[※스압주의※의역/오역 주의※]
어제 삼이다님이 올려주신 자료,
[혐오]고양이 가죽 ??? 개 가죽 ???
http://todayhumor.co.kr/board/view.php?table=humorbest&no=498101
에 달린 댓글
Katinka Simonse (= TINKEBELL)은 동물의 권리를 주장하기 위해
동물의 사체를 이용해서 예술 작품을 만듦으로써,
논란에 오른, 암스테르담 출신의 작가입니다.
원문들 |
위키피디아 Katinka Simonse (aka TINKEBELL) is a controversial artist from Amsterdam who calls attention to animal rights issues with works using the remains of dead animals.[1] She's been the target of significant angry email[2] and a call for criminal prosecution. 팅커벨의 포트폴리오 사이트 TINKEBELL. provokes by exemplifying the blind spots of modern society. She confronts a public that revels in being indignant about everything that has nothing to do with them, but at the same time is very apologetic about their own actions. She questions why millions of male chicks are brutally killed every day (often by throwing them against the walls of a barn) but she gets arrested for threatening to do the same in public. Why are people who openly discuss the lowering of the sexual age of consent treated as vile pedophiles, but are 'barely 18' websites intensely popular? By turning her own cat into a handbag she tries to show people their own hypocrisy about the use of animals for consumption and leather production. If anything, her works form a extreme incentive for the discussion of our morals and the way society is developing. These actions often leave her with a lot of negative feedback. From all corners of the web people have used the relative anonimity of the internet to send her the most foul death wishes. Fascinated by the enormous anger and cruelty of these messages, she tried to find the people behind them. To her surprise these were ordinary people living ordinary lives. For these people the internet was a faceless funnel for their anger, a one-click way of justifying their indignance. TINKEBELL's reaction to this flood of hatemail was publicizing a book, called 'dearest TINKEBELL,', in wich she identifies these anonimous criticasters. In this way she defies the awkward position of an artiston the internet. She no longer is just the reciever of all this faceless anger, but takes charge in responing to it. |
2004년에 팅커벨은 그녀의 사랑하는 고양이 Pinkeltje를 지갑으로 만들었다.
Pinkeltj는 '우울증 걸린 고양'이라 집에 홀로 남아 있을 수 없었다.(역자: 분리장애로 생각 됨.)
팅커벨은 그 고양이를 죽이고 지갑으로 만듦으로써, 어디로든 들고 다닐 수 있게 하였다.
영어 원문 |
n 2004 TINKEBELL. made a purse out of her dearest cat Pinkeltje. Pinkeltje was a 'depressed cat' who couldnt be left at home alone. By killing her and making her into a purse, TINKEBELL. could carry her always with her. |
자신의 고양이를 지갑으로 만듦으로써 (=대중에게 혐오감 유발)
각종 동물을 재료로 만든 다른 악세서리에 대한 비판 의식을 불러 일으키는거라네요.
왜 자신의 작품에는 혐오감 느끼면서 다른 동물 제품에는 아무런 비판의식이 없는 건지 의문을 던지면서요.
Baby bunny project 는 현 애완동물의 상황에 대해서 말하기 위해 만들어진 거랍니다.
현대사회에서는 애완동물은 순수한 애완동물의 기능을 하지 않지요. 사람들은 미학적인 목적으로 애완동물을 기르려고 합니다.
그러한 이유로 고양이를 교배시켜서 새로운 종을 만들고, 특성화된 사료를 먹여서 취향에 맞는 털가죽을 만드는 등 갖은 노력을 다해
'완벽한' 애완동물을 만드려는 노력이 끊이지 않고 있고, 그런 노력으로 인해서 애완동물은 원래의 애완동물의 의미를 상실하고
악세서리로서 여겨지게 되었다네요. 이걸 고발하고자 Baby bunny project가 생겨났더군요.
원문 |
The pet is developing from 'man's best friend' into a completely commodified article of consumption. Pets are no longer bred purely for their Function (think of for instance the duck hunt) but are also selected on their aesthetic value and the way in which the animal will fit its (future) urban environment. Hypoallergenic cats and phospholuminescent fish are just some of the tragic examples of this process. We're currently witnessing a development which is focused on creating the 'perfect' pet. Due to breeding programs and genetic manipulation, we can recreate the pet into its 'ultimate', fantasy-based form, asresembled by (plastic) toy pets: Smooth skinned or fluffy. Candy pink or with 'natural' color patches, featuring big shiny eyes and/or limbs you can manipulate. Mankind has been trying to dominate the animal kingdom for millennia and this ongoing endeavour will eventually result in the perfect pet. A pet that can be adjusted to the wishes and desires of its owner. A pet that will be the perfect accessory in daily (social) life. |
Her name is... (그녀의 이름은...) 시리즈
이 작품은 동물들이 하나의 생명이라기보단, 만들어진 이미지를 나타내기 위한 하나의 상품으로 여겨지는 것을 나타내기 위해 한 퍼포먼스라네요.
+ 추가 설명(내 맘대로 붙인거.)
많은 애완동물의 주인들이 동물들이 뭘 좋아하는지도 생각 안하고 그저 자신의 만족만을 위해서 동물의 이미지를 정해 놓고,
동물을 자신의 이미지대로 꾸며서 데리고 다니면서 우월감을 느끼잖아요?
죽은 개 시체에 옷을 꼼꼼히 입히고 끌고 다님으로써 -말 그대로 살아서 감정을 교류하는 애완 동물로써 의미가 아닌
자신의 이미지와 맞는 식으로 꾸민 악세사리로서의 의미만 강조한 거지요.-그러한 태도들을 비난하는 거죠.
원문 |
The performance undoubtably refers to the meaning of the animal withinupper (middle) circles, in which much more then a living being, the animal is used as a commodity article: as part of an individuals carefully build image and ego, rather then being acknowledged as a being with own needs and characteristics. |