HaHa! Oh, what have I done. I cringe at the thought of being woken up by a tiger staring at me. In deed, just such a thing happened to me a few times with a little Roman cat who was visiting my once shared flat.

I know that my comments are not always a source of happiness and are sometimes feared, LOL. Yet I am merely an interested and committed person. But it's true: I don't make myself very popular with my critical mind. Nevertheless, I understand that your spirit, which is a friend of mine, welcomes such thoughts. I welcome your humour, which is evident in almost all your remarks :), but also gladly accept your challenges.

I am not so good at scattering compliments, but whoever receives one from me receives it wholeheartedly and with conviction. :D ... You get further in life if you have a certain positive diplomacy, but for some reason unknown to me, I don't have that gift of an all sprinkling watering can. Therefore, I graciously beg your pardon for bringing hardship to your hut ;-) At the same time, I am delighted that you also appreciate the ravaging thoughts. Thank you!

Everything in me resists the artwork with the emaciated young boy looking like he has whooping cough. At a time when hysteria was making the highest waves. I think something like that might stir up the hidden fears even further. But you are right, art does arouse unease and can probably counteract the sugar coating that is also poured over reality.

I suppose from your point of view, banning or removing art that makes you uncomfortable doesn't serve well as a justification, because that's what art is supposed to do in the eyes of many - I would not ban it either but use other ways to creatively counteract it (like you said above).

I am beyond where I find shocking elements to be particularly artful, basically requiring the sensations to be less intense and crude for me personally. I am moved by much smaller works and gestures.
... There was a running gag between my husband and I for a long time after I called his Netflix selection "stupid and brutal". He has been joking about this algorithm ever since.

I wish they would stop with the dooming

me too, me too!

I wish the vandal would have made his/her own sign, and put it beside the 'chilling' sign instead of ruining the piece. This would be more effective.

There are artists and there are vandals out there. I would have also preferred the first one.

Language can be creative or boring, how true. I think it was Chesterton (if I'm not mistaken) who meant that socialists denigrated language. "Chilling Dude" is snappier, in any case, it's the language of the people, not the academic.

Here ist the quote from C. G. Chesterton to not cite him incorrect (from his book from the year 1922):

The mark of the atheistic style is that it instinctively chooses the word which suggests that things are dead things; that things have no souls. Thus they will not speak of waging war, which means willing it; they speak of the "outbreak of war," as if all the guns blew up without the men touching them. Thus those Socialists that are atheist will not call their international sympathy, sympathy; they will call it "solidarity," as if the poor men of France and Germany were physically stuck together like dates in a grocer's shop. The same Marxian Socialists are accused of cursing the Capitalists inordinately; but the truth is that they let the Capitalists off much too easily. For instead of saying that employers pay less wages, which might pin the employers to some moral responsibility, they insist on talking about the "rise and fall" of wages; as if a vast silver sea of sixpences and shillings was always going up and down automatically like the real sea at Margate. Thus they will not speak of reform, but of development; ...

I think that many of us lose perspective on how much better things are now than they were in the past

yeah, suffering in the midst of decadence ... I cannot believe it... LOL

Oh, the men call for me, we are about to play cards.
Bye bye :)