Copulating cadavers turn stomachs in Berlin

[Molested Sock]

Thursday May 7, 10:01 PM
Copulating cadavers turn stomachs in Berlin

BERLIN (AFP) - A new exhibition featuring preserved dead bodies having sex opened in Berlin on Thursday with critics saying a maverick German anatomist dubbed "Doctor Death" has gone too far this time.

The couple, part of Gunther von Hagens's exhibition "The Cycle of Life", is the "low point in his tastelessness", Michael Braun, culture expert from the conservative CDU party, told AFP.

Von Hagens said his copulating couples show the sexual act in "bracing clarity".

The exhibits, of four "consenting donors", are in a separate room accessible only to over-16s.

One couple, because of the process used, "is reminiscent of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), as well as Leonardo da Vinci's anatomical drawing, 'Coition of a Hemisected Man and Woman (1492)'," he said in a statement.


The exhibition "offers a deep understanding of the human body, the biology of reproduction, and the nature of sexuality".

The dead bodies are plasticised, a process invented by Von Hagens involving skinning bodies to display the naked muscles, nerves and tendons underneath, and preserving them with a synthetic resin.

Van Hagens is no stranger to controversy and his many critics accuse him of deliberately shocking people in order to gain publicity, rather than furthering science as he claims.

In 2002 he conducted Britain's first public autopsy in 170 years despite the risk of arrest.

Three years ago he opened a factory-cum-museum in eastern Germany manufacturing "plastinated" sections of cadavers to supply researchers and medical students and charging visitors to watch the process.

"I am firmly convinced that he just breaks taboos again and again in order to make money," Kai Wegner, another CDU lawmaker, told AFP. "It is not about medicine or scientific progress. It is marketing and money-making pure and simple."

It appears to work, with Von Hagens's touring "Body Worlds" exhibition drawing millions of visitors around the world.

http://nz.entertainment.yahoo.com/090507/8/c79z.html
I think it is a perverse corrupt grotesque needless mindless inane waste of space and time also attention seeking and close the low point of todays so called advanced society, if not of all human culture.

But then again perhaps it's thinking like this which will progress us to new leaps and bounds of thinking and we will progress into a new philosophical age.

[Yootopia]

But then again perhaps it's thinking like this which will progress us to new leaps and bounds of thinking and we will progress into a new philosophical age.

You have to be fucking kidding me.

As to this - shock art for the sake of shock art.

[Tubbsalot]

I voted sick art, but honestly, who cares? It's not like you're being forced to see it, and the bodies were donated by their former owners.

And this is hilarious:

"I am firmly convinced that he just breaks taboos again and again in order to make money," Kai Wegner, another CDU lawmaker, told AFP. "It is not about medicine or scientific progress. It is marketing and money-making pure and simple."

Yes. How unusual it is for a person to do shocking things in order to make money. Has this guy been living under a rock for his entire life?

[Heaven Hieghts]

I retract this earlier comment, it was quite ignorant for me to say that.

[Tratvia]

I voted sick art, but honestly, who cares? It's not like you're being forced to see it, and the bodies were donated by their former owners.

Quite. All von Hagens wants is fame/notoriety. Ignore him and he'll go away.

[Rhalellan]

But then again perhaps it's thinking like this which will progress us to new leaps and bounds of thinking and we will progress into a new philosophical age.

You have to be fucking kidding me.

As to this - shock art for the sake of shock art.

Pretty much sums it up for me.

[Muravyets]

I saw one of the Body Worlds exhibitions at the Museum of Science in Boston. I didn't find it shocking or tasteless at all. I didn't see a lot of other people having a problem dealing with it the day I went, either. The exhibition included both artistically arranged cadavers -- some of which were aesthetically more successful than others -- and preserved specimens of organs in varying stages of health or disease.

What Hagens does is just the latest in a long tradition of medical-science-as-art, and the artful arrangement of cadavers to make various points. His work also combines references to many social and psychological attitudes and expectations, prejudices, fears, notions of life and beauty, and other classic artistic themes.

It's not really light entertainment as modern audiences are used to, but I really don't get what's all so shocking about it. I saw bodies similarly preserved -- using a different technique, obviously -- that were made that way almost 200 years ago in the basement of a church in Naples. They were from the collection of an anatomist who was a member of the family whose church it was. He was the guy who preserved them. That same church holds the Veiled Christ, one of the most significant sculptures in the world. Art and science in the same building.

On the science side, there's the famous Mutter Museum, which in my opinion, is a much more disturbing collection than anything Hagens does.

And let's not forget such ancient practices as the Buddhist monks and Bon shamans of the Himalayas, who make flutes, prayer beads, cups, and other tools out of human bones, donated for the purpose.

People have been playing around with corpses to make decorative stuff for centuries. Why does Hagens get everyone's knickers in a twist?

EDIT: I did not vote because I have not seen the work in question, so I cannot judge it.

EDIT2: And as for his commercial gimmicks -- do you think what he does is cheap? He's got to pay for it somehow.

[Milks Empire]

It would be one thing if he were displaying it only to scientists studying the topic. Showing that off to the general public makes me question his sanity.

[Muravyets]

It would be one thing if he were displaying it only to scientists studying the topic. Showing that off to the general public makes me question his sanity.

Why?

[Velkya]

What the hell is a 'culture expert'?

Anyways, it doesn't bother me. If the people whose bodies are presented consented, and people want to see the exhibit , I don't see any reason why people's squeamishness and personal (dis)tastes should get in the way. Art's in the eye of the beholder, so I say, bring on the plastic dead copulation.

[Gelgisith]

It would be one thing if he were displaying it only to scientists studying the topic. Showing that off to the general public makes me question his sanity.

I disagree. IMO, if anyone, everyone, not just scientists, should benefit from such things for their edification.

As long as the people whose bodies are used consented to this, i see no reason to condemn it.

[Bokkiwokki]

How unusual it is for a person to do shocking things in order to make money.

This about sums it up. Someone wants to make money, and has found out that shocking things make you money, and has developed a craft that makes it easy to make shocking things to make money. So what's wrong with that?

As long as it isn't shoved down our throats by some form of government wacko thinking this should be displayed in public spaces "because it's ART!!!!", I'm okay with it.

[Prince Chula]

As long as the people whose bodies are used consented to this, i see no reason to condemn it.

Well, I agree with this quote.
Furthermore, everybody knows what they are going to see, right? They don't have to see if thay don't want to see.

Anyway, I think the age limited (16 years old) is quite too low. I guess 18 or 20 should be OK

PS I vote for sick art

[Rejistania]

Well, I agree with this quote.
Furthermore, everybody knows what they are going to see, right? They don't have to see if thay don't want to see.

Anyway, I think the age limited (16 years old) is quite too low. I guess 18 or 20 should be OK

PS I vote for sick art

It is surely somewhat sick art, but then, I think it does serve a purpose in remindung us that we are all like that biological mortal beings It has a philosophical point to make. I think 16 is okay as age. You can vote in municipal elections in that age, so why not being able to see these acts. From what I have heard softcore porn on TV is also free for those of the age of 16 and higher.

[SaintB]

"I am firmly convinced that he just breaks taboos again and again in order to make money," Kai Wegner, another CDU lawmaker, told AFP. "It is not about medicine or scientific progress. It is marketing and money-making pure and simple."

Yes. How unusual it is for a person to do shocking things in order to make money. Has this guy been living under a rock for his entire life?

He's a lawmaker. To be a lawmaker you MUST spend 20 years under a rock of which at least 5 of them must be spent with your head firmly lodged within your anus.

[Milks Empire]

It would be one thing if he were displaying it only to scientists studying the topic. Showing that off to the general public makes me question his sanity.

Why?

The way it was described reeks of it straddling, if not crossing, the line between having educational merit and porno for necrophiliacs.

[Prince Chula]

Well, I agree with this quote.
Furthermore, everybody knows what they are going to see, right? They don't have to see if thay don't want to see.

Anyway, I think the age limited (16 years old) is quite too low. I guess 18 or 20 should be OK

PS I vote for sick art

It is surely somewhat sick art, but then, I think it does serve a purpose in remindung us that we are all like that biological mortal beings It has a philosophical point to make. I think 16 is okay as age. You can vote in municipal elections in that age, so why not being able to see these acts. From what I have heard softcore porn on TV is also free for those of the age of 16 and higher.

Well, I don't know much about other country. In my country, the age you can vote in municipal elections is 18.

I agree with the quote "serve a purpose in remindung us that we are all like that biological mortal beings " but, again, it's up to the individual's point of view. Someone, who can come up to the thought like you, must be quite well-educated.

I doubt that those without education can think like that.

[Muravyets]

It would be one thing if he were displaying it only to scientists studying the topic. Showing that off to the general public makes me question his sanity.

Why?

The way it was described reeks of it straddling, if not crossing, the line between having educational merit and porno for necrophiliacs.

That is the way it is described by a news reporter and a person who did not like it. If you have not seen yourself, you're not really in a position to judge it, are you? And if you do not know Hagens and are not a psychologist, you're not really in a position to judge whether his motivation is sane or not.

So, having disposed of any potential factual basis for the statement, is there a reason in general why you think that displaying this work to the public would be not a sane act?

[Muravyets]

Well, I don't know much about other country. In my country, the age you can vote in municipal elections is 18.

I agree with the quote "serve a purpose in remindung us that we are all like that biological mortal beings " but, again, it's up to the individual's point of view. Someone, who can come up to the thought like you, must be quite well-educated.

I doubt that those without education can think like that.

That strikes me as a rather prejudiced assumption.

Do you think people cannot contemplate their own death/mortality unless they learn how to in school? Do you think the uneducated are unaware that they are going to die someday? Does your country include courses on contemplating death in the public schools? At what grade? Because none of my schools did.

Speaking as an artist, I detest this elitist notion that only the supposedly "educated" can appreciate art. It's bullshit. I know plenty of "educated" people -- many of them are directors of galleries and museums -- who are blithering morons when it comes to understanding art. And I have personally witnessed people who appear to have had little or no prior exposure to fine art or the higher sciences express rather profound insights when they see something that interests them.

Education gives you things to think about. It does grant the ability to think.

To me, the commonly expressed objection to art that the uneducated masses cannot understand it and will be shocked and (presumably) damaged in some way by that shock is little more than an excuse to both censor art and insult the poor and working classes at the same time.

[Prince Chula]

Well, I don't know much about other country. In my country, the age you can vote in municipal elections is 18.

I agree with the quote "serve a purpose in remindung us that we are all like that biological mortal beings " but, again, it's up to the individual's point of view. Someone, who can come up to the thought like you, must be quite well-educated.

I doubt that those without education can think like that.

That strikes me as a rather prejudiced assumption.

Do you think people cannot contemplate their own death/mortality unless they learn how to in school? Do you think the uneducated are unaware that they are going to die someday? Does your country include courses on contemplating death in the public schools? At what grade? Because none of my schools did.

Speaking as an artist, I detest this elitist notion that only the supposedly "educated" can appreciate art. It's bullshit. I know plenty of "educated" people -- many of them are directors of galleries and museums -- who are blithering morons when it comes to understanding art. And I have personally witnessed people who appear to have had little or no prior exposure to fine art or the higher sciences express rather profound insights when they see something that interests them.

Education gives you things to think about. It does grant the ability to think.

To me, the commonly expressed objection to art that the uneducated masses cannot understand it and will be shocked and (presumably) damaged in some way by that shock is little more than an excuse to both censor art and insult the poor and working classes at the same time.

I might be prejudice as you said but ,come on, let's think about the percentage of those who can think and those who can't think in both group.
I think some of your quote is absolutely true, but not all of yours.
Because of my job, I have a chance to see a lot of people, vary from those who have never study in a class to those who have a Ph.d.
I admit that among many good guys, there's still a bad guy (and vice versa too.)
It's true, those who have never study in a class sometimes know more than me in a certain field

I don't know about your country so please excuse me if what I am going to say is wrong.
In my country, smoking and drinking alcohol are still a problem. I will use these as an example.

Unfortunately, from my experience, in a term of number accident cause by alcohol consumption, the number is much more higher in the former group - those with uneducated (can't says the word statistical significant since I haven't checked it yet - although I want to say)

How can those who can't think of their own life (by drinking + drive a car = accident) think about that philosophy?

You might says that it's unfair to judge all of those by some of them. You're right, in this case, that I might be prejudice.

and well, there IS a courses on contemplating death in school (at least in my school) about grade 8 or 9 I think (It's a topic about the religious and what they thought)

Lastly, sorry if some of my word or sentence may make you angry, I didn't mean that (really).

PS sorry for my (very) poor English, I'm not a native speaker and I don't use it much in a daily life.

[Saint Jade IV]

I do think that it is sick, repellent and various other synonyms. But, that being said, people do these things because they want publicity and money. If the cadavers donated themselves for this purpose, then there should be no problem.

[SaintB]

I do think that it is sick, repellent and various other synonyms. But, that being said, people do these things because they want publicity and money. If the cadavers donated themselves for this purpose, then there should be no problem.

I think they were donated before they were cadavers. If I had a cadaver walk in and donate itself to science or art anywhere near me I would get out my zombie killin' tools.

[Saige Dragon]

If the sun is too bright, why keep staring at it?

Having seen von Hagens's Body World before, where it did contain section on pregnancy (with shockingly, real foetus'), I don't see any problem with this exhibition what-so-ever. I don't see how it is perverted, none of the displays are shown in malicious or disturbing poses. So he's got a new display up, that happens to contain sex, a natural part of life.

[Prince Chula]

I do think that it is sick, repellent and various other synonyms. But, that being said, people do these things because they want publicity and money. If the cadavers donated themselves for this purpose, then there should be no problem.

I think they were donated before they were cadavers. If I had a cadaver walk in and donate itself to science or art anywhere near me I would get out my zombie killin' tools.

WoW, you are so brave.
If I were you, I would run as fast as I can.

[SaintB]

I do think that it is sick, repellent and various other synonyms. But, that being said, people do these things because they want publicity and money. If the cadavers donated themselves for this purpose, then there should be no problem.

I think they were donated before they were cadavers. If I had a cadaver walk in and donate itself to science or art anywhere near me I would get out my zombie killin' tools.

WoW, you are so brave.
If I were you, I would run as fast as I can.

I'm not brave, I'd just rather face death fighting off the undead hordes than die running away.