Lounge of Tomorrow - Miscarriage Art. Or, how to make a name for yourself very quickly

Lounge of Tomorrow (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/index.php)

- Daily Grind (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/forumdisplay.php?f=18)

- - Miscarriage Art. Or, how to make a name for yourself very quickly (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/showthread.php?t=7783)

Miscarriage Art. Or, how to make a name for yourself very quickly

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yale Daily News

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.

Story here.

But now she's saying she faked it:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fox News

A Yale student's stunning claims of repeatedly artificially inseminating herself and then taking drugs to induce miscarriages for her senior art project aren't true, the university said Thursday night.

Story here.

I had read about this. That is one seriously sick person.

I read that and never quite figured out what her point (if she had one) was anyway.

She said it was "not intended for 'shock value'" - but that rather seemed to be the case.

She can go fvck herself. And then, uh, somehow un-fvck herself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LSPoorEeyorick (Post 205360)

She said it was "not intended for 'shock value'" - but that rather seemed to be the case.

Yes, but shock in a way that seemed to fail to actually impart a coherent viewpoint on the subject of shock from the artist. Shock for shock's sake, and it really seems like she didn't even understand what her actions (or alleged actions) meant.

Undergraduate art majors with no clear message or focus to their results? Un-possible.

And yet - I have to applaud this misguided pushing of the envelope on limits of choice - even if fake.

I just get the feeling that the whole thing will have the world saying "only in America"...

Maybe because of the media's desensitisation of young people to horrific events like this (and other distasteful acts, ie: Saw, Hostel, Hannibal etc) - also the annual portrayal of vomiting, crapping, disembowelling etc as entertainment during Halloween season, the young folk don't see the disturbing side of portraying this kind of thing for "entertainment" or "art"

...just a theory.

Yeah, hard to comment really without seeing/experiencing the piece in context - the descriptions I've read indicate the piece is rather unsettling and not something someone experiences as an "oh how pretty" moment.

As a conceptual piece though, it does illustrate what one might be in the law to do - to use one's flesh as medium.