Last night Yale University released a press statement saying she never did any of those things and that "the entire project is an art piece, a creative fiction designed to draw attention to the ambiguity surrounding form and function of a woman’s body."
Then today, the Yale Daily News published an article saying that she DID impregnant and induce miscarriages.
But in an interview later Thursday afternoon, Shvarts defended her work and
called the University’s statement “ultimately inaccurate.” She reiterated that
she engaged in the nine-month process she publicized on Wednesday in a press
release that was first reported in the News: repeatedly using a needleless
syringe to insert semen into herself, then taking abortifacient herbs at the end
of her menstrual cycle to induce bleeding. Thursday evening, in a tour of her
art studio, she shared with the News video footage she claimed depicted her
attempts at self-induced miscarriages....
As more news outlets posted their stories online early Friday morning, Shvarts responded to the University’s second statement, asserting that her project was, in her words, “University-sanctioned.”
“I’m not going to absolve them by saying it was some sort of hoax when it wasn’t,” she said. “I started out with the University on board with what I was doing, and because of the media frenzy they’ve been trying to dissociate with me. Ultimately I want to get back to a point where they renew their support because ultimately this was something they supported.”
She did, she didn't... This is all confusing. Right now it's hard to separate the art from the controversy. Or maybe the controversy is the art itself.
Posts
8 comments:
That's awful for her. The university shouldn't have supported her in the first place if they were going to get so...jumpy about a little media attention.
But it is still confusing.
And I still don't know exactly what I think about it.
maybe she's the controversey...
I posted about an editorial she wrote on my blog but here's a link to it. http://www.yaledailynews.com/articles/view/24559
I gather it's meant to be intentionally ambiguous so the school denying it kind of ruins the meaning of the work.
I think the entire idea behind it is disgusting... regardless of if it's true or not.
but it is freedom of speech....
I immensely approve. I think she was trying to raise the issue that the only thing that separates menstrual discharge, miscarriages, and abortions from each other is a bunch of neofundamentalist Cloud-father and soul nonsense.
This state ownership of the uterus has gone on long enough. If she wants to do what she wants with her own womb in protest of the popular sentiment that what women do with their bodies is everyone's business but their own, then good for her.
Whoa! Jen, how about this for separating "menstrual discharge, miscarriages, and abortions from each other:" the fact that one is a natural cycle, one is a tragedy, and the last is infanticide.
Also, does a man have no rights to decide if he wants the child? Yes, the woman has to physically give birth, but what if the father is a loving, caring man who really wants a child, can afford to raise the child and pay the mother's medical bills? Should he not have some input in the process? Perhaps consent of the father -or- a court order allowing it should be required for abortions?
One final point, The so-called Neofundamentalist nonsense has been the dominant form of thought on earth for about the last 5,000 years, at least. Just because you happen to disagree with a religion does not mean that their views are nonsense and your radical communist left-wing immoral lunacy is correct.
"Goose," the last sentence of your comment is objectionable. I will not tolerate name calling on this blog. Personal attacks are not acceptable. Perhaps Jen could have stated things better, but she was not personally attacking anyone, just disagreeing with some beliefs. You have been warned. Please think more carefully before you comment again or I will start deleting. Thanks.
Jen - I disagree. Menstrual discharge is part of a natural cycle that women experience. Miscarriages are tragedies that no one wishes for. When women experience miscarriages, they are often devistated. It's not something women typically try to make happen. And abortion is technically murder.
This is not about "state ownership of the womb." This is about messing with human life... and yes, it is LIFE. More to the point - she is creating life simply to rid herself of it and turn it into "art"
Post a Comment