It's hard for me to imagine anything more grotesque than Yale student Aliza Shvarts' abortion-based art project. (Backup URL.) It's like something out of a horror movie. The sheer barbarity and cavalier display of evil leaves me almost speechless.
Beginning next Tuesday, Shvarts will be displaying her senior art project, a documentation of a nine-month process during which she artificially inseminated herself ?as often as possible? while periodically taking abortifacient drugs to induce miscarriages. Her exhibition will feature video recordings of these forced miscarriages as well as preserved collections of the blood from the process.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.?
There's no "discourse" I'd want to have with this subhuman vermin. What she's done isn't illegal, but should be a capital crime. So yes, I'd be pleased to see the justice system put Aliza Shvarts to death. Since that's not likely, she should be cast out of society, shunned, ostracized, and abandoned.
The students and administrators of Yale should be ashamed of what their institution has become. This sort of evil has no place in our culture, contributes nothing to public discourse, and ultimately degrades our society when left unpunished. I hope the Yale alumni find some way to respond to the cruelty done in their name and supported by their money.
For the rest of us, take a long hard look at what our modern amorality has spawned: Aliza Shvarts is a vile creature who conceives human babies only to slaughter them for her amusement, and our society is left with no legal recourse thanks to the decades-long ascent of secular humanism. We should be ashamed of what we've become.
I'm ashamed, as an American, that such evil could be perpetrated in our midst and that I'm powerless to stop it. Pray for our country.
Update:
Color me dubious about the Yale art project story. In talking to a few knowledgeable docs this morning, the facts don’t add up very well. Self-insemination of the sort she seems to be claiming is no easy feat, and “herbal” abortifacients are extremely dangerous and not at all reliably effective. It’s highly unlikely that these two improbable elements would both be carried off successfully multiple times, and with no side effects. It’s more likely that her senior art project is to see how many people she can upset with a hoax.If it’s a hoax, it’s an abhorrent and disgusting one. If it turns out to be true, it’s of course all the more so and far worse. Either way, where are the adults at Yale?
What we see here is no different from Dennis Rader ("BTK": Bind Torture Kill) or the Zodiac killer, or Jack the Ripper, or any number of other serial killers. Shvarts is nothing more than a serial murderer. Her prey happens to be defenseless, weaker than she -- just like serial killers. She arranges them as art and collects mementos --just like serial killers. What I see here is a sociopathic serial murderer, nothing else. Unfortunately, she will not be imprisoned because our culture does not recognize fetus as life. She is perhaps more dangerous than a serial killer because she went to great lengths to create her own victims, only to take their lives. Other serial murderers simply stalk their victims. I would not be surprised if she attempts to murder again, either by her own womb or through some other means. Someone who is this disturbed will not stop here.
I reckon it's got to be a hoax -- if it isn't then Schvarts is dumber than the dumbest person I've ever met. That way it makes at least some sense as art... before I cottoned on that it was very unlikely to be genuine I was simply appalled, but once I reasoned that it was a most likely a hoax (which artists are allowed to do, I don't think "hoax" is quite the best word...) it really did some of the things that Schvarts said it should do.
For example, I don't think that abortion is the same as killing, and I certainly don't share DeuDuce's concern that a serial aborter is likely to progress to killing people who are already born; so why exactly was I appalled by it? (That's a rhetorical question: I know why you think I was appalled by it!)
It also portrays the human biological process (in particular the one which we hold the most sacred, reproduction is seen as mysterious and miraculous, whereas eg. digestion is just normal or even disgusting) as a purely industrial process that can be planned, controlled, repeated and interrupted at will, like a printing press or a factory line.
So it's potentially an excellent artistic concept. Artists are allowed to shock us. Goya's Saturn devouring his son is art of an older, more accepted form, covering some of the same ground. As a depiction of a mythical episode it is not expected to be considered "real", but if you follow the link I expect you'll be shocked nonetheless, even if you know that painting already. Now, I don't expect the work of an undergraduate to match the quality of a late-period Goya (and maybe Shvarts' art fails completely, I haven't seen it), but should the concept art of today be more restrained in scope than the representative art of the 19th century? Presenting it as a real documentary of an ethically troubling action is perhaps a lapse in taste, but that trick certainly incites a deep response. I'm not sure if it's really "art" if the deepest responses are from people like us who haven't even seen it -- it almost seems that the material piece is irrelevent. Perhaps it doesn't exist? Maybe this is some kind of meta- or viral art... art 2.0 perhaps. :)
Anyway, I'm sure that Shvarts is delighted that there have been repeated calls for her death. In the circles of modern art, a death threat is probably better than a top 1st from Yale.
The fact that you admitted you are pro-choice and appalled shows hypocrisy.
I don't think so, for a number of reasons.
1) Just because I'm appalled by something doesn't mean I think it should be illegal.
2) You ignore the difference between making an unfortunate choice as a result of unintended circumstances, with engineering that situation. It's like the difference between injuring an attacker in self defense, and deliberately goading a known aggressive man into attacking so that the appearance of self-defense can be used as an excuse to injure him.
3) Actually, all I said was that imo abortion != killing, which doesn't imply that I'm pro-choice. (I happen to be weakly pro-choice).
I think you're over-keen to find hypocrisy in those who you think you disagree with.