Art, Shock, and Disorientation

In response to this week's readings, explain why you agree or disagree with Vattimo's idea (based on the philosophies of Walter Benjamin and Martin Heidegger) that disorientation is "the supreme mode of modern aesthetic experience," and that art should shock a viewer/reader/listener into discomfort in order to confront him/her with the strangeness and uncertainty of a "real" world he/she usually takes for granted. Does Vattimo's concept rightly challenge the inoculating effects of art that only serve to coddle and dull the senses? Or is shock, like any other quality, constantly being made the norm, and thus in danger of forcing artists to search for even greater shocks at the risk of safety or simple aesthetic pleasure/value? Or, to go even further, is the basis of Vattimo's thought fundamentally flawed? Is disorientation "the supreme mode of modern aesthetic experience"? If so, why, and if not, why not?

Also, post or embed a link to a work of art you believe is primarily meant to shock the viewer,  and explain why it succeeds or fails in bringing to consciousness the disorientation of modern life. Here's an example: performance artist Chris Burden's "Shoot":