Abortion: Social Issue or Shock Art?
by Kelly
There’s an article in Bitch magazine entitled, “Point/Counterpoint: Art or Bloody Shame.” In this piece, two writers discuss whether or not a Yale student’s senior art project is merely “shock art” or “fodder for anti-choicers.” Basically, a student named Aliza Shvart created a performance piece that entailed, over a nine month period, repeated attempts at artificial insemination and self-induced miscarriages – all of which was recorded on video. If that wasn’t enough, Shvart intended to show her own blood from the miscarriages mixed with Vaseline between plastic sheets.
Gross, huh? According to the artist her goal was “to spark conversation and debate on the relationship between art and the human body.” Call me prudish or old-fashioned, but this doesn’t seem like art to me. However I don’t want to get into a debate about what is or isn’t art. I want to talk about abortion.
Bitch writer Jennifer McDaniel makes a good point that Shvart’s artworks, “have left pro-choice advocates in the unenviable position of grudgingly defending the student’s right to use her body in any gruesome way she wants.” This raises a controversial question: how far are pro-choicers willing to defend the right to privacy? Shvart is exercising her right to freedom of expression: she is, after all, choosing to artificially inseminate herself, choosing to video tape herself miscarrying, and so on.
The problem lies in the frivolity of her actions. I believe that when women become pregnant and then choose to abort their fetus, it is because they have carefully weighed the consequences of their actions. They are making an educated decision about their bodies and their lives. Shvart, on the other hand, is reducing such an important facet of human life to what can only be called “shock art”. Do I believe she is a baby murderer? No, because I don’t believe life begins at conception. Do I think she is wrong to tape her miscarriages? No, because she is entitled to do what she wants in the privacy of her own home. However, I agree with Yale’s decision to ban her artwork; it is, after all, a private institution and her artwork is not sensitive to the gravity of the issues at hand: motherhood, abortion, choice, and women’s right to privacy.
Most problematic is that Shvart’s art feeds into the misconception that people who are pro-choice relish the thought of “murdering innocent babies” and enjoy provoking their pro-life counterparts. This couldn’t be further from the truth. Although many (including John McCain) believe that pro-choice = pro-abortion, the reality is that pro-choicers just want women to be able to make their own decisions about their body without the government or other people’s interference. Shvart’s actions are protected by this notion but they certainly are not promoted or supported by the pro-choice cause. It’s just like with freedom of speech – you are allowed to use hateful language by law but most people engage in self-censorship out of respect to other people’s feelings. A woman aborting her fetus is a private matter; displaying a video of your self-induced miscarriages on a college campus is not. Shvart’s art is shocking, yes, but it is also offensive and of questionable taste. Her video could have a harmful effect on women who have experienced involuntary miscarriages. Furthermore, she seems to make a mockery of the entire abortion debate: not only does she paint pro-choicers as careless and reckless, but she provokes pro-lifers who honestly believe she is murdering numerous human beings. No matter which side you are on in this debate, I think we can agree that Shvart’s shock art adds unnecessary controversy to an already controversial social issue.
What do you think of Shvart’s performance art? Am I being too dismissive of her “artwork”? Is the thought of video-taping induced miscarriages disgusting to you or morally reprehensive? Please weigh in.
Related posts:
Perez Hilton
Huffington Post
i read this article in bitch the other day! i had heard about it before then, but after reading the article i felt so disturbed.
no i don’t think you’re being unreasonable. this “piece” is disgusting. and maybe its okay because it’s “art,” but it’s a dangerous way to display an innocent assumption.
<33 mermaid
@ mermaid — Yeah I just got my copy in the mail and I felt compelled to write about it. The art piece itself grosses me out a lot (I’m pretty squeamish about blood) and the fact that the artist is so careless in how her work will be interpreted kind of pisses me off.
Thanks for commenting!
dollface, I would usually agree that life doesn’t necessarily begin at conception. But I think there’s a difference in that case and that is this woman knowingly conceived (through artificial semination) so she could kill the potential life that was there. Well, I don’t know… that doesn’t sound right as I just typed it out. But there’s just this nasty feeling to me that she is a kind of baby-murderer–and I’m pro-choice. I can’t explain why I feel that way. It’s just the fact that she knows she’s creating life and then willfully destroying it. Maybe these are my parent’s conservative indoctrinations creeping up again.
Either way though you’re right that she’s just giving material to the anti-choice people and giving hell to the pro-choice people. It’s creating discussion-but it’s going to create the kind that takes away her right to do this to her body. And considering what an extreme case this is, she’s kind of fucking over all pro-choice women.
I’m pro-choice and I think each to their own – if this is what Shvart wants to do with her body, then she can.
However, I don’t think she’s really thought about the repercussions. Induced miscarriage? Not exactly healthy, whether you want kids later on or not. Plus she is going to lose a lot of respect from pro-lifers, pro-choicers who are grossed out and the general public. She will be known for the rest of her life as ‘that abortion girl’, even if later in life she wants to be taken more seriously for her artwork. I actually feel quite sorry for her – sure it’s something that’s never been done before, but i doubt anyone is ever going to look at it and say “Wow – that’s brilliant”.
My personal thoughts are that life does begin at conception and I could never abort a fetus because I do consider it murder. But I respect the choices of other women. My disgust at this ‘art’ is the same as disgust at any destruction – if she was killing small animals and sticking the blood to plastic everyone would be outraged, but because it’s ‘just a fetus’ she is excused.
Mind you, I also think as far as the ‘shock’ value of it goes, articles on blogs like this are probably exactly the publicity she was looking for – lets all just look the other way.
@ Dollyann — I think I know what you mean. The fact that she is purposefully attempting to become pregnant JUST so she can abort it doesn’t sit right with me. I definitely view it less as destroying an actual “baby” and more as just harmful for her body. In the article I read she “repeatedly” inseminated herself and induced miscarriage over a short period of time. That doesn’t seem very natural or good for the body.
@ Shannon — I respect your personal views on abortion. I think you have a very tolerant viewpoint, especially considering you think life begins at conception.
I see your point about discussing this “shock art” on a blog…it probably was exactly what she wanted. However, I do feel a little bad about the fact that this *will* haunt her career for life. In this day and age even facebook can be a liability. Imagine having your image and name over a ton of blogs and magazines calling you a baby murderer or, as you put it, “that abortion girl”. Ouch. But maybe she doesn’t care?
Ms. Shvart should aquaint herself with the painting “My Birth,” by Frida Kahlo.
Or read Margaret Sanger’s descriptions of her nursing practice in the Lower East Side of Manhattan.
A careful perusal of the DSM-IV might reveal that Ms. Shvart’s behavior arranged itself into a readily identifiable pathology long before she began laboring under a misconception.
By the way, do the donors have a right to know what their hapless gametes are being used for?
http://picturesqueflawless.blogspot.com/2010/03/video-grandmother.html
top free great funny video.