https://www.foxnews.com/science/school-children-blown-up-for-not-fighting-climate-change-in-controversial-ad

Graphic. Horrible. And widely denounced, even by some climate change advocates.

Yet that commercial went through the whole creative cycle of writing, rehearsing, filming, editing and reshooting as necessary with dozens of people involved.

No one raised their hand and asked, “Um…is it really a good idea to kill children graphically on television?”

There were those who got the “joke” and were pleased with it.
There were those who got the “joke” and were too afraid to complain.
There were those who didn’t get the joke and were dazzled by the credentials of the others.
There were those who were too busy to bother figuring anything out.

Most (not all, but most) of King’s descendants apparently approved.

Then there is the great cost and the many stages of fabrication at a foundry. It’s not like an artist whittles tons of bronze and everyone is surprised.

Willis is not a sculptor. He is a conceptual artist and photographer, specializing in black racial statements. I assume he had others doing the sculpture part under his guidance.

I believe he knew exactly what he was doing. This is not an “Oops! We never thought someone would look at it from those angles.”

If viewers are outraged or repulsed or upset, that’s what Willis had in mind.

I’m not going to say that all modern sculpture and modern architecture are bunk or junk, but much writing about aesthetics is airy and vague and meaningless. Faulting artists and aestheticians for not knowing what they’re talking about or for not having anything to say is like faulting sociologists for repeating the obvious or jumping to the wrong conclusions or having a bad prose style. At this point all those things are assumed. If you’re an artist, words aren’t your forte, and if you’re an aesthetician, you’re trying to put experiences and processes which defy verbalization into words.