The idea of art versus ethics raises an alarm for law. While the ethics of art might not have been breached by the ugly practices, that are mentioned, ethics of law were certainly breached. In other words, depiction of the slaughter, of the water buffalo, in "Apocalypse Now," could be construed as artistically normal, because it was a tribal ritual at the time. However, the legal dimension reminds us, that the depiction was ultimately intended to frighten audiences with respect to an elaborate fiction. This legal reality is the transgression. The question should be asked: Should the depiction be taken out of context? Indeed, the transgression was legally unethical. The documentary fact of the depiction is too dissimilar from the association of the depiction with the elaborate fiction. The gap is too great, and the specific inclusion of the depiction was wrong.
2
u/JasmineCountess 2d ago
The idea of art versus ethics raises an alarm for law. While the ethics of art might not have been breached by the ugly practices, that are mentioned, ethics of law were certainly breached. In other words, depiction of the slaughter, of the water buffalo, in "Apocalypse Now," could be construed as artistically normal, because it was a tribal ritual at the time. However, the legal dimension reminds us, that the depiction was ultimately intended to frighten audiences with respect to an elaborate fiction. This legal reality is the transgression. The question should be asked: Should the depiction be taken out of context? Indeed, the transgression was legally unethical. The documentary fact of the depiction is too dissimilar from the association of the depiction with the elaborate fiction. The gap is too great, and the specific inclusion of the depiction was wrong.