The first part of this article gave information on an artist who took candid photos of people in their homes, and using the photos in art exhibits without the people's consent. I feel that this was a terrible thing to do on the artists part. Personal privacy is something we expect from a home. It is where we feel the safest and most comfortable. By taking this away, the artist is not creating art, but rather violating a personal right. Legally, however, the artist had every right to do what he did. Artistic expression is a specific right we have under the Constitution. It is perfectly legal to take pictures of people in their homes (so long as it is solely for art purposes) and display them such as the artist did. This does not detract from the fact that it was morally wrong. As stated before, a person should have the right to their privacy, especially in their own home.
Another part of the article talked about a less artistic approach to the same type of "peeping" called "Mass Observation." This was done in the same way as the artist, but done so in order to gain information on various topics. I feel a little less disgust at this project. The only thing put on display was information. There was no personal information, and nobody's face was shown. However I feel that this is only acceptable for things that are meaningless, and not personal. Seeing how many people drive around a certain area in a day is absolutely fine, but once the information turns to why specific people are driving in this area the entire project becomes foul. Again, this has to do with privacy. To gain adequate information, the specifics of people's lives does not need to be involved.
No comments:
Post a Comment