Yale art student Aliza Shvarts delivered a one-two punch to the media on Thursday, beginning with the announcement of her senior project: an exhibition chronicling a nine-month period during which she impregnated herself "as often as possible" with semen from voluntary donors then videotaped herself inducing miscarriages and preserving the bloody byproducts thereof. "I hope it inspires some sort of discourse," Shvarts was quoted as saying in the Yale Daily News. She got her wish in spades. The announcement sent shock waves through the blogosphere, eliciting disgust and outrage from every quarter, expressed via headlines on the order of "The Art of Murder" and "Aliza Shvarts Is a Monster."
Hours later came an announcement from the Yale University Office of Public Affairs stating that the art project was just that -- art. "The entire project is ... a creative fiction designed to draw attention to the ambiguity surrounding form and function of a woman’s body," read the statement by Yale spokesperson Helaine Klasky. "She stated to three senior Yale University officials today, including two deans, that she did not impregnate herself and that she did not induce any miscarriages."
The statement went on to acknowledge that had they been real, Shvarts' actions would have "violated basic ethical standards and raised serious mental and physical health concerns." It concluded by defending Ms. Shvarts' right to express herself, a right she can certainly be said to have exercised to the fullest.
Update:
• Shvarts Disputes Yale Statement, Says Project Is Real
Sound Off: According to Yale, Aliza Shvarts' project is a 'creative fiction.' But is it art?
1) Yes. 2) No. 3) Don't know.
Read more about it:
• For Senior, Abortion a Medium for Art, Political Discourse - Yale Daily News
• Yale Senior's 'Abortion Art' Whips Up Debate, Protests - Washington Post
• Yale Officials Conclude Student's Claim of 'Abortion Art' Was 'Creative Fiction' - Fox News
• Yale: Student Artwork Purporting to Show Abortion a Hoax - Associated Press
• Student 'Abortion Art' Hoax Just One of Yale's Pro-Choice Debacles Women's Issues
Hours later came an announcement from the Yale University Office of Public Affairs stating that the art project was just that -- art. "The entire project is ... a creative fiction designed to draw attention to the ambiguity surrounding form and function of a woman’s body," read the statement by Yale spokesperson Helaine Klasky. "She stated to three senior Yale University officials today, including two deans, that she did not impregnate herself and that she did not induce any miscarriages."
The statement went on to acknowledge that had they been real, Shvarts' actions would have "violated basic ethical standards and raised serious mental and physical health concerns." It concluded by defending Ms. Shvarts' right to express herself, a right she can certainly be said to have exercised to the fullest.
Update:
• Shvarts Disputes Yale Statement, Says Project Is Real
Sound Off: According to Yale, Aliza Shvarts' project is a 'creative fiction.' But is it art?
1) Yes. 2) No. 3) Don't know.
Read more about it:
• For Senior, Abortion a Medium for Art, Political Discourse - Yale Daily News
• Yale Senior's 'Abortion Art' Whips Up Debate, Protests - Washington Post
• Yale Officials Conclude Student's Claim of 'Abortion Art' Was 'Creative Fiction' - Fox News
• Yale: Student Artwork Purporting to Show Abortion a Hoax - Associated Press
• Student 'Abortion Art' Hoax Just One of Yale's Pro-Choice Debacles Women's Issues
Comments
I don’t guess she is any flavor of Christian, Muslim, or Buddhist. Gee, I wonder what religious background would place such emphasis on selfish expression at the expense of innocent life? Not even that art lover, Hermann Göring, could dream this masterpiece. Her parents must be so proud for this publicity stunt.
What creativity …
Wish I thought of it a little earlier … still I’m male! Is there a guy out there who’s already done that or would I immediately qualify for a world record!
I find this “art” disgusting. Even if she was making the statement that abortion is wrong and was trying to artifully show the horror of it doesn’t make this anything but a cheat.
I realize she didn’t actually conceive or abort, but I think her actions have cheapened the value of life and added to the overall attitude of many in this world.
It’s so much “easier” to abort an unplanned for child than it is to get out a condom, take a pill, or just not have sex. I’m not anti-abortion for REAL reasons–rape, incest, etc.–but as a means of birth control, it’s just wrong.
This attitude toward life makes it easier for those who want to murder the innocent, or the not-so-innocent, for the least little offenses. Why do you think it’s easy for terrorists to kill? They don’t see life here as precious. All they see is their reward for killing….
Sorry for getting distracted. I just see this as another way to devalue life in general, not make a statement of value in any way, nor has it any artistic value.
Creative writing is art.
Creative writing as art? Yes. Abortion, murder? NO Life is precious – destroying it is not art and in no way should ever be considered art. If she had done what she said she did – she is no artist. If she didn’t do it, but said she did to spark debate – she did a good job – I’m still not sure I would call it art.
If she was trying to make a statement with shock value, it worked but I think she lost the point she was trying to get across, and lowered her respect for human life in the process. Abortion is a personal decision and there are too many variables to judge one case or all. It is not a clear cut matter, and should never taken lightly, however I think if she would have at least posed it as a hypothetical snenario/question and asked for feedback it would have been a more useful research study. All she ended up doing was portraying how careless of human life, a woman could be, if she she chose to and I really don’t think any woman would ever do this purposely unless she was mentally disturbed. Having said that, it still wouldn’t justify it and i would hope if that was the case, she would be penalized for her actions.
I agree with Darla Gross — No life is precious!
Whether it is fiction or art is not the central issue, in my view. What this young lady has done is create human life for the sole purpose of developing an academic project, which is morally reprehensible. She has shown a disregard of the sanctity of human life.
When I read the first part of this report, I believed it. Seeing as how the whole world reeks with an all-encompassing, evil stench, I wouldn’t put anything past anyone. Marnie states that she didn’t believe any woman would do that. Wake up and smell reality kiddo. Women sell their babies, abuse their babies and kill them. They drown them in the bathtub, put them in a car and push it off a cliff, put a pillow over their face, shake them to death. Without knowing this “artistic” woman, I deduce that she is one arrogant witch who is so proud of her “great idea.” She’s getting the attention she’s always craved and man, does she think she’s sooooooooooo cool. If I came up with the idea before her, I’d question my sanity and, most certainly, would take those sickening thoughts to the grave with me. Question for Shvarts: are there any good exorcists in your city?
I fail to understand the digust over this art project in your comments. Why should you see an intentional act of impregnation and abortion differently than the daily practice of a careless conception and clinical treatment to dispose of the unwanted fetal material as having any difference whatsoever? Americans’ moral basis is highly confusing to a Icelandic native such as myself.