Chinese artist Xiao Yu is defending himself against a complaint by a visitor to an exhibition of his in Switzerland (sorry, no cite yet). The complaint takes issue with the artist’s use of a human foetus head grafted onto the body of a bird to complete an item of his art.
The complainant wants to know whether a foetus was killed specifically for this artpiece, an accusation the artist denies - he says it comes from remains of a medical collection and dates back to the 1960s.
Assuming the artist is telling the truth, and I suspect he is, has he nonetheless “crossed the line” where art is concerned, or should there be no such line (as long as no laws are broken, of course)?
An eternal question, I know, but how do dopers stand on this particular case?
Pretty strange, but in recent years it seems that artists have been going out of thyeir way to shock viewers with outrageous materials – various types of dung, cut up animal caracasses, bodily fluids. The fetus part -as- art material seems to be in the progression. Fac it, when nudity and obscenity are common fodder for movies, you really have to work at it to freak people out. And a lot of artists see it as their business to freak people out.
Is there a line? How long until we see someone putting their own severed finger on a canvas? I think people would seriously protest at severed adult cadaver parts.
“Cadaver” suggests the parts came from an already-dead body. Why would that offend people more than the foetus head used in this instance?
There have been protests at the Body Worlds exhibitions, which consist of whole preserved human corpses, flayed and posed running, riding horses, etc. But on the whole, people have been fascinated with it, and it has been very successful in many locations around the world.
I’m firmly of the “no line as long as no laws were broken” opinion.