Abortion a medium for art

[peewee's lovechild]

For senior, abortion a medium for art, political discourse

Martine Powers
Staff Reporter
Published Thursday, April 17, 2008
Art major Aliza Shvarts '08 wants to make a statement.

Beginning next Tuesday, Shvarts will be displaying her senior art project, a documentation of a nine-month process during which she artificially inseminated herself "as often as possible" while periodically taking abortifacient drugs to induce miscarriages. Her exhibition will feature video recordings of these forced miscarriages as well as preserved collections of the blood from the process.

The goal in creating the art exhibition, Shvarts said, was to spark conversation and debate on the relationship between art and the human body. But her project has already provoked more than just debate, inciting, for instance, outcry at a forum for fellow senior art majors held last week. And when told about Shvarts' project, students on both ends of the abortion debate have expressed shock . saying the project does everything from violate moral code to trivialize abortion.

But Shvarts insists her concept was not designed for "shock value."

"I hope it inspires some sort of discourse," Shvarts said. "Sure, some people will be upset with the message and will not agree with it, but it's not the intention of the piece to scandalize anyone."

The "fabricators," or donors, of the sperm were not paid for their services, but Shvarts required them to periodically take tests for sexually transmitted diseases. She said she was not concerned about any medical effects the forced miscarriages may have had on her body. The abortifacient drugs she took were legal and herbal, she said, and she did not feel the need to consult a doctor about her repeated miscarriages.

Shvarts declined to specify the number of sperm donors she used, as well as the number of times she inseminated herself.

Art major Juan Castillo '08 said that although he was intrigued by the creativity and beauty of her senior project, not everyone was as thrilled as he was by the concept and the means by which she attained the result.

"I really loved the idea of this project, but a lot other people didn't," Castillo said. "I think that most people were very resistant to thinking about what the project was really about. [The senior-art-project forum] stopped being a conversation on the work itself."

Although Shvarts said she does not remember the class being quite as hostile as Castillo described, she said she believes it is the nature of her piece to "provoke inquiry."

"I believe strongly that art should be a medium for politics and ideologies, not just a commodity," Shvarts said. "I think that I'm creating a project that lives up to the standard of what art is supposed to be."

The display of Schvarts' project will feature a large cube suspended from the ceiling of a room in the gallery of Green Hall. Schvarts will wrap hundreds of feet of plastic sheeting around this cube; lined between layers of the sheeting will be the blood from Schvarts' self-induced miscarriages mixed with Vaseline in order to prevent the blood from drying and to extend the blood throughout the plastic sheeting.

Schvarts will then project recorded videos onto the four sides of the cube. These videos, captured on a VHS camcorder, will show her experiencing miscarriages in her bathrooom tub, she said. Similar videos will be projected onto the walls of the room.

School of Art lecturer Pia Lindman, Schvarts' senior-project advisor, could not be reached for comment Wednesday night.

Few people outside of Yale's undergraduate art department have heard about Shvarts' exhibition. Members of two campus abortion-activist groups . Choose Life at Yale, a pro-life group, and the Reproductive Rights Action League of Yale, a pro-choice group . said they were not previously aware of Schvarts' project.

Alice Buttrick '10, an officer of RALY, said the group was in no way involved with the art exhibition and had no official opinion on the matter.

Sara Rahman '09 said, in her opinion, Shvarts is abusing her constitutional right to do what she chooses with her body.

"[Shvarts' exhibit] turns what is a serious decision for women into an absurdism," Rahman said. "It discounts the gravity of the situation that is abortion."

CLAY member Jonathan Serrato '09 said he does not think CLAY has an official response to Schvarts' exhibition. But personally, Serrato said he found the concept of the senior art project "surprising" and unethical.

"I feel that she's manipulating life for the benefit of her art, and I definitely don't support it," Serrato said. "I think it's morally wrong."

Shvarts emphasized that she is not ashamed of her exhibition, and she has become increasingly comfortable discussing her miscarriage experiences with her peers.

"It was a private and personal endeavor, but also a transparent one for the most part," Shvarts said. "This isn't something I've been hiding."

The official reception for the Undergraduate Senior Art Show will be from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. on April 25. The exhibition will be on public display from April 22 to May 1. The art exhibition is set to premiere alongside the projects of other art seniors this Tuesday, April 22 at the gallery of Holcombe T. Green Jr. Hall on Chapel Street.

************************************************** ************************

http://www.yaledailynews.com/articles/view/24513

[smeagol]

Mucho "avant garde" . . . :rolleyes

[peewee's lovechild]

I'm waiting for all the art purists to come out and say that it's "art".

[TheFaggotryAnnex]

Performance art! Genius!

[Spurminator]

Well, it is art. It's also stupid.

[1369]

It's not art, it's a fucked up episode of "Jackass".

I'm also betting it's a hoax.

[CuckingFunt]

I'm waiting for all the art purists to come out and say that it's "art".

It is art.

It's exactly the kind of pretentious, shock-for-the-sake-of-shock art that I tend to stay far away from, but it's art.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

I'm waiting for all the art purists to come out and say that it's "art".i guess you missed that starving dog exhibit thread.

[CuckingFunt]

i guess you missed that starving dog exhibit thread.

My guess is that's the thread that inspired this posting.

[MannyIsGod]

Well, it is art. It's also stupid.

[easjer]

I've already commented on this at length elsewhere.

Suffice it to say that my opinion of this 'art' project is that I am at a loss for words to express how vile, repugnant, abhorrent and disgusting I find this. And I am pro-choice, so it's not some anti-abortion rant.

I also find myself feeling sort of sad for this girl - she doesn't understand that despite the drugs she took being 'legal and herbal' - she could have fucked up her future fertility. There could be scarring or thinning of uterine lining that could prevent her from carrying a pregnancy that she desires to term.

[MannyIsGod]

Great point PeeWee. No seriously, great point. Its not like anyone couldn't see this coming the moment we saw the thread title.

Boy, you really got us!

[peewee's lovechild]

My guess is that's the thread that inspired this posting.

Winner!! Winner!! Winner!! Winner!!

[peewee's lovechild]

Great point PeeWee. No seriously, great point. Its not like anyone couldn't see this coming the moment we saw the thread title.

Boy, you really got us!

Yea, I thought long and hard on how to get you guys.

I live for that.

I wake up every morning and say, "How can I 'get' Manny The All Knowing today?"

I'm glad you took the time to pop into this thread.

You've made my day.

You've blessed me.

I'm so happy.

[1369]

If she hadn't called it "art", I'd bet she would be sitting in a psych ward for a mandatory evaluation.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm waiting for all the art purists to come out and say that it's "art".

Your words not mine.

[MannyIsGod]

If she hadn't called it "art", I'd bet she would be sitting in a psych ward for a mandatory evaluation.

I don't see why she shouldn't be considered for one either way. Making art doesn't mean you're not crazy.

[MannyIsGod]

LOL @ peewee

"i'm waiting for them"

then he tries to play the I don't care what you think card.


Can you possibly be anymore retarded?

[peewee's lovechild]

Your words not mine.


And?

Did that mean I was looking to "get" you guys?

And, if I was, the fact that you posted and are responding means that I did "get" you, if that was what I was trying to do.

The purpose of the thread was to show the extremes people will go to express something as "art".

If you got all butt hurt for some reason, maybe you should ask yourself why.

[peewee's lovechild]

LOL @ peewee

"i'm waiting for them"

then he tries to play the I don't care what you think card.


Can you possibly be anymore retarded?


I like how you try to make it seem like you don't care and yet, here you are.

That's pretty retarded in itself.

[MannyIsGod]

And?

Did that mean I was looking to "get" you guys?

And, if I was, the fact that you posted and are responding means that I did "get" you, if that was what I was trying to do.


Yes Peewee, you got me. I told you that several posts above.



The purpose of the thread was to show the extremes people will go to express something as "art".



Well thats fucking groundbreaking!!! Whats PEEWEE Special is next? People use AC in the Summer? Men and Women have sex? Midgetonadonkey is a raging pussy?



If you got all butt hurt for some reason, maybe you should ask yourself why.


Well, if me thinking you're a complete retard is me being butt hurt then I guess we could try to figure out why. I'm guessing the root of your retardation stems from being droped on your head as a baby although thats just a guess at this time. It will require more research on my behalf.

[MannyIsGod]

I like how you try to make it seem like you don't care and yet, here you are.

That's pretty retarded in itself.

When did I say I didn't care? On the contrary, I enjoy ridiculing you a great deal. It fills the entertainment gaps in my day. It would be more satisfying if you made it harder though.

[peewee's lovechild]

Well, if me thinking you're a complete retard is me being butt hurt then I guess we could try to figure out why. I'm guessing the root of your retardation stems from being drop on your head as a baby although thats just a guess at this time. It will require more research on my behalf.


Yea, all I do is think about ways to get the All Knowing Manny.

I posted the article with that in mind.

Dude, the world doesn't revolve around you.
Really, it doesn't.

I understand that it's hard for you to understand that, having gorilla sensibilities and all.

But, I don't blame that on you.
I blame your mother for fucking that silver back gorilla.

You're just a product of that union.

[peewee's lovechild]

When did I say I didn't care? On the contrary, I enjoy ridiculing you a great deal. It fills the entertainment gaps in my day. It would be more satisfying if you made it harder though.

I just enjoy the fact how you make it seem like it really doesn't matter to you but yet you keep responding.

It's nice.

[CuckingFunt]

If she hadn't called it "art", I'd bet she would be sitting in a psych ward for a mandatory evaluation.

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

As both an art nerd and a strong supporter of reproductive justice, I respect her right to call this art and I respect her right to make her own decisions with regards to pregnancy and herbal abortions (which, before it's argued, is NOT to suggest that I support or respect the actual decisions that she has made).

As a woman, however, I'd be really curious as to the thought process that says it's okay to intentionally put her own body through that much stress. I had an unforced miscarriage several years ago and, even as someone who does not want kids, it was incredibly traumatic. Both physically and emotionally. I cannot fathom being able to do that intentionally and can't help but feel that there would need to be some real self-esteem issues involved for the self-preservation instinct not to kick in.

[MannyIsGod]

Yea, all I do is think about ways to get the All Knowing Manny.

I posted the article with that in mind.

Dude, the world doesn't revolve around you.
Really, it doesn't.

I understand that it's hard for you to understand that, having gorilla sensibilities and all.

But, I don't blame that on you.
I blame your mother for fucking that silver back gorilla.

You're just a product of that union.

LOL @ your mother jokes.

[midgetonadonkey]

I don't like how the quote boxes are darker than before.

[peewee's lovechild]

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

As both an art nerd and a strong supporter of reproductive justice, I respect her right to call this art and I respect her right to make her own decisions with regards to pregnancy and herbal abortions (which, before it's argued, is NOT to suggest that I support or respect the actual decisions that she has made).

As a woman, however, I'd be really curious as to the thought process that says it's okay to intentionally put her own body through that much stress. I had an unforced miscarriage several years ago and, even as someone who does not want kids, it was incredibly traumatic. Both physically and emotionally. I cannot fathom being able to do that intentionally and can't help but feel that there would need to be some real self-esteem issues involved for the self-preservation instinct not to kick in.

I don't consider it art.

And, I think giving it credence as art only encourages others to go to similar extremes to gain artistic fame.

[Sunshine]

She fucking filmed her miscarriages??? And calls it ART?

Unbelievable.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

enough with the monkeying around in here.

[smeagol]

I guess her difinition of art is not the same as mine

[CuckingFunt]

I don't consider it art.

Well, duh.


And, I think giving it credence as art only encourages others to go to similar extremes to gain artistic fame.

I don't entirely disagree with that statement, but question the concept of "giving it credence as art." I don't think that's our decision to make.

[1369]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/US_Supreme_Court_Justice_Potter_Stewart_-_1976_official_portrait.jpg/498px-US_Supreme_Court_Justice_Potter_Stewart_-_1976_official_portrait.jpg

Does not approve.

/Knows it when he sees it

[Don Quixote]

She filmed her miscarriages??? And calls it ART?

Unbelievable.

Yes, unbelievable. This person has a low view of human life, apparently.

What if we were to put dead babies in this display? Or kids 4-5 years old in it?

[CuckingFunt]

What if we were to put dead babies in this display? Or kids 4-5 years old in it?

Completely different situations, as there would be legitimate legal questions as to where someone would have gotten the dead bodies. This girl's display is no doubt tasteless, but it's not illegal.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

What if we were to put dead babies in this display?

I'd definitely go see that exhibit.

[PEP]

Probably a hoax, if it isnt, I hope she uses a coat hanger each time.

[MannyIsGod]

I'd definitely go see that exhibit.

:lol

[Spurminator]

I don't consider it art.

And, I think giving it credence as art only encourages others to go to similar extremes to gain artistic fame.

I think it's more the national outrage and attention that encourage future exhibits of such art.

[midgetonadonkey]

Are the dark quote boxes annoying anyone else?

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

A little.

[MannyIsGod]

I find that the sigs being in every post is more annoying.

[Shelly]

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2008/04/17/yale-students-abortion-art-claim-scam

A hoax?

[Evan]

double

[Evan]

***UPDATE***
The New York Sun reports that Aliza Shvarts' artificial insemination and miscarriage art project is just "creative fiction." Yale University released a statement this afternoon:

[easjer]

"For the official university statement from the Yale University Office of Public Affairs regarding Ms. Shvarts’ work, please click here (http://www.yale.edu/opa/) or read below:


Statement by Helaine S. Klasky — Yale University, Spokesperson

New Haven, Conn. — April 17, 2008

Ms. Shvarts is engaged in performance art. Her art project includes visual representations, a press release and other narrative materials. She stated to three senior Yale University officials today, including two deans, that she did not impregnate herself and that she did not induce any miscarriages. The entire project is an art piece, a creative fiction designed to draw attention to the ambiguity surrounding form and function of a woman’s body.

She is an artist and has the right to express herself through performance art.

Had these acts been real, they would have violated basic ethical standards and raised serious mental and physical health concerns."

[Ronaldo McDonald]

I wonder if the guy(s) who gave her sperm knew what would happen.

[O-Factor]

Anyone who says this is art if a fucking idiot. A FUCKING IDIOT! Its stupid, its attention whorish. She's just a loony bitch, no more, no less. There is no creativity, she's not creating something. This is stupider than the starving dog in the museum they called "art"

Paint me a picture or make me a pot, and then I'll be impressed.

[Don Quixote]

Anyone who says this is art if an idiot. Its stupid, its attention whorish. She's just a loony bee-yotch, no more, no less. There is no creativity, she's not creating something. This is stupider than the starving dog in the museum they called "art"

Paint me a picture or make me a pot, and then I'll be impressed.

Yes, I'm with this guy. If this were real, it wouldn't be art. It would be stupid, unethical, and looney.

It would also break some serious moral rules, rules that are no less real merely because they are unwritten.

[CuckingFunt]

Yes, I'm with this guy. If this were real, it wouldn't be art. It would be stupid, unethical, and looney.

It would also break some serious moral rules , rules that are no less real merely because they are unwritten.

And, yet, none of that would make it not art. Edouard Manet received the same reaction when he first exhibited his "Luncheon on the Grass," which is now considered to be one of the most important Realist paintings of the time.

I'm consistently amused by this notion that art can only be a pretty painting or sculpture. Art is often disturbing, or depressing, or unpleasant, or stupid, or unethical, or looney, or just plain bad.

As I said last time this argument came up, it's the artist that determines whether or not something is art; the viewer can only decide whether or not they like it. To suggest that something isn't art just because you don't like it is absurd.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

Anyone who says this is art if a fucking idiot. A FUCKING IDIOT!

Change is to isn't and I agree.

-1

[Don Quixote]

Hmm. You may have a point. The philosophy of art is not my strong suit. I'm geared toward approaching things from an ethical or epistemic angle.

That said, it would be some sick art, if indeed this were a real exhibit. Like the one about the dog they just let starve -- you might make the case that it's art, but the way the majority of us would look at it, we'd say, so what? It's sick!

[Don Quixote]

One last comment. My case against such an exhibit would not merely be a judgment on my personal taste -- "I don't like it." I don't care for certain types of modern and postmodern art or sculpture. I don't care for certain types of music or literature. Everyone has their own individual tastes and preferences, and that's fine.

This kind of (hypothetical) exhibit, however, would cross the line. Putting aborted fetuses (or a starving dog) on display takes the discussion out of aesthetics and into ethics and moral philosophy. I would be justified in saying that such an exhibit would be morally wrong. It would no longer be a matter of beauty or taste or whether or not it is art (aesth.)

But yes, I guess it would be art.

[ShoogarBear]

Are the dark quote boxes annoying anyone else?

I find them quite a bit more artistic than the old ones.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

I got nothing.

[Ronaldo McDonald]

She should have aborted this piece of shit she calls art.

[Ronaldo McDonald]

Do they give you a barf bag at the exhibition?

[smeagol]

I will hang pictures of me taking a dump in an exhibition.

According to Funt, if I call it art, then it probably is art. :rolleyes

[CuckingFunt]

Do they give you a barf bag at the exhibition?

I hope so. That could be used as the next show.

[CuckingFunt]

I will hang pictures of me taking a dump in an exhibition.

According to Funt, if I call it art, then it probably is art. :rolleyes

Yep. Though, just like the aborted fetuses, I think I'd skip your show.

[monosylab1k]

"For the official university statement from the Yale University Office of Public Affairs regarding Ms. Shvarts’ work, please click here (http://www.yale.edu/opa/) or read below:


Statement by Helaine S. Klasky — Yale University, Spokesperson

New Haven, Conn. — April 17, 2008

Ms. Shvarts is engaged in performance art. Her art project includes visual representations, a press release and other narrative materials. She stated to three senior Yale University officials today, including two deans, that she did not impregnate herself and that she did not induce any miscarriages. The entire project is an art piece, a creative fiction designed to draw attention to the ambiguity surrounding form and function of a woman’s body.

She is an artist and has the right to express herself through performance art.

Had these acts been real, they would have violated basic ethical standards and raised serious mental and physical health concerns."

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

the fallback plan of all shock-value performance "artists". If your "art" produces a shitstorm of controversy and people are calling you out as the sick fuck that you are, just tell them you were faking it all along.

[Findog]

It is art.

It's exactly the kind of pretentious, shock-for-the-sake-of-shock art that I tend to stay far away from, but it's art.

CF FTW.

This is as bad as the starving dog episode.

[Fillmoe]

stupid... i hope someone ends her life

[tlongII]

It's weird.

[smeagol]

Yep. Though, just like the aborted fetuses, I think I'd skip your show.

Thanks for calling pictures of me taking a dump a "show".

I have a bunch of other very "artsy" ideas which involve turturing animals, starving kids, mourning widows and terminally ill people . . . :rolleyes

[Kori Ellis]

I'm not responding to the subject of the thread.

But I would just like to say that you all are ALWAYS bitching about something. Read at the top of the freakin Spurs forum and you will see that the quote boxes, multiple signatures, etc aren't staying this way. We had a choice, leave the forum down for days til we re-customized everything, or put it up as soon as it migrated and do the customization when we have time. We chose the latter.

[peewee's lovechild]

And, yet, none of that would make it not art. Edouard Manet received the same reaction when he first exhibited his "Luncheon on the Grass," which is now considered to be one of the most important Realist paintings of the time.

I'm consistently amused by this notion that art can only be a pretty painting or sculpture. Art is often disturbing, or depressing, or unpleasant, or stupid, or unethical, or looney, or just plain bad.

As I said last time this argument came up, it's the artist that determines whether or not something is art; the viewer can only decide whether or not they like it. To suggest that something isn't art just because you don't like it is absurd.


Manet?

Funt, you're comparing a painting to abortions . . . you do realize that, don't you?

[CuckingFunt]

Manet?

Funt, you're comparing a painting to abortions . . . you do realize that, don't you?

Nice diversion, but I did nothing of the sort. I compared the reaction, not the art. I simply used the Manet example to challenge the idea that something being unethical, looney, or immoral wasn't enough to completely discount it as art.

[peewee's lovechild]

Nice diversion, but I did nothing of the sort. I compared the reaction, not the art. I simply used the Manet example to challenge the idea that something being unethical, looney, or immoral wasn't enough to completely discount it as art.

It's not a diversion, at all.

You're comparing the reaction to a PAINTING with the reaction to multiple abortions.

It's not the same thing.
It's not even close.

[CuckingFunt]

It's not a diversion, at all.

You're comparing the reaction to a PAINTING with the reaction to multiple abortions.

It's not the same thing.
It's not even close.

If it's not a diversion, then it's a complete misunderstanding of my point.

In the post I was responding to, Don Quixote made the assertion that looney, unethical, and immoral = not art. By default. I used the Manet as an example of the opposite specifically because it is now considered to be such an important work. I could have used Mapplethorp, Warhol, The Doors, or John Waters and the point would have still been valid.

[Spurminator]

At what point is something not art? I think we need to determine this. See below scale. At which point are we no longer discussing art?

1. An oil painting of flowers

2. A watercolor painting of flowers

3. A watercolor painting of flowers and doo doo

4. A charcoal drawing of flowers and doo doo

5. A charcoal drawing of Jesus eating doo doo while sitting on flowers

6. A depiction of Jesus eating doo doo while sitting on flowers, painted using a combination of goat's blood and saliva

7. A depiction of BABY Jesus eating doo doo while sitting on flowers, painted using a combination of goats blood and saliva

8. A homeless man sitting in an art gallery on a bed of flowers, eating doo doo

9. A homeless man dressed as Jesus sitting in an art gallery on a bed of flowers, eating doo doo

10. A Hootie and the Blowfish Greatest Hits album

11. A homeless man dressed as Jesus sitting in an art gallery on a bed of flowers, eating doo doo, covered with goats blood and saliva

12. A homeless man dressed as Jesus sitting in an art gallery on a bed of flowers, eating doo doo, covered with goats blood and saliva and singing "Let Her Cry" by Hootie and the Blowfish

[CuckingFunt]

12. A homeless man dressed as Jesus sitting in an art gallery on a bed of flowers, eating doo doo, covered with goats blood and saliva and singing "Let Her Cry" by Hootie and the Blowfish


I'd still have to call that art, even though we've FINALLY found something that deeply offends me.

Fucking Hootie.

[peewee's lovechild]

If it's not a diversion, then it's a complete misunderstanding of my point.

In the post I was responding to, Don Quixote made the assertion that looney, unethical, and immoral = not art. By default. I used the Manet as an example of the opposite specifically because it is now considered to be such an important work. I could have used Mapplethorp, Warhol, The Doors, or John Waters and the point would have still been valid.


If that was the point you made, then I would have to give it to you.

I can agree that it doesn't matter if art is immoral and what not.
What I can't agree with is the assertion that multiple abortions would be considered art.

There have been many artists that use their visual representations of reality in an offensive manner. I'm okay with that. But, an abortion is not a representation of reality. It is an actual act.

A painting of an abortion, or a sculpture of an aborted fetus is not the same thing as an actual aborted fetus..

[peewee's lovechild]

I'd still have to call that art, even though we've FINALLY found something that deeply offends me.

Fucking Hootie.

There is nothing wrong with Hootie.

Well, their first two albums anyway.

[CuckingFunt]

If that was the point you made, then I would have to give it to you.

I can agree that it doesn't matter if art is immoral and what not.
What I can't agree with is the assertion that multiple abortions would be considered art.

There have been many artists that use their visual representations of reality in an offensive manner. I'm okay with that. But, an abortion is not a representation of reality. It is an actual act.

A painting of an abortion, or a sculpture of an aborted fetus is not the same thing as an actual aborted fetus..

Performance art, however, is always going to be about that actual act.

[Don Quixote]

In the post I was responding to, Don Quixote made the assertion that looney, unethical, and immoral = not art.

That's not exactly what I said.

What I said was, when you have an exhibit such as these (dead dogs, fetuses, real human bodies obtained from only-God-knows where), it raises ethical questions that make aesthetic questions (e.g., is it good? is it even art?) irrelevant.

So, if you want to call it art, fine. I just don't think it's a salient question at this point.

[Don Quixote]

But, an abortion is not a representation of reality. It is an actual act.

A good observation! Again, the philosophy of art is not my field, but doesn't art have to represent something, and not be the actual thing?

Then again, we could turn around and say, well these (hypothetical aborted babies) represent "ambiguity, potential, the modernist corruption of life," or a million other things. So I don't know.

[CuckingFunt]

That's not exactly what I said.

What I said was, when you have an exhibit such as these (dead dogs, fetuses, real human bodies obtained from only-God-knows where), it raises ethical questions that make aesthetic questions (e.g., is it good? is it even art?) irrelevant.

So, if you want to call it art, fine. I just don't think it's a salient question at this point.

Your later post made that more clear, but the post I responded to just said that it wasn't art because it was unethical:


Yes, I'm with this guy. If this were real, it wouldn't be art. It would be stupid, unethical, and looney.

It would also break some serious moral rules, rules that are no less real merely because they are unwritten.

[peewee's lovechild]

Performance art, however, is always going to be about that actual act.

You're right.

I'll give you that.

However, I don't think having an abortion = performance art.
If it were, giving birth would be performance art.

After all, women give birth every day and I've never seen an art gallery set up in a nursery ward of a hospital.

Oh look, I'm typing.
It's performance art.

[CuckingFunt]

You're right.

I'll give you that.

However, I don't think having an abortion = performance art.
If it were, giving birth would be performance art.

After all, women give birth every day and I've never seen an art gallery set up in a nursery ward of a hospital.

Oh look, I'm typing.
It's performance art.

And, look at that, we're right back at the beginning of the argument! Congratulations.

[peewee's lovechild]

And, look at that, we're right back at the beginning of the argument! Congratulations.

There is no argument if you give creedence to an abortion = art, or performance art.

[Spurminator]

WE MUST PROTECT THE DEFINITION OF ART!!

[CuckingFunt]

There is no argument if you give creedence to an abortion = art, or performance art.


question the concept of "giving it credence as art." I don't think that's our decision to make.

And 'round and 'round we go.

[Don Quixote]

WE MUST PROTECT THE DEFINITION OF ART!!

Yes, I'd agree. I'm generally for protecting the definition of WORDS. This is the danger with performance art and other post-modern art forms. If we keep expanding the definition of the term "art," before you know it, art is everything, art is nothing, and the term becomes meaningless.

And indeed, we're sitting here wasting our time typing, and that's art. Why? Because I said it is. It's existential, and stuff.

[mrsmaalox]

I suppose if I dug deep enough I could accept this as conceptual art. But I can't accept anything that is not SINCERE as any form of art. This woman's project took place over a nine month period. I think we all know it is possible to get pregnant "the first time", but not always likely. After a real miscarriage, medical research shows that it takes 4 to 12 weeks for a woman's body to return to normal fertility. Did she get pregnant again immediately when her period stabilized? Was she ever really pregnant? Did she pass off a normal period as a miscarriage? Miscarriages of less than 12 weeks are usually nothing more than a "heavier than usual" period; not requiring the bathtub agony she supposedly videotaped. So for me to accept this as true conceptual art, I guess I would need proof of her pregnancies; otherwise, in my opinion, this is a ruse and then not art.

[monosylab1k]

Completely different situations, as there would be legitimate legal questions as to where someone would have gotten the dead bodies. This girl's display is no doubt tasteless, but it's not illegal.

How does that make a difference? Legal = art, but illegal = not art?

[CuckingFunt]

Yes, I'd agree. I'm generally for protecting the definition of WORDS. This is the danger with performance art and other post-modern art forms. If we keep expanding the definition of the term "art," before you know it, art is everything, art is nothing, and the term becomes meaningless.

And indeed, we're sitting here wasting our time typing, and that's art. Why? Because I said it is. It's existential, and stuff.

I see less of an attempt to expand the definition of "art" to include performance, and more of an attempt to narrow the definition of "art" to represent only certain genres or sensibilities.

[CuckingFunt]

How does that make a difference? Legal = art, but illegal = not art?

I never said that. I said that the two situations were different in terms of legality and were difficult to compare for that reason, but I made no comments on whether or not the illegal example would have been art.

[monosylab1k]

I said that the two situations were different in terms of legality and were difficult to compare for that reason

why is that?

[CuckingFunt]

why is that?

Original comment:


What if we were to put dead babies in this display? Or kids 4-5 years old in it?

My response:


Completely different situations, as there would be legitimate legal questions as to where someone would have gotten the dead bodies. This girl's display is no doubt tasteless, but it's not illegal.

I don't see how this could possibly be confusing. The legal implications ABSOLUTELY change the context of the two hypothetical situations. If someone were to have an exhibition that included toddler corpses, odds are that they and the gallery directors would be going to jail.

[peewee's lovechild]

And 'round and 'round we go.

It's only going 'round and 'round because you can't accept the fact that you claiming that it's art is giving it creedence as art.

Look, I know that your trying to speak up for "art" because you're an Art Major and what not.

But, there's just no way that an abortion can be considered art, or performance art as you will have it.

Step away from your art pedestal and look upon it in a sensible way.

What's next, faking a murder and calling it "performance art"?

Come on Funt, you're smarter than that.

[peewee's lovechild]

I don't see how this could possibly be confusing. The legal implications ABSOLUTELY change the context of the two hypothetical situations. If someone were to have an exhibition that included toddler corpses, odds are that they and the gallery directors would be going to jail.

The problem with that is that there is a completely credible and relevant argument that a fetus is a living thing.

There absolutely could be a legal argument here.

[monosylab1k]

The legal implications ABSOLUTELY change the context of the two hypothetical situations. If someone were to have an exhibition that included toddler corpses, odds are that they and the gallery directors would be going to jail.

So you're saying that while they're different only because you can get arrested for one and not the other, they're both art?

[easjer]

I suppose if I dug deep enough I could accept this as conceptual art. But I can't accept anything that is not SINCERE as any form of art. This woman's project took place over a nine month period. I think we all know it is possible to get pregnant "the first time", but not always likely. After a real miscarriage, medical research shows that it takes 4 to 12 weeks for a woman's body to return to normal fertility. Did she get pregnant again immediately when her period stabilized? Was she ever really pregnant? Did she pass off a normal period as a miscarriage? Miscarriages of less than 12 weeks are usually nothing more than a "heavier than usual" period; not requiring the bathtub agony she supposedly videotaped. So for me to accept this as true conceptual art, I guess I would need proof of her pregnancies; otherwise, in my opinion, this is a ruse and then not art.

Leaving aside your medical talk (which has some valid points and some unexplained points in the original article) - none of it matters.

The entire thing is performance art (or so she claims). The news release, the concept, everything was 'creative fiction' - a narrative.

In other words - a hoax.

[ididnotnothat]

LOL @ peewee

"i'm waiting for them"

then he tries to play the I don't care what you think card.


Can you possibly be anymore retarded?

I hate it when someone uses "retarded" to try to make a point. :rolleyes

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

I'm looking forward to the "art" exhibit that features the "artist" having self-induced spontaneous abortions with a starving dog standing there waiting to consume whatever comes out. A forward thinker, somewhere, will have to do this for the sake of art. Have to.

[Spurminator]

Yes, I'd agree. I'm generally for protecting the definition of WORDS. This is the danger with performance art and other post-modern art forms. If we keep expanding the definition of the term "art," before you know it, art is everything, art is nothing, and the term becomes meaningless.

Agreed, very dangerous. Think of the ramifications.

[mrsmaalox]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080418/ap_on_re_us/art_hoax;_ylt=Ajh5HHnCDCcoHG_5Ylg4yAztiBIF


Yale: Student's artwork purporting to show abortion a hoax By PAT EATON-ROBB, Associated Press Writer

HARTFORD, Conn. - A Yale University art student's claim that she induced repeated abortions on herself and used the blood for her senior project is false, school officials said after her account was published in the student newspaper.

Aliza Shvarts described the project in a story Thursday in the Yale Daily News. She said she artificially inseminated herself "as often as possible" while taking herbal drugs to induce miscarriages, the story said.

The account swept across blogs and media outlets before Yale issued a statement saying it investigated and found it all to be a hoax that was Shvarts' idea of elaborate "performance art."

"The entire project is an art piece, a creative fiction designed to draw attention to the ambiguity surrounding form and function of a woman's body," said Yale spokeswoman Helaine Klasky.

But in a guest column published in Friday's student newspaper, Shvarts insisted the project was real. She described her "repeated self-induced miscarriages," although she allows that she never knew if she was actually pregnant.

"The most poignant aspect of this representation — the part most meaningful in terms of its political agenda (and, incidentally, the aspect that has not been discussed thus far) — is the impossibility of accurately identifying the resulting blood," she said.

"Because the miscarriages coincide with the expected date of menstruation (the 28th day of my cycle), it remains ambiguous whether ... there was ever a fertilized ovum or not. The reality of the pregnancy, both for myself and for the audience, is a matter of reading," she wrote.

Shvarts told the newspaper she planned to display a work that consisted of a cube lined with plastic sheets with a blood-and-petroleum-jelly mixture in between, onto which she would project video footage of herself "experiencing miscarriages in her bathroom tub."

University officials said Shvarts' project included visual representations, a news release and other narrative materials. When confronted by three senior Yale officials, including two deans, Shvarts acknowledged that she was never pregnant and did not induce abortions, Klasky said.

"She said if Yale puts out a statement saying she did not do this, she would say Yale was doing that to protect its reputation," Klasky said.

Shvarts told the paper her goal was to spark conversation and debate on the relationship between art and the human body.

Andrew Mangino, editor-in-chief of Yale Daily News, said the newspaper published the story after receiving a news release about the project. A reporter interviewed Shvarts and other students and saw photos and video that she said was part of the art project, he said.

"At this point it's just he said and she said," Mingino said Friday. "The problem seems to be in the ambiguity of what each side is saying."

Shvarts could not be reached for comment. Her telephone number was disconnected and she did not respond to e-mails or a knock on the door at the address listed for her in the campus directory.

Groups for and against abortion rights expressed outrage over the affair.

Ted Miller, a spokesman for NARAL Pro-Choice America, called the concept offensive and "not a constructive addition to the debate over reproductive rights."

Peter Wolfgang, executive director of the Family Institute of Connecticut, an anti-abortion group, said his anger was not mitigated by the fact that Shvarts may never not have been pregnant. "I'm astounded by this woman's callousness," he said.

[CuckingFunt]

It's only going 'round and 'round because you can't accept the fact that you claiming that it's art is giving it creedence as art.

Look, I know that your trying to speak up for "art" because you're an Art Major and what not.

But, there's just no way that an abortion can be considered art, or performance art as you will have it.

Step away from your art pedestal and look upon it in a sensible way.

What's next, faking a murder and calling it "performance art"?

Come on Funt, you're smarter than that.

What am I defending or speaking up for?

My only argument -- in this thread, the dog thread, or any similar threads that may pop up in the future -- is that it is not up to you or I or anyone else to summarily decide that something isn't or can't be art just because we may not agree with what it's saying or how it's being said. That's it. You want to say that this girl's performance art is pretentious bullshit? I'll agree. You want to say that art itself, or the art world/community as a whole, is pretentious bullshit? You'll get very little argument from me.

I've yet to see a single counter argument that is supported by something more substantial that one's individual taste, personal policy, or comfort level. All of which are more than enough to influence one's opinion of or reaction to a particular artistic expression, of course, but not even close to enough to conclusively decide that it isn't a valid artistic expression.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

there's some heavy quote editing going on in here. must be a slow news day.

[CuckingFunt]

The problem with that is that there is a completely credible and relevant argument that a fetus is a living thing.

There absolutely could be a legal argument here.

The day Roe v. Wade is overturned, you've got a point. Until then, there is absolutely a legal difference.

[Fillmoe]

I'm not responding to the subject of the thread.

But I would just like to say that you all are ALWAYS bitching about something. Read at the top of the freakin Spurs forum and you will see that the quote boxes, multiple signatures, etc aren't staying this way. We had a choice, leave the forum down for days til we re-customized everything, or put it up as soon as it migrated and do the customization when we have time. We chose the latter.




loooooooooool...

mad kori is sexy...

[1369]

Well, art or not I am sure that this piece as well as the education and degree she will get from Yale will undoubtedly help her maximize her potential working the graveyard shift at the Wendy's drive through window.

[CuckingFunt]

So you're saying that while they're different only because you can get arrested for one and not the other, they're both art?

They could, indeed, both be someone's artistic expression.

That doesn't mean that I would support either one, however. And in the case of clear violations of the law, I would hope that the person in question would be fully prosecuted.

[CuckingFunt]

Well, art or not I am sure that this piece as well as the education and degree she will get from Yale will undoubtedly help her maximize her potential working the graveyard shift at the Wendy's drive through window.

God, save us from the special sauce.

[1369]

Found this on another site, thought he makes a pretty good point.


As an artist, I am constantly struggling to find ways to challenge the limits of my chosen medium, which is sperm, and push my audience toward a higher level of both cognition and meta cognition--to see, in other words, the art beyond the art, the way the art steps beyond being an object of "art," so to speak, and invokes a definition that calls into question the very fabric of life and existence and our species' interaction with the physical and emotional world. For example, my last piece, "Jerking Off On The Orange Line," was intended to push the boundaries of physical expression and inspire self-reflection among the three Catholic high school girls at the end of the car, whose expectation of a Metro ride without the opportunity to witness another human masturbating was challenged--I think, for the better. Its follow-up piece, "Running Pantless Through the Station," was a breathless exploration of the nexus where the tyranny of law enforcement intersects with the vibrant pulse of individuality and liberal expression. "My Cock In Her Sleeping Mouth," perhaps one of my most controversial pieces, explored the biological, social, physical, and emotional consequences of one-sided fellatio, and often misunderstood expression of deep, abiding affection. Its follow-up, "Ejaculate on Her Forehead," takes this a step further, calling into question the ideas of what it means to "own" ones own skin. Symbolically, in turning her white with my love, I am exploring complex issues of race and challenging my audience to question their own biases, prejudgments, and narrow world views.

[Fillmoe]

if i nut all over a womans face, using the womens face as a canvas and my sperm as the media.... would that be considered art? and cuckingfunt are you available to do that sometime between now and the end of the month

[CuckingFunt]

if i nut all over a womans face, using the womens face as a canvas and my sperm as the media.... would that be considered art?

It certainly could be.

Though it wouldn't be particularly innovative. It's been done. A lot. At various levels of respectability.


and cuckingfunt are you available to do that sometime between now and the end of the month

For you? No.