Corpses on display

Augmerson

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/entertainment/arts/newsid_1887000/1887976.stm

I've seen this before in Germany, but now it's come to England. This isnt like the type of thing you'd see in a History musem(The Tollmund man s.c.?)Example being a woman with her womb cut open to reveal a 8 month old child.

What do you think? If it came to Ireland, would you go see it?

Sand

It strikes me as disgusting. Most "art" these days seems to be about either some crap (What about that bed they were calling a modern masterpiece) or something going for pure shock value this freak show obviously is. Still, Im sure hell have plenty of visitors along with the obligatory "modern masterpiece" descriptions.

azezil

I see nothing wrong with it... i think it'd be worth a look.

DadaKopf

If you look at Vesalius' 16th century masterpiece, The Fabritia, he concentrated on understanding the human body through dissection and illustrated them in a distinctly artistic way which was unprecedented for the times. Are you going to call that 'disgusting' as well?

[Edit: Fabritia pictures - http://mesl.itd.umich.edu/w/wantz/vesd1.htm]

And as for your 'shock value' comment: yes, that's exactly what art is expected to do. Massaccio's development of perspective shocked people, you know. Monet shocked people. All important art shocks.

Why don't you inform yourself about art before you go having opinions you know nothing about?

Clintons Cat

I was shocked at the concept initially then curious.
I would like to see it before i pass judgement.
Aparently they let you touch some of the exhibits ooh.

Official site of bodyworlds http://www.bodyworlds.co.uk/en/aktuelle.htm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/gall/0,8542,669680,00.html

adnans

looks very interesting. i would go and see it.

the corpses were donated by the people who died, not anyone else. also at the exhibition you can sign away your corpse after you die to Commerzbank (the bodies dont belong to the artist, but to the bank which is underwriting the exhibition). if someone is an unreligious person i dont think they would mind what happens to thier body once they are dead.

i've always been fascinated by the human anatomy and how it works and i wouldnt miss this if it ever comes to ireland.

adnans

BuffyBot

Originally posted by adnans

if someone is an unreligious person i dont think they would mind what happens to thier body once they are dead.

I know I wouldn't, however, I'm not sure how many people would want to see my body

i've always been fascinated by the human anatomy and how it works and i wouldnt miss this if it ever comes to ireland.

Definitely, I would go and see it too. The body is the peak of nature's perfection - that is art.

Sand

If you look at Vesalius' 16th century masterpiece, The Fabritia, he concentrated on understanding the human body through dissection and illustrated them in a distinctly artistic way which was unprecedented for the times. Are you going to call that 'disgusting' as well?

Well, Id say that The Fabritia is an interesting book. With interesting pictures. Book. Pictures. Its not exactly dead bodies put on display for the viewing pleasure of the public and the attempt of a man to gain public notice. So in short no, It would not be correct to assume that I consider the Fabritia disgusting because I consider the above to be disgusting.

And as for your 'shock value' comment: yes, that's exactly what art is expected to do. Massaccio's development of perspective shocked people, you know. Monet shocked people. All important art shocks.
Why don't you inform yourself about art before you go having opinions you know nothing about?

Yes, the great downfall of art. Its stopped being about communicating something and become about "shock". Howard Stern must be a artistic genius by that definition.

I am curious though as to how you can learn to have an opinion about art? You have an opinion about it, or you dont. Learning to have an opinion on art? Surely you mean borrowing someone elses opinion and calling it your own?

From the article it appears that many of the people used were taken from a Siberian mental institute.

Obviously a fair few people will be curious and many will no doubt find the display fascinating. Some may even wish to donate their bodies to such artistic endevours. Good for them in my opinion. Far fewer would be happy should their mothers, fathers, grandparents or children donated their bodies, I would imagine.

Mercury_Tilt

This post has been deleted.

DadaKopf

Sand:

The point is that both this exhibition and the Fabritia involved the dissection of human bodies for the purposes of display. The bodies dissected for the Fabritia were the bodies of criminals who didn't consent to their fate (but it was assumed they were going to Hell anyway) and that, by today's standards, weighs heavily on the consensual fashion that this exhibition was carried out. However I consider this a moot point as we're talking about two different world views, past and present.

Judging from your response, expressing your disgust at the exhibition, it's fair to infer that you've been shocked by the whole thing. Even if you're remotely disgusted by it and are willing to discuss it means von Hagens has done his job. Repulsion is only a hair's breadth away from fascination.

And like The Fabritia, the purpose was of both pedagogic and artistic in the sense that it hopes to get across how amazing a machine the human body is. The fact that the collection's home is Heidelberg University confirms the exhibition's educational merits.

The only difference between von Hagens' exhibition and Vesalius' Fabritia is that instead of using a book to describe the workings and wonder of the human body, he uses the human body itself.

smiles

Erg! I must say that I was a bit horrified by the article, ok, if the corpses were freely given then its ok, but the bit about the mental instution used to be used to get bodies, thats a little bit dodgy...

That said, i'd still go and see it.

<< Fio >>

Mills

Having read the article I'd be interested in seeing this if it ever comes to Ireland or if I'm in the UK, looks good. I don't know whether I'd call it art or not until I'd see it myself, but I'd go anyway, seeing something in the flesh as it were gives a new perspective on it, as opposed to looking at diagrams in science books.

Sand

Even if you're remotely disgusted by it and are willing to discuss it means von Hagens has done his job.

Again I expect art to be more than another circus side show of freaks. Personally Im not disgusted by the display itself. Im disgusted by the use of people in such a fashion. I find it degrading and sad. People have been reduced to nothing more than easel and paint, for a tired work that you yourself admit has already been done in the Fabritia (which was of far more value given the times it was created in). This display is only noteworthy because of the way it exploits corpses, to lure people who have a certain macabre fascination with it. You might say that the people concerned are long gone - either to heaven (if youre religious), or to some inky black nothingness (if youre not) - and thus their bodies are just husks.

The problem is society in general has strong views on respect for the dead - graverobbing, necrophilia, mutilation of corpses and so on - all are frowned on at the very least. That at least shows that we are concerned for the mere husks. From that point of view I find the work disgusting (that view has been repeated by those Ive mentioned this to). Id never donate myself for it, and Id be appalled if any friend or family member did, and Id imagine anyone would be at the very least disturbed at the prospect of bringing their children to a museum and saying "Look theres Grandma, or whats left of her".

At the end of the day that disgust is merely my opinion. Visit the exhibition if you want, sign up your corpse if you want, whatever. The people who are on display signed up for this, except maybe for that grey area over the Siberian mental patients. There is also the question of when the baby got around to signing its release form to be used in such a fashion.

sceptre

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/entertainment/arts/newsid_1895000/1895049.stm


Someone's already attacked it with a hammer

Shinji

A small point missed by both Dadakopf and Sand - the creator, who is a professor of anatomy and biology, doesn't consider himself an artist and flatly denies that the exhibition is art - any more than exhibits of dead stuffed animals or various cutaways of human anatomy in science museums are art.

The whole point of the thing is to be an education and an insight into human and animal anatomy. Yes, some people take offence to it, but I fail to see the problem - for christs sake, this stuff sloshes around inside you in semi-liquid form every day, what's the problem with actually finding out what it's like?

I went along to it last week, and found it downright fascinating - and very educational. I'd reccomend anyone who isn't squeamish go along - hell, I'd reccomend anyone with kids to bring them, and show them around the exhibits with one of the guidebooks pointing out things to them. It's not horrific or disgusting, it's what's inside your body; so is the human body disgusting, now?

DadaKopf

Yeah, it's pretty weird. All the articles I read made von Hagens seem like some kind of artist (or 'artist') - which I found strange - but the programme on the television about the exhibition made it look entirely different. Just like Shinji said.

Nevertheless, I think my point is still valid to a certain extent. The Fabritia was an educational book, but it displayed the human body artistically.

I presume, in that case, that the problem people have with Bodyworks is that the human body has been dissected and displayed in an 'artistic' way.

But you're entirely right, Shinji: are we supposed to view the human body as disgusting?

Sand

Personally Im not disgusted by the display itself. Im disgusted by the use of people in such a fashion. I find it degrading and sad. People have been reduced to nothing more than easel and paint,