Visitors to the exhibition can choose to join him in the room, hold his hand, and get a photograph taken for a token price of $250.
This process is part of his art installation about "removing the trappings of identity".
Personally, I respect his approach on his art. I acknowledge many things to be art and I feel that art is not confined to sculptures and paintings and things that follow the Principles of Design and Elements of Art. As our society advance, our perception of art will have to change too. Art should be seen as an expression instead of a product. Therefore I can accept his work as art because it is him expressing an idea, addressing an issue.
However I do not think that this is a good piece of art. It does not seem to be doing what an artwork should do. An artwork allows people to think by relating it to people, which is why most museums and galleries are free for people to visit, because art is the spreading of ideas and not selling of ideas. The artwork, which is the naked artist has to be sealed off to prevent visitors from stumbling upon it by accident, that defeated the purpose of the artwork. The artwork is about removing the trappings of identity, it is probably something the artist want to change about this world, something he feels deeply, yet how many people can he reach out to with this approach and how many people can pause to think about the deep meaning he is perhaps trying to showcase beneath the "eccentricity" and the "freshness". People gets attracted because he is doing something different, something weird and interesting, they are not attracted by the values behind the work.
In addition, I feel that his expression of removing the trappings of identity is a little blatant and to your face. While it may be a good thing (people nowadays are very direct), for me it feels like a rather superficial interpretation of the message. I do not think that removing the trappings of identity merely to remove one's clothings. I feel that this artist is expressing his message with a very extreme approach, which would usually cause unnecessary controversies in our society.
Lastly, I do not understand why do the visitors have to pay such a high cost to take a picture with a naked artist as a token. The cost does not seem to have any direct link with his artwork. If it is to protect his privacy, I felt that the cost is also a bit too much. I do not understand what is his real purpose in charging people for taking picture with him.
Although much were said, I would still applaude him for being brave enough to challenge our society's perception of art. Artists often go out to challenge the limit, pushing things further and further each time. It shows that as more and more people accept the different perceptions, art can be viewed as a neutral platform in which many things can be questioned and discussed.
I just wish that his art, especially the substance in his art is worth being so brave for.
:)
