Guillermo Vargas

Back in 2007, Artist Guillermo Vargas caused a violent outburst of protest on the internet when he used a starving dog off the street as an object of artwork. Apparently, he tied up the emaciated dog, placed bowls of food just out of its reach, and allowed the public to come in and view the slowly dying animal as "art."

This exhibit, titled "Eres lo que lees," according to Vargas, was intended to create public awareness of the thousands of starving dogs in his hometown in Costa Rica. Obviously, there was an immediate outcry against the artist. Thousands of online viewers signed petitions when photographs of the animal were placed on the internet. Facebook group
It is hard to distinguish between the facts and the rumors, but according to some sources, the animal died the day after the display. However, the art gallery stated that the dog was not tied up and actually had been fed.

When Vargas was invited to repeat his display at the Central American Visual Arts Biennial, many protested. The World Society for the Protection of Animals contacted officials to make sure that no animal abuse would take place at the event. WSPA

However, a startling new turn has occurred in this already twisted story. Apparently Vargas has told the public that the whole incident was in fact a hoax. He intended to trick the world to show the irony of the situation- millions of people are horrified at the starvation of one animal while many more creatures are dying in the streets right in front of their homes.

Many do not believe Vargas is telling the truth and is lying to save his reputation against the multitude of internet users petitioning against him. Guillermohabacusvargas.blogspot It is truly hard to tell what is reality- most of the information is from individual bloggers as opposed to a credible news site.

However, the whole situation does bring up a good point. Obviously, it is cruel to force a helpless animal to die, even as a statement to some larger truth, but there are indeed millions of animals that do starve right before us. Though there is a difference between choosing not to feed a stray animal and deliberating withholding food from a captivated animal, does it matter to the animal if he dies because he cannot reach the food in front of him or because he wanders for days without finding a scrap of nourishment? Are people angrier because they are forced to confront the reality of a dog's fate of starvation, when they convince to themselves that the dog on the street will be fed by someone else?

No matter what his intention was, Vargas did give everyone something to think about.

The image above is from Latinaviva.com