A Starving Statement: The Controversial Art Exhibition in Denmark
In a bold and provocative move, Chilean-born artist Marco Evaristti sparked international attention with his art exhibition in Copenhagen, Denmark, titled "And Now You Care." The exhibition, which opened in late February 2025, aimed to shed light on the harsh realities of modern meat production by featuring three piglets—named Lucia, Simon, and Benjamin—who were being denied food and water. The piglets were confined in a makeshift cage constructed from shopping carts, symbolizing the commodification of animals in the meat industry. Evaristti’s intention was to provoke thought about the ethical implications of factory farming, where animals are often subjected to inhumane conditions for mass production. However, the exhibition quickly became a focal point of controversy, with many questioning the ethics of using live animals to make a statement. Little did Evaristti know, the drama surrounding his installation would take an unexpected turn.
Pigs, Protests, and Theft: The Unexpected Twist in Copenhagen
In a surprising development, the three piglets at the center of Evaristti’s exhibition were stolen just days after the installation opened. The theft was carried out by animal rights activists, who were surprisingly aided by Evaristti’s own friend, Caspar Steffensen. Steffensen, who had initially supported the exhibition, revealed that he could no longer stand by and watch the piglets suffer after his 10-year-old daughter pleaded with him to intervene. Moved by her compassion, Steffensen secretly assisted the activists in freeing the piglets from the gallery on a Saturday evening. The stolen animals were later revealed to have been taken by the Danish animal rights group De Glemte Danske (The Forgotten Danes), who posted a statement online claiming responsibility for the rescue.
From Art to Outrage: Evaristti’s Mixed Reaction
Evaristti initially expressed disappointment and frustration upon learning of the theft. He had reported the incident to the police and was forced to shut down the exhibition, which he described as a significant setback for his artistic vision. However, after reflecting on the situation, he began to see the silver lining. "At least this way, the piglets would have a happy life," he remarked, acknowledging that their rescue ensured their well-being. Despite his mixed emotions, Evaristti faced backlash from the public, including hate mail from around the world. Many criticized his approach to raising awareness about animal rights, arguing that starving the piglets was a form of abuse, even if the intention was to highlight the cruelties of the meat industry. For Evaristti, the controversy underscored the complex relationship between art and activism, where the line between provocation and exploitation can often be blurred.
The Art of Awareness: Evaristti’s Vision and the Broader Message
At the heart of Evaristti’s exhibition was a desire to confront audiences with the uncomfortable truths of modern pig farming. In Denmark, the pig industry is a significant contributor to the national economy, but it has also come under scrutiny for its treatment of animals. Animal welfare groups, such as Animal Protection Denmark, have long criticized the industry for practices that prioritize efficiency and profit over animal well-being. For instance, sows in the industry are often bred to produce large litters of piglets, but with only 14 teats available, many piglets are left to compete for milk, leading to starvation and death. By denying Lucia, Simon, and Benjamin food and water, Evaristti sought to mirror the conditions faced by countless animals in the meat industry. His installation was meant to provoke empathy and spark a conversation about the ethics of mass meat production.
Activism and Ethics: The Animal Rights Perspective
While Evaristti’s exhibition aimed to raise awareness about animal suffering, it also drew criticism from animal rights groups who questioned the methods used to convey the message. Many organizations, including Animal Protection Denmark, welcomed the initiative to highlight the cruelties of the meat industry but condemned the use of live animals in the process. They argued that starving the piglets, even for the sake of art, was a form of abuse and that alternative approaches could have been employed to achieve the same awareness without causing harm. The debate surrounding Evaristti’s installation highlights the challenges of using art as a tool for social commentary, particularly when it involves living beings. It also raises important questions about the ethics of activism and the fine line between awareness and exploitation.
The Fallout and the Future: Evaristti’s Next Move
Despite the shutdown of his exhibition, Evaristti is already brainstorming new ways to continue his artistic exploration of animal rights. One idea involves using dead piglets from meat processing plants to create a similar installation, though this time without the controversial element of live animals. Another concept he is considering is to purchase three new piglets, not to starve but to auction off to the highest bidder with the condition that they will be given a happy life. Evaristti hopes this approach will both challenge the commodification of animals and raise funds for animal welfare initiatives. While his methods remain provocative, his commitment to sparking a dialogue about animal rights is undeniable. As the art world and the public continue to grapple with the ethical implications of his work, one thing is clear: Marco Evaristti is not ready to back down from the conversation.
