Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Myrkridia · Apr 10, 2002, 02:11 PM

ringo · Apr 10, 2002, 02:14 PM

<sarcasm>
Good to see someone defending our right to destroy art that looks kinda 'freaky'. Heck, it may be billed as 'educational', but I know the devil's behind it all.
</sarcasm>

malvolio · Apr 10, 2002, 02:22 PM

Unless he was an heir or close blood relative of one of the bodies on display, and could document that such a display was against the deceased person's wishes, his action was indefensible.
I assume that the subject matter of this "art" exhibition was clearly expressed in the publicity material. So anyone attending should have known what to expect.

ChaChi Boy · Apr 10, 2002, 02:25 PM

I have seen the art and it is actually nice. It is not what you are thinking, they look like plastic and ALL the people that are displayed donated their bodies.

Why did he bring his kids to the show?

cheerios · Apr 10, 2002, 02:25 PM

HOly cow, who would go see that!?!?! who would MAKE "art" like that, even?? Don't know as I'd go RUIN it, but it doesn't seem appropriate to take corpses, cleave their heads in two, and preserve them on display... :shudder:

ChaChi Boy · Apr 10, 2002, 02:32 PM

This is the art. Big whoop.
http://www.bodyworlds.co.uk/en/home.asp

G Barnett · Apr 10, 2002, 02:36 PM

Look on the bright side, guys.

At least it's not 'performance art.'

G Barnett

nonhuman · Apr 10, 2002, 02:47 PM

Personally, I really want to go see that at some point. I've seen a few of the exhibits on tv, and they're really amazing.

Myrkridia · Apr 10, 2002, 03:56 PM

Call me old fashion but I don't consider art to be pictures made of poo, or the dead remains of humans, animals, ect.

nonhuman · Apr 10, 2002, 04:02 PM

Originally posted by Myrkridia:
Call me old fashion but I don't consider art to be pictures made of poo, or the dead remains of humans, animals, ect.

I don't particularly consider it art, but I still find it to be fascinating and even *gasp* beautiful. I get that it's not for everyone, but the painstaking work that went into preparing the exhibition, the amount of time that was invested, the care taken in plasticising, colouring, and posing the figures, and the bodies themselves with all their exposed constituent parts, I find fascinating.

malvolio · Apr 10, 2002, 04:08 PM

Originally posted by Myrkridia:
Call me old fashion but I don't consider art to be pictures made of poo, or the dead remains of humans, animals, ect.

Hey, I'll take take it over Elvis portraits on velvet any day!

astronomix · Apr 10, 2002, 04:33 PM

It's not art. Just crap.

ChaChi Boy · Apr 10, 2002, 04:38 PM

Originally posted by astronomix:
It's not art. Just crap.

Exactly why you shouldn't go see it.

andi*pandi · Apr 10, 2002, 04:49 PM

well, why use real bodies, if not to shock people?

if you are a real artist, you can sculpt what you want. I think the proof is that this guy has no real talent, otherwise he could create his art instead of just skinning it.

It just reminds me of the movies where the serial killer is an artist and "sculpts" his victims, or kills people and hides the bodies within a clay sculpture... thus hiding the evidence. Sure, the bodies are donated... but ewwww.

lemme say that again: ewww.

Face Ache · Apr 10, 2002, 08:04 PM

It's not art - it's a display. There's nothing wrong with it. It's just not art.

C33 · Apr 10, 2002, 08:09 PM

one person's trash is another's treasure. don't like it? don't go see it.

i agree that we need to respect the dead, they once were living human beings who walked this earth and had people who loved them however, those in that exhibit donated their bodies, it's not like he dug them up randomly, without permission.

Face Ache · Apr 10, 2002, 08:19 PM

Digging them up randomly would be funnier.

Too Much Coffee Woman · Apr 10, 2002, 08:27 PM

a year or so back, in NYC there was this dude who showed his art collection.

in it, there was a collage/painting/sculpture of the Virgin Mary with pictures of dirty magazine vaginas pasted onto her with the entire painting being supported with Elephant dung.

everybody in nyc went to see it because the mayor tried to outlaw the art show and to be honest it was kind of neat when i saw it in person.

oh and there was glitter on the elephant dung too

ringo · Apr 10, 2002, 08:45 PM

Originally posted by Face Ache:
It's not art - it's a display. There's nothing wrong with it. It's just not art.

No offense, but there is nothing in this world that is not art.

Too Much Coffee Woman · Apr 10, 2002, 08:56 PM

Originally posted by ringo:


No offense, but there is nothing in this world that is not art.

i beg to differ, Mr.Ringo

not art.

ringo · Apr 10, 2002, 09:16 PM

Originally posted by Too Much Coffee Woman:


i beg to differ, Mr.Ringo

not art.

Respect! Nice Link.

I didn't say there was no bad art. I'd even risk calling the IcyHotStuntaz modern pop-folk art. Your great-grandkids will be seeing this kind of thing in museums one day.

[ 04-10-2002: Message edited by: ringo ]

jcadam · Apr 10, 2002, 09:41 PM

Yea, I won't go see the exhibit, dead bodies don't do anything for me.

jblakeh1 · Apr 10, 2002, 09:48 PM

well, why use real bodies, if not to shock people?

Well, most of the skeletons in biology classes are real. What is the difference?

If the donors agreed to having this done, I don't see anything wrong here. It is somewhat fascinating. I have to wonder if it isn't more of a science exhibit, though.

andymcdeee · Apr 10, 2002, 09:53 PM

Originally posted by Too Much Coffee Woman:


i beg to differ, Mr.Ringo

not art.

Damn. That was funny.

UNTeMac · Apr 10, 2002, 11:02 PM

If you don't like the idea, don't go see it. Art is like Love. You can't define it.
The exhibit is just bodies of people, long dead, who donated their remains to this exhibit. Unfortunately for the artist, most people apparently can't get past the *ick* factor.

"Free your mind."

MinivanH8R · Apr 11, 2002, 12:26 AM

"It's art!"
"No it's not art, it's pure and total crap!"
"It's a masterpiece!"
"It's not a masterpiece, it's worthless garbage!"

People have had the exact same conversation over every piece of art ever created. Big deal. There are critics, and then there are the people who just accept the art for what it is.

If you ask me, the real low life p.o.s. isn't Gunther, but the moron who vandalized the exhibit. Did he not have anything better to do but to vandalize someone else's property because he was scared for his children?

deeg · Apr 11, 2002, 12:52 AM

Originally posted by MinivanH8R:

If you ask me, the real low life p.o.s. isn't Gunther, but the moron who vandalized the exhibit. Did he not have anything better to do but to vandalize someone else's property because he was scared for his children?

agreed...odd that he turned up to a gallery with a pot of paint and a blanket and they still let him in..

rob5243 · Apr 11, 2002, 02:18 AM

This type of art is interesting, but it's creeping me out.

lurkalot · Apr 11, 2002, 02:41 AM

Originally posted by deeg:


agreed...odd that he turned up to a gallery with a pot of paint and a blanket and they still let him in..

Maybe it was performance. His paint and blanket added something to the object like the accidental breaking of the large glassy bride...

oh and is it me or did someone else notice a lot of other corpses in the lounge? Rat infested in LA ,stuffed in London and unknown destinations for the living wondering where they will end up after life. Neither one of these 2 would be my first choice.

[ 04-11-2002: Message edited by: lurkalot ]

M�lum · Apr 11, 2002, 06:31 AM

It's a clever money maker.

Because it's such a "controversial" concept people discuss about it and become curious.

It's a fascinating technique, but in my opinion it's the opposite of art.

I suppose it is a coincidence the exhibition was most successfull in Germany and Japan.

Jan Van Boghout · Apr 11, 2002, 06:45 AM

It's not art, it's supposed to be an exhibition to show all aspects of the human body.
We visited it with our school some time ago, it was soooooooooo boring� And the giant horse smelled like hell,

Oh well, it was only a few hours and we were allowed to explore Brussels in the afternoon. (without the teachers�we had a good time

)

l'ignorante · Apr 11, 2002, 07:00 AM

It's not art because IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ART!!! So anybody considering this 'entartete Kunst', please inform yourself.

If it was Art, I'd still like it..

Cipher13 · Apr 11, 2002, 07:19 AM

I don't see a problem. It's scientific. It's not sick. If it was art, I still wouldn't see a problem.

This dude had NO RIGHT to do what he did - if he doesn't wanna see it, fine, he doesn't have to look at it.

His opinion isn't the only one that matters.

If I wanna see something, *I'll* decide. Nobody will decide for me.

ringo · Apr 11, 2002, 10:15 AM

Originally posted by l'ignorante:
It's not art because IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ART!!!

Intent means nothing to someone like me...

astronomix · Apr 11, 2002, 04:05 PM

It's not art because IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ART!!! So anybody considering this 'entartete Kunst', please inform yourself.
If it was Art, I'd still like it..

This is funny, but in German and Dutch 'Kunst' means 'Art'... So I guess this is supposed to be Art.

l'ignorante · Apr 12, 2002, 03:01 AM

'entartete kunst' is the NAZI description of 'degenerated' art. I just used it because people here seem easily shocked. But they're shocked wrongly, it is not art and so it is also not "degenerated" art.

Spheric Harlot · Apr 12, 2002, 07:56 AM

Originally posted by M�lum:
It's a clever money maker.

Because it's such a "controversial" concept people discuss about it and become curious.

It's a fascinating technique, but in my opinion it's the opposite of art.

I suppose it is a coincidence the exhibition was most successfull in Germany and Japan.

Explain that last sentence, please.

I can't help the feeling that it's meant to be a slur of some sort, but I can't for the life of me figure out what it's supposed to mean.

-s*

anarkisst · Apr 12, 2002, 09:10 AM

jeez, that stuff is pretty tame next to what has been exhibited here for decades. All these are medical exhibits not art exhibits.

Can even get a calendar...

l'ignorante · Apr 12, 2002, 11:22 AM

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:


Explain that last sentence, please.

I can't help the feeling that it's meant to be a slur of some sort, but I can't for the life of me figure out what it's supposed to mean.

-s*

Maybe he means that since Germany and Japan have mechanically and scientifically eliminated a couple of million lives in the past century, they probably have some sort of fascination for death, scientifically exposed. It makes sense.

� · Apr 12, 2002, 08:35 PM

� is upset that an anonymous corpse in which so much work was put to give it a meaningful lesson for the living, was vandalised by someone who couldn't understand it.

eep! · Apr 12, 2002, 09:41 PM

Originally posted by �:
� is upset that an anonymous corpse in which so much work was put to give it a meaningful lesson for the living, was vandalised by someone who couldn't understand it.

eep! is concerned as to why � refers to him/herself in the third person.

oh, and "art is useless, go home." it was a painting in french. fogot who it's by.

Catalyst236 · Apr 13, 2002, 01:46 AM

Originally posted by Myrkridia: Thank god someone did something

I too would like to thank the un-named man for offering his skin back to his creator, and saying in essence, " Here, old man. I offer back to you this cursed facade. Does this please you? It was cruel of you to punish me for the sins of others before me and poison my eyes with it's reflection. I don't need it anymore. I will no longer be ashamed of my nakedness. Here I shall stand in my bloody splendor. I am free."

And thanks to the artist for preserving the moment.

An true act of bravery.
" Wow" is right.

fearman111 · Apr 13, 2002, 10:03 AM

Provoking a reaction is not the same as saying something profound.

Just because no one understands something, that doesn't make it art.

Honestly, I'm getting really tired of no-talent hacks stooping lower and lower, using shock to hide their lack of ability and imagination (this applies to Tom Green as well).

fm111

Catalyst236 · Apr 13, 2002, 04:22 PM

Originally posted by fearman111:
Provoking a reaction is not the same as saying something profound.

Just because no one understands something, that doesn't make it art.

Honestly, I'm getting really tired of no-talent hacks stooping lower and lower, using shock to hide their lack of ability and imagination (this applies to Tom Green as well).

fm111

When was it decided that noone understands it? Did you take a poll or something?

goatnet · Apr 13, 2002, 08:14 PM

I think it is a wonderful exhibit.

From an art view:

The human body is an incredibly complex machine. It thinks, sustains existance, reproduces, entertains, manipulates, along with a thousand other things.

One of the hardest tasks I ever did in art class was to study "Color Atlas of Anatomy" by Rohen/Yokochi (Second Edition). The human body is very hard to draw, if you understand that essentially no 2 bodies are the same. The effects of age, geographical location, heredity all factor into the equation. I spent many hours studying the book, which was very graphic (it's used by medical students, I think), but it provides so much insight toward the human body.

Our bodies are truly a marvel, which we pretty much take forgranted. I think a display as such really gives the public an idea of what human anatomy is possibly capable of.

l'ignorante · Apr 13, 2002, 08:53 PM

Originally posted by fearman111:
Provoking a reaction is not the same as saying something profound.

Just because no one understands something, that doesn't make it art.

fm111

MACFLY !!!!

It's not art !

Face Ache · Apr 14, 2002, 05:22 AM

I've changed my mind. My body is art. The beer. The pizza. The hamburgers. The pot. All of these things have gone into what I am today. This doesn't just happen randomly people.

When I die I want my flabby white ass* on display for the whole damned world to see. I think it would give the kiddies something to aspire to.

*My ass ain't really that flabby. It was a joke.