Abortion = Art? Okay... what?
- Thread starter blindpassion
- Start date
lipstickandhate
Well-known member
Oh Shimmer, obviously you do not get her art. The uncertainty of pregnancy is PART OF THE AMBIGUITY that is the project.
Duh. How could you be so pedestrian.
Duh. How could you be so pedestrian.
Obreathemykiss
Well-known member
I am not surprised Yale is doing all of this damage control and demanding a written confession that she didn't actually do all of this. I also read that if they do show her project, she cannot use human blood. I am so pissed I missed out on this crazy lady's youtube video.
blindpassion
Well-known member
Quote:
I watched it (the video) and it was really like, just her standing on this crate in the middle of some hall yelling about... well thats the thing, it was just crap, you spent most of the time trying to figure out what she was actually talking about, she was just kind of talking loudly about how we have to "fight this fucking institution" or something, and what she was saying was just jumble it didnt make any sense.
Originally Posted by Obreathemykiss
I am not surprised Yale is doing all of this damage control and demanding a written confession that she didn't actually do all of this. I also read that if they do show her project, she cannot use human blood. I am so pissed I missed out on this crazy lady's youtube video. |
I watched it (the video) and it was really like, just her standing on this crate in the middle of some hall yelling about... well thats the thing, it was just crap, you spent most of the time trying to figure out what she was actually talking about, she was just kind of talking loudly about how we have to "fight this fucking institution" or something, and what she was saying was just jumble it didnt make any sense.
Obreathemykiss
Well-known member
Weird! It's funny her "advisor" took it down...I'm sure they're afraid of media murder. I looked up her advisor and saw some of the "art" she has done. Strange things, IMO.
Anyway, I thought you would all be interested to know her art project isn't being placed on exhibit because she has continued to keep her silence.
She loves the attention so I would guess she's seeking an alternate location for this "piece". Bet she's not gettin' that grade!
Anyway, I thought you would all be interested to know her art project isn't being placed on exhibit because she has continued to keep her silence.
She loves the attention so I would guess she's seeking an alternate location for this "piece". Bet she's not gettin' that grade!
CantAffordMAC
Well-known member
I really wish it was clear on whether its real or fake.
Doesn't matter too much though. Either way she's sick
Doesn't matter too much though. Either way she's sick
blindpassion
Well-known member
Quote:
So so true.
| Originally Posted by CantAffordMAC
I really wish it was clear on whether its real or fake. Doesn't matter too much though. Either way she's sick |
So so true.
MAC_Whore
Well-known member
Further discussion about the concept:
Quote:
Quote:
| By Jennie Yabroff | NEWSWEEK May 5, 2008 Issue A German artist wants to install a terminally ill patient in a gallery as an exhibit. In Nicaragua last year, an artist displayed a starving dog, tethered just out of reach of food, as conceptual art. In New Haven, Conn., an artist claims to have made multiple attempts to impregnate herself and then induce miscarriages as a work of art. All these artists say their projects are intended to start conversations. But apart from all the shouting about indecency and insensitivity, are any ideas actually being exchanged? When Gregor Schneider, who previously installed sunbathers in cages on an Australian beach, announced his search for dying patients, gallery owners were quick to say they would refuse the exhibit. Meanwhile, animal-rights activists are demanding that Costa Rican artist Guillermo Vargas be banned from the upcoming Central American Biennial art exhibition after Vargas displayed the dog tied up in a Nicaraguan gallery. And last week Yale administrators banned senior Aliza Shvarts's induced-miscarriages exhibit, which includes sheeting smeared with what she says is her blood, unless she admits it was a hoax. Shvarts has refused to talk to the media, with the exception of a statement in the Yale Daily News, in which she wrote, "for me, the most poignant aspect of this representation … is the impossibility of accurately identifying the resulting blood." According to Shvarts, because it would be unclear if the blood in the work was the result of a miscarriage or her menstrual cycle, the piece is ultimately about the narrative she has constructed. (Doctors have pointed out, however, that blood samples could be tested for pregnancy hormones.) Feminist artists such as Judy Chicago and Ana Mendieta have long used blood as a medium; performance artists (Chris Burden, Marina Abramovic) have manipulated their bodies in the name of art. However, Shvarts's coy refusals to verify how much, if any, of the project actually took place aligns her more with conceptual provocateurs such as Vargas and Schneider. When word of Shvarts's piece spread earlier this month, both pro-choice and pro-life groups denounced the work. But now that Yale has banned the piece, some critics have taken up Shvarts's cause as a free-speech issue. In the Yale Daily News, art lecturer Seth Kim-Cohen wrote "the University has decided not to allow the rest of us to make up our own minds. I am considerably more troubled by their action than by hers." If galleries do refuse to show Schneider's work, or the Biennial bans Vargas, the art community will most likely defend them in similar fashion. These controversies highlight the problem with art as a means toward fostering conversation—the resulting discourse is rarely about the artist's stated topic, or even about art. What constitutes free speech is always an important conversation, but it is unclear what the Shvarts controversy adds. Andres Serrano's "Piss Christ," which depicts a crucifix submerged in urine, was condemned by Jesse Helms; Rudy Giuliani tried to shut down a museum show that included Chris Ofili's painting "The Holy Virgin Mary," which incorporated elephant dung. In both cases, supporters asserted the artists' rights to freedom of expression trumped the relative artistic merits of the work. As wrongheaded and unsubtle as Shvarts's piece may be, Yale comes out as a censoring bully. The real loser, though, is an already art-averse public, who will doubtless take the Shvarts saga as proof that all an aspiring artist need do for celebrity is create a piece offensive enough to be banned by an institution. More important, there are real topics that get lost amid all the hand-wringing about indecency. Earlier this month Italian artist Pippa Bacca began hitchhiking from Italy to the Middle East wearing a wedding dress, for a work intended to foster "marriage between different peoples and nations." Bacca was picked up by a trucker in Turkey, who raped and strangled her, then dumped her naked body. The conversation Bacca wanted to inspire about international unity has been overshadowed by her death, underscoring the difficulty for any artist to dictate the terms of discourse about a work. But even if it wasn't the conversation Bacca intended, the question of why a woman still cannot travel alone safely in much of the world seems a more valuable topic of discussion than whether a college student lied about her menstrual cycle. |
Obreathemykiss
Well-known member
I read in an article (don't remember which one and of course I can't find it now) that Yale went into her art studio and found no traces of human blood. Why isn't she talking now? If she had the balls to entertain the world with her project, why doesn't she have the balls to stand up for it now?
lipstickandhate
Well-known member
Quote:
A terminally ill patient as an art exhibit? These people have too much time on their hands. They need a job that doesn't involve masturbatory pondering of the meaning of life.
Honestly, as loathsome as abortion art and starving dog art are, this would be 10X more terrible in my opinion. To take advantage of a person at one of the most vulnerable points in their soon-to-be-over life makes me sick.
I think about my mother's terminal illness and how frail and delicate she was before she died... she was like an angel. I really would kill someone if they'd tried to exploit that for self-aggrendizing, controversial "art."
| Originally Posted by MAC_Whore
Further discussion about the concept: |
A terminally ill patient as an art exhibit? These people have too much time on their hands. They need a job that doesn't involve masturbatory pondering of the meaning of life.
Honestly, as loathsome as abortion art and starving dog art are, this would be 10X more terrible in my opinion. To take advantage of a person at one of the most vulnerable points in their soon-to-be-over life makes me sick.
I think about my mother's terminal illness and how frail and delicate she was before she died... she was like an angel. I really would kill someone if they'd tried to exploit that for self-aggrendizing, controversial "art."
ri0tdorque
Well-known member
Ok I'll admit I did not read the article but the mere concept that "abortion is an artform" sends so many bad messages it makes my stomach turn and I'm a fairly active pro-choice advocate.
Being though one myself I can honestly say that I saw nothing artful about it. They asked me if I wanted the ultrasound picture and I literally was boggled by the fact that she'd even ask that. Don't get me wrong I also think it's one of the best decisions I've made in my lifetime and do not at all regret my choice at the time but it's in not way artful. At all. Whatsoever.....
Being though one myself I can honestly say that I saw nothing artful about it. They asked me if I wanted the ultrasound picture and I literally was boggled by the fact that she'd even ask that. Don't get me wrong I also think it's one of the best decisions I've made in my lifetime and do not at all regret my choice at the time but it's in not way artful. At all. Whatsoever.....
Obreathemykiss
Well-known member
So here's the latest news in case ya'll are interested-I got this from yaledailynews.com with bold print I added through the article to outline the main points
Shvarts submits alternate project
While new exhibit prevents senior from failing, veracity of original project remains uncertain
Thomas Kaplan
Staff Reporter
Published Thursday, May 1, 2008
Event.observe('emailFriendForm', 'submit', function(event) { new Ajax.Updater('emailFriendStatus','/articles/email/24743', {asynchronous:true, evalScripts:true, onComplete:function(request) {new Effect.Highlight('emailFriendStatus', {duration: 2.0});}, parameters:Form.serialize('emailFriendForm'), requestHeaders:['X-Update', 'emailFriendStatus']}) }, false);
Aliza Shvarts ’08 has submitted another art piece in place of her controversial senior project that purportedly documented nine months of self-induced miscarriages, the University said this week.
The announcement — which came Monday, a week and a half after Shvarts’ initial project inspired nothing short of a national controversy — puts to rest the question of whether the Davenport College senior’s art exhibit would ever be displayed. Last week, the University forbade Shvarts from installing it unless she admitted the piece was a work of fiction. She did not.
In the announcement, University spokeswoman Helaine Klasky said Shvarts requested permission to substitute a different piece of art in place of what Klasky termed “the performance piece” she had originally planned as her senior project.
“We welcomed the solution that Aliza proposed,” Klasky said, “as we had been unable to determine with clarity whether Ms. Shvarts had in fact undertaken actions injurious to her health in carrying out her original project.”
The director of undergraduate studies in the School of Art, Henk van Assen, approved her request, the statement said.
But the matter of whether Shvarts’ project actually entailed nine months of self-inseminations and repeated miscarriages, as Shvarts claimed, or was merely ill-conceived performance art, as the University said, remains unresolved.
Shvarts did not return telephone messages this week and has not spoken publicly since defending her project in an op-ed piece in the News more than a week ago.
The announcement ended an eight-day stalemate between Shvarts and the University, which had refused to allow her project to be displayed unless she met several conditions — namely, that her installation would not include human blood and that she would admit her story of self-inseminations and pregnancies was not true.
Yale College Dean Peter Salovey outlined those demands in a written statement on April 20. Shvarts never commented publicly, and the University repeatedly offered nothing more than to say that nothing yet had been determined about whether her project would ever be displayed. But it was clear that the saga would not drag on forever: The Undergraduate Art Senior Project Show closes today.
But no agreement came.
On Tuesday, the show opened. A flock of reporters and photographers from various outlets rushed to it — but Shvarts’ project was nowhere to be found.
As the impasse dragged on, it appeared most likely that if any agreement was to come between Shvarts and the University, the beginning of this week was when it was most likely to happen. On Monday, faculty from the School of Art were scheduled to critique and evaluate her project, as is customary with senior projects for undergraduate art majors.
With no project on display, it was believed that Shvarts would have received a failing grade for her senior project. The project is a requirement for art majors, according to the Yale College Programs of Study.
Perhaps that possibility, observers mused, would be enough to compel her to agree to Salovey’s demands. Whether or not the possibility of failing played into her decision was unclear; van Assen has not commented publicly on the matter, nor has Shvarts’ adviser, School of Art lecturer Pia Lindman.
But whether Shvarts would have failed may have been a moot point, since her failure to complete the Art major may not have affected her eligibility to receive a diploma.
According to the online Yale College directory, Shvarts is also enrolled in the English major. As long as she had at least 36 other credits to her name — not including ART 495, the senior project course — she would have remained eligible to graduate next month as an English major.
Shvarts’ replacement exhibit is not on display in Green Hall at her request, officials said.
As much as Monday’s announcement provides some closure to the ongoing melodrama surrounding the exhibit, it offered no hint of what will ultimately happen to Shvarts’ original project. As Shvarts described it, she planned to display a four-foot-wide cube made from PVC piping that would be shrouded in hundreds of feet of plastic sheeting and hung from the ceiling of the gallery. Between the layers of the plastic sheeting would be coatings of Vaseline mixed with the blood collected over the previous nine months, Shvarts said.
At the time, Shvarts said she had no plans to display her work elsewhere if the University would not permit it to be installed at Green Hall.
Yet whether or not this announcement really will end the controversy over Shvarts’ project still remains to be seen. The saga generated more media inquiries than anything since the tempest over the admission of former Taliban diplomat Rahmatullah Hashemi in 2006, a Yale official said.
Within hours of its posting on the Web site of the News on April 17, The Drudge Report linked to the story about Shvarts’ project, an article that was prompted by a news release the student sent the previous day. The hundreds of thousands of readers who immediately flocked to the site — crashing it repeatedly throughout the day — were only the beginning.
Over the last two weeks, the story has received widespread coverage abroad and in major national publications in the U.S., including The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal and The Los Angeles Times, not to mention countless blogs.
Writing April 24 in The Journal, Michael J. Lewis went so far as to pose the question, “Has any work of art been more reviled than Aliza Shvarts’ senior project at Yale?”
The coverage continues this week, although Yale’s public statements on the matter have been removed from their prominent place on the home page of the Office of Public Affairs.
The latest publication to weigh in on the saga is Newsweek, which includes a story on Shvarts’ project in its May 5 edition. “Yale’s abortion artist is the latest to try — and fail — to start a conversation,” it declares.
On the magazine’s Web site, the story was the second most-read on Tuesday.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opinions?
Shvarts submits alternate project
While new exhibit prevents senior from failing, veracity of original project remains uncertain
Thomas Kaplan
Staff Reporter
Published Thursday, May 1, 2008
Event.observe('emailFriendForm', 'submit', function(event) { new Ajax.Updater('emailFriendStatus','/articles/email/24743', {asynchronous:true, evalScripts:true, onComplete:function(request) {new Effect.Highlight('emailFriendStatus', {duration: 2.0});}, parameters:Form.serialize('emailFriendForm'), requestHeaders:['X-Update', 'emailFriendStatus']}) }, false);
Aliza Shvarts ’08 has submitted another art piece in place of her controversial senior project that purportedly documented nine months of self-induced miscarriages, the University said this week.
The announcement — which came Monday, a week and a half after Shvarts’ initial project inspired nothing short of a national controversy — puts to rest the question of whether the Davenport College senior’s art exhibit would ever be displayed. Last week, the University forbade Shvarts from installing it unless she admitted the piece was a work of fiction. She did not.
In the announcement, University spokeswoman Helaine Klasky said Shvarts requested permission to substitute a different piece of art in place of what Klasky termed “the performance piece” she had originally planned as her senior project.
“We welcomed the solution that Aliza proposed,” Klasky said, “as we had been unable to determine with clarity whether Ms. Shvarts had in fact undertaken actions injurious to her health in carrying out her original project.”
The director of undergraduate studies in the School of Art, Henk van Assen, approved her request, the statement said.
But the matter of whether Shvarts’ project actually entailed nine months of self-inseminations and repeated miscarriages, as Shvarts claimed, or was merely ill-conceived performance art, as the University said, remains unresolved.
Shvarts did not return telephone messages this week and has not spoken publicly since defending her project in an op-ed piece in the News more than a week ago.
The announcement ended an eight-day stalemate between Shvarts and the University, which had refused to allow her project to be displayed unless she met several conditions — namely, that her installation would not include human blood and that she would admit her story of self-inseminations and pregnancies was not true.
Yale College Dean Peter Salovey outlined those demands in a written statement on April 20. Shvarts never commented publicly, and the University repeatedly offered nothing more than to say that nothing yet had been determined about whether her project would ever be displayed. But it was clear that the saga would not drag on forever: The Undergraduate Art Senior Project Show closes today.
But no agreement came.
On Tuesday, the show opened. A flock of reporters and photographers from various outlets rushed to it — but Shvarts’ project was nowhere to be found.
As the impasse dragged on, it appeared most likely that if any agreement was to come between Shvarts and the University, the beginning of this week was when it was most likely to happen. On Monday, faculty from the School of Art were scheduled to critique and evaluate her project, as is customary with senior projects for undergraduate art majors.
With no project on display, it was believed that Shvarts would have received a failing grade for her senior project. The project is a requirement for art majors, according to the Yale College Programs of Study.
Perhaps that possibility, observers mused, would be enough to compel her to agree to Salovey’s demands. Whether or not the possibility of failing played into her decision was unclear; van Assen has not commented publicly on the matter, nor has Shvarts’ adviser, School of Art lecturer Pia Lindman.
But whether Shvarts would have failed may have been a moot point, since her failure to complete the Art major may not have affected her eligibility to receive a diploma.
According to the online Yale College directory, Shvarts is also enrolled in the English major. As long as she had at least 36 other credits to her name — not including ART 495, the senior project course — she would have remained eligible to graduate next month as an English major.
Shvarts’ replacement exhibit is not on display in Green Hall at her request, officials said.
As much as Monday’s announcement provides some closure to the ongoing melodrama surrounding the exhibit, it offered no hint of what will ultimately happen to Shvarts’ original project. As Shvarts described it, she planned to display a four-foot-wide cube made from PVC piping that would be shrouded in hundreds of feet of plastic sheeting and hung from the ceiling of the gallery. Between the layers of the plastic sheeting would be coatings of Vaseline mixed with the blood collected over the previous nine months, Shvarts said.
At the time, Shvarts said she had no plans to display her work elsewhere if the University would not permit it to be installed at Green Hall.
Yet whether or not this announcement really will end the controversy over Shvarts’ project still remains to be seen. The saga generated more media inquiries than anything since the tempest over the admission of former Taliban diplomat Rahmatullah Hashemi in 2006, a Yale official said.
Within hours of its posting on the Web site of the News on April 17, The Drudge Report linked to the story about Shvarts’ project, an article that was prompted by a news release the student sent the previous day. The hundreds of thousands of readers who immediately flocked to the site — crashing it repeatedly throughout the day — were only the beginning.
Over the last two weeks, the story has received widespread coverage abroad and in major national publications in the U.S., including The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal and The Los Angeles Times, not to mention countless blogs.
Writing April 24 in The Journal, Michael J. Lewis went so far as to pose the question, “Has any work of art been more reviled than Aliza Shvarts’ senior project at Yale?”
The coverage continues this week, although Yale’s public statements on the matter have been removed from their prominent place on the home page of the Office of Public Affairs.
The latest publication to weigh in on the saga is Newsweek, which includes a story on Shvarts’ project in its May 5 edition. “Yale’s abortion artist is the latest to try — and fail — to start a conversation,” it declares.
On the magazine’s Web site, the story was the second most-read on Tuesday.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opinions?
OK Haute Girl
Member
I think this chick is a serious whack job, not even going to lie.
Sushi.
Well-known member
an abortion is the last resort, not an art project.
it seems like every "artist" these days thinks if they do anything shocking/inhumane or cruel it can be classed as art. Unfortuantly they dont realize they are just disgusting talentless individuals.
Some say shes just displaying what she believes is art, well can we murder people randomly on the street and call it art? no, because these things are NOT ART.
it seems like every "artist" these days thinks if they do anything shocking/inhumane or cruel it can be classed as art. Unfortuantly they dont realize they are just disgusting talentless individuals.
Some say shes just displaying what she believes is art, well can we murder people randomly on the street and call it art? no, because these things are NOT ART.
iheartcolor
Well-known member
How could she even preserve 9 months worth of blood? Does she have access to specific medical supplies needed for bodily fluid preservation?
I mean - if she even DID impregnate herself and miscarry on purpose - how many times could that have *really* happened over the course of 9 months?
What a total idiot. How is she even attending Yale?!
-Lauren
I mean - if she even DID impregnate herself and miscarry on purpose - how many times could that have *really* happened over the course of 9 months?
What a total idiot. How is she even attending Yale?!
-Lauren
KitCat007
Active member
I believe in free choice. I know ppl who have had abortions and there tales sound like nightmares. They live with the choice they made everyday and have had to come to terms with the choice that they made, it wasn't easy and if they could go back in time they of course would have never gotten pregnant in the first place(yes I know it was their fault to begin with). But to get pregnant on purpose just to have an abortion is SICK, it is beyond sick. This woman needs to be in a mental facility not an art school.
adela88
Well-known member
let me get this straight?!
the stupid whore got herself pregnant on purpose to abort- im pro choice
but that is murder.
if i literally come across that lously excuse for human life, i would literally kill her.
the men who were the fathers should have a little chat with her.
the stupid whore got herself pregnant on purpose to abort- im pro choice
but that is murder.
if i literally come across that lously excuse for human life, i would literally kill her.
the men who were the fathers should have a little chat with her.
MACnificent_grl
Member
Wow!!!
