #3 + #5 + individualism.
C.Custer :
please delete this post and the 2nd last posts, the one I said “As I am allowed to fully explain, I try as briefly as I can.” Thx.
@ Wahaha,
I think that’s, maybe, where we diverge: you believe that politics is like that house in your analogy, i.e. that “rudeness” matters as much in political opinions as in personal relations, whereas I think the whole focus of political discussion should be on the substance of what’s working and what isn’t. I would say that in POLITICS the discussion should be ENTIRELY about whether that house of yours is well built—not clapping you on the back for building it and not about keeping up spirits at the dinner party. Incidentally, Ai Weiwei is in trouble very literally for questioning the quality of buildings, namely schools in the earthquake zone!
As an aside, you are right to point out that many Americans supported the Iraq War once it began. Though you imply that that support was a good thing (a sort of “democratic centralism” argument—once a policy is decided upon, everyone should back it, regardless of their previous arguments to the contrary). I, on the other hand, have long been angered at how quickly Americans jumped on board with the war. It was a big mistake.
@ Wahaha: Don’t use a metaphor, tell me what he actually did
Leaving aside the whole democracy and metaphor thing, something I’ve admired about Ai Weiwei is that he’s an artist that packs a political punch. Regardless of whether or not you agree with him, your reaction to him is directed back to politics. This is as true of his combative gestures like those above as it is of his subtler, more low-key performances, such as the gathering of a range of Chinese people—farmers, yuppies, etc.—to live together in Germany at the Documenta exhibition. Many artists are good at shocking and being clever, but few in any country are as good as he is at addressing the knotty issues of state power and community.
“….your reaction to him is directed back to politics….”
C.Custer and OTR,
I was question if he is kind of a person you want your children to respect or despise. I didnt question his personal view of political system in China as I said in previous post : ” Did he tell the truth ? maybe.”
He accepted the offer as the designer of Bird Nest; he saw the efforts of millions of Chinese people in preparing Olympic; he saw the enthusiasm of Chinese people waiting for the opening of Olympic.
What did he do ?
Right after completion of Bird Nest, he started complaining about the human right record in China, refused to participate the opening ceremony. Was that not a problem until the completion of Bird Nest ? of course not. So he waited for the PERFECT time when Beijing was ready for Olympic, he began to jerperdize the effort of millions of Chinese people, knowing that he had a perfect shield for himself.
That is like he helped your painting your house, then mock you about the color of living room in front of all of your guests.
He is an @$$hole.
BTW, I didnt think China should host Olympic, I thought the time was not ready yet.
@ Wahaha, I don’t think that’s a fair metaphor. Hadn’t he been saying political stuff like that for years? It’s more like he had mocking the color of your living room forever, then you invited him to paint your house and were disappointed that after he painted the outside he was still mocking the color of the living room.
I don’t see it as a particularly “asshole” thing to do, either. Whether you agree with him, or his methods, or not, I think we can agree his motivation is to improve China, yes? Maybe you think he’s trying to do the wrong thing or go at it the wrong way, but you have to give him credit for trying to improve things.
And criticism is a tactic that’s worked well before. Look at all the harshly critical literature that came out of May 4th…say what you will about the effectiveness of May 4th but that criticism led to study of new things, and that led to China’s first study groups on Communism, one of which a young Mao Zedong joined….
Anyway, either way, didn’t the government know what they were getting when they asked him to design the Bird’s Nest?
@ Wahaha,
In response to your question, I would hope my children would admire someone like Ai Weiwei, though that doesn’t mean his brand of art is appropriate for all ages! Previously, I rejected your comparison between codes of personal politeness and the right way of addressing political realities. But maybe I’ll run with your metaphor, after all (as Custer did above).
If Ai Weiwei is ruining a party or a house warming or whatever by being critical when everyone else is excited and supportive, all the while being “protected” by his work on the Bird’s Nest… that seems exactly the right role for an artist.
Artists needn’t be political, of course, but if they are political, they should make things awkward for others. Otherwise, they are celebrating power. I was all about Obama posters during the 2008 campaign, for example, but I don’t feel as good about artwork celebrating him now that he is in control. It just doesn’t seem right. Basically, artists SHOULD bite the hand that feeds them—-as everyone from Michelangelo to Diego Rivera to Chinese painters under Manchu rule did. They should paint your house and then tell you you suck.
But artists need money, too. I the best source of funding is the state (otherwise it gets to be this weird insider game with other rich people)—but state endowments can’t be subjected to the interference of every congressman sensitive about this or that. The Bird’s Nest was a sort of endowment for Ai Weiwei. I think he used it well.
No disrespect, but I dont know what on earth you two are talking about:
The reason I called him an @$$ is that he did NOT raised the topic until the perfect time FOR HIMSELF. if he had raised the simliar topics before, he wouldnt have been offered the job as the designer of bird next. so what does “It’s more like he had mocking the color of your living room forever..” mean ?
also I dont understand “They should paint your house and then tell you you suck.” simply cuz he is artist then he should get a pass after ruining someone’s party ? If so, I couldve put together some garbages and claimed myself as an artist and went on to sleep naked on the pennsylvania avenue in Washington DC. IS IT PART OF MY RIGHT ?
How do you think Michael Fay’s case ? do you think Singapore government did right thing or not ?
and here is another picture of his, another middle finger :
http://www.artfacts.net/artworkpics/7145b.jpg
Who the F@#$ did he think he is ? OK, CCP mistreated his father, he showed CCP a middle finger. What did US do to him that he should be given the right doing something like that ?
He is a typical scumbag who has no respect for anyone else. It is all about “mememe.”, and suddenly pretend he cares the victims in earthquake. WTF ?
Wahaha, I think you’re being a little overdramatic. First of all, do you really think he “ruined the party” of the Olympics? 99.9999% of foreigners have no idea who he even is, let alone whatever he said. The point of the Olympics was an international coming-out party for China, no? They went well, and most people were impressed, what exactly did Ai “ruin”?
Secondly, I really don’t see how any of this is self-centered. In these middle finger photos, you can’t even tell whose finger it is. I think the point is a general gesture of individualism and autonomy over being controlled by other things (whether they be the government, tradition, convention, whatever), not anything about disrespect for China (or the US, or France, or wherever else he has taken them). Personally, the photo of him flipping off the White House doesn’t bother me at all.
As a sidenote, you couldn’t sleep naked in DC because public nudity is a crime, but you could certainly sit in front of the White House with garbage, or write “fuck” on your chest and take a photo there, or whatever else. That IS part of your rights, yes.
I believe I’ve made that gesture toward the White House myself—and rightfully so, given what America has been through the past eight years! Also, there’s a group of peace activists who have been camping a few feet from the White House for a couple decades now, for what it’s worth. Their “tent” is made of dirty tarps and surrounded by grisly photos of war victims.
But more to the point, Ai Weiwei’s medium seems to be, like Custer said, gestures of autonomy and, I would add, gestures of community (as in the Documenta project I mentioned earlier). He has always had an uncomfortable relationship with authority, so I’m a little surprised, too, that the government let him in on the Olympic designs… but there you have it, they should have known what they were getting into. Another person with a checkered past politically-speaking, Zhang Yimou, also helped out, but he played nice. Which route is more principled?
As to Michael Fay… I didn’t feel all that sympathetic for him because he seemed like a spoiled rich kid. But I do like graffiti. So, good question.
Obviously, people have different definitions of what constitutes good art. Performance art, which doesn’t result in a “commodity” in the same way as, say, painting has always been particularly controversial. And China isn’t the only country to get pissed off about art, performance or otherwise. Giuliani’s attack on the Brooklyn Museum is another example.
What do you think of Diego Rivera painting Marx and Lenin into a mural commissioned by Ford? I understand that gestures like that seem a bit cheap in that the artist, whether Rivera or Ai Weiwei, is living off the person he is insulting… but how else are artists to earn their keep? And who else are they to insult except the powerful?
Custer,
You didnt get my point :
US did nothing to Ai weiwei, who the F@#$ did he think he was ?
Do you really believe that a person, who helped you paint your house, then embarrassed you in front of your guests, would care your children ?
Please, if you do, then we are either living in different worlds or there is no logic on earth.
“Do you really believe that a person, who helped you paint your house, then embarrassed you in front of your guests, would care your children ?”
Honestly, YES. Here’s why: he might have embarrassed me in front of others and caused me to lose face, but honestly, what have I lost? He hurt my pride. Who cares? However, he helped paint the house, which is something REAL. It makes the house better and other people can see how nice looking a house I have.
My assumption would be he WOULD care about my children, for two reasons. 1) He has already shown he’s willing to help when it’s needed — not willing to help my ego, sure, but willing to help in real life and 2) nearly everyone who isn’t evil genuinely cares about children. They are cute, they are innocent, and they remind us of ourselves. I think it’s utterly absurd for you to suggest Ai doesn’t care about the DEATHS of Chinese children just because he made the government lose a little face. I believe he, like any human being, is perfectly capable of separating the two and caring deeply about the people of China even as he disrespects the government. You may not agree with his methods, but you really haven’t offered any evidence whatsoever to indicate that he doesn’t care.
Good, fucking Tiananmen