• kahjtheundedicated@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    76
    ·
    19 days ago

    Almost certainly a bit of performance art. Makes for some interesting imagery, and provocative enough to be posted and discussed here. So he’s done well.

    • daannii@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      19 days ago

      Yeah that’s a good point. In the city there are walking around art pieces.

      They are intended to be understood as art.

      • unitedwithme@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        19 days ago

        Thanks to whomever mentioned airgradient the other day, I’ve got indoor and outdoor sensors coming soon! It will be so nice to have visibility into the surrounding air.

    • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      19 days ago

      Except there is no science behind it, and if anything, it misses the point and implies a person can live off a single house plant.

      • daannii@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        18 days ago

        I think it’s implying that

        1. Draw attention to the point that we depend on plants to breathe.
        2. A general dystopian portrayal of natural air becoming poisonous and that we will need supplemental O2.
        3. A point about how even air will be owned and sold to us in the future when billionaires have made natural air unbreathable. More subscriptions to stay alive.

        Like most art. The artist allows for multiple interpretations unless they state otherwise.

        But usually the point is it’s interpretive. Because the interpretation is personal. Subjective. And becomes more about the viewer than the view.

        As with my 3 suggestions. Those points say more about me than they do about the artist.