Digg this
I originally wasn’t going to post this but it’s spun so far out of control that I feel like I have to comment on it.
Yale art major Aliza Shvarts just finished her senior thesis on performance art. Her medium? Abortion.
Over the course of nine months, she says she artificially inseminated herself with donated sperm and then induced miscarriages by taking herbal drugs. She videotaped each miscarriage and preserved the blood for display.
However, she says she didn’t believe it would shake anyone up.
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.”
Yeah effing right. The when this story hit the fan, Yale was compelled to say something about it, calling the project “a creative fiction” and reporting the whole project was a hoax.
Not so, says the art major herself:
Shvarts stood by her project, calling the university’s statement “ultimately inaccurate.”
…
But Shvarts reiterated Thursday that she repeatedly use a needleless syringe to insert semen into herself. At the end of her menstrual cycle, she took abortifacient herbs to induce bleeding, she said. She said she does not know whether or not she was ever pregnant.
“No one can say with 100-percent certainty that anything in the piece did or did not happen,” Shvarts said, “because the nature of the piece is that it did not consist of certainties.”
I honestly don’t know what to think, other than that it’s safe to say that people on both sides of the reproductive-rights debate are definitely scandalized.
I can kinda see why she would have had to be “artificially” inseminated. Isn’t there usually a lot of beer on campus? I guess beer goggles don’t come that thick. Coyote ugly indeed.
Do we really want this person reproducing anyway?
As an artist and part-time museum docent, I’ve always followed the idea that truly thought-inspring art does not need to be accompanied by a multi-page explanation telling you what to think about it. Just my not so humble opinion. Taking that idea further to relate it to this piece of drivel, truly provacative art does not need to be revolting in nature and sensibility to be meaningful and draw attention. This chick seems desperate to get that attention. Ergo, her mega-extreme measures taken to receive it, and her presumption in imagining that anyone remotely intelligent would want to see a video of her bleeding in a bathtub. And besides, aren’t there health laws now that govern the leaving of bloody equipment around in public places, WTH?! And now…the false nature ::coughliescough:: of the project was actually a part of the project???? This chick should be a politician. Probably will be. What a crock-o-crap, and from Yale of all places.
She wouldn’t be able to anyway. Not if she’s going to continue wearing those fringe boots/animal print shorts combos.
Why are activist types always yelling? I can hear ya know. I’m just ignoring you.
The worst thing about it all is that it just isn’t surprising anymore. Art. Yale. Need for attention. Just not surprising at all.
Good job twat. Give the govt the ammo they need to go through with making abortions completely illegal.
Don’t worry Igrowviolent. It doesn’t really work that way.
Sadly, you’re right Hurricane.
All the idiocy aside, are we really supposed to believe that her last name is Shvarts, which means ‘black’ in Yiddish?
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.”
An art piece on abortion is not meant to scandalize anyone? You’re an artist. Stand up for your art. Go out there and say what you really want to say. People don’t like the thought of sex during a period, much less videos of self-induced miscarriages and a preserved display of the blood. But this isn’t meant to scandalize? Just because you went to Yale and call yourself an artist doesn’t mean I’m stupid. If you want to be controversial, be controversial but don’t hide behind cliches when the sh-t hits the fan.
By the way, what is the intention of the piece?
Is putting boogers on a cup & letting them dry out in da hot sun as 2 cause some type of reaction considered art or is that scientifical xperrimentation?! That chick is a few fries short of a kids meal!!!
Agreed, that her piece was revolting. However, I applaud her… she is known, an H-list celebrity. If she wants to be a famous artist and activist, she has her foot in the door.
Not so Ling,…I’ve forgotten her name already.