KC Hill
Dexter
Cibbuano
Paladin
Craig Hill
Oracle of DelphiYes, but is it art?
April 23rd 2007 08:10
Gunther von Hagen’s' ‘BODY WORLDS'
For those unfamiliar with this form of ‘art,’ I refer to a wandering exhibition of preserved human bodies and body parts. These bodies are kept from the inevidable ‘stench’ by a technique called plastination to reveal inner anatomical structures.
The question I pose is; Does Von Hagen have the right to call this display of chopped and plastisised humans, ‘art’? In it do we see the talent and passion that comes through in Carravaggio’s ‘paintings’ or the innovation and glimps into a new world as Monets portray? Or is it just abominable and sick?
I don’t doubt the fact that Von Hagen’s presentation of ones body systems, would not educate people about their own anatomy, so viewing this mans work from a medical point of view it could be seen as breakthrough. But is it art?
The shows have been rightly surrounded by much controversy all through their travels across the world. The main area of focus has been on a 8 month pregnant woman. The bottom of her torso has been cut to present to the public the fetus within.
It seems to me that Von Hagen was aware of the absence of actual ‘artwork’ in his exhibition, because he prepared exhibits, such as a man carrying his own skin (based on a 16th century drawing by Gaspar Becerra); a man on horseback holding his brain in one hand and the horse's brain in the other and a man kneeling in prayer, holding his heart in his hands, together giving an imaginitive ‘art’ feel to the exihbition. These exhibits may be seen by some as degrading to the deceased. Do you agree?
Imagine if this was real
For those unfamiliar with this form of ‘art,’ I refer to a wandering exhibition of preserved human bodies and body parts. These bodies are kept from the inevidable ‘stench’ by a technique called plastination to reveal inner anatomical structures.
The question I pose is; Does Von Hagen have the right to call this display of chopped and plastisised humans, ‘art’? In it do we see the talent and passion that comes through in Carravaggio’s ‘paintings’ or the innovation and glimps into a new world as Monets portray? Or is it just abominable and sick?
I don’t doubt the fact that Von Hagen’s presentation of ones body systems, would not educate people about their own anatomy, so viewing this mans work from a medical point of view it could be seen as breakthrough. But is it art?
The shows have been rightly surrounded by much controversy all through their travels across the world. The main area of focus has been on a 8 month pregnant woman. The bottom of her torso has been cut to present to the public the fetus within.
It seems to me that Von Hagen was aware of the absence of actual ‘artwork’ in his exhibition, because he prepared exhibits, such as a man carrying his own skin (based on a 16th century drawing by Gaspar Becerra); a man on horseback holding his brain in one hand and the horse's brain in the other and a man kneeling in prayer, holding his heart in his hands, together giving an imaginitive ‘art’ feel to the exihbition. These exhibits may be seen by some as degrading to the deceased. Do you agree?
| 28 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
Comment by Anonymous