Such a professional title, huh? But it is the only way I could describe this next story. Eww….
The German entrepreneur, who describes himself as a plastinator, has earned international fame for his Body Worlds shows which feature
human cadavers arranged in lifelike poses.
But his latest project Cycle of Life, which opens in Berlin today, has been condemned as indecent and offensive for arranging two dead bodies as if they were making love.
Von Hagens has defended his piece, insisting it is not intended to be sexually stimulating and the models gave their consent to the pose.
He was once accused of using the bodies of executed prisoners from China in his plastination process and in 2004 he returned seven corpses which had head injuries because he said he could not prove they had not been executed.
The scientist’s technique, which involves removing body fluids and fat from corpses and replacing them with plastic resin, has made him a multi-millionaire.
No words. There are just no words.
Loading ...
lol- that has to be much more interesting than the original “Body Worlds” which I thought was really, really boring when I saw it.
Which is odd given that I’m a bio-nut. :-/
Then again, anatomy was never my cup o’ tea.
WHATEVER, Bodies was awesome. The fetal exhibit was especially cool. But 2 observations:
1. That picture is hilarious (guy in the background?)
2. The models gave their consent to do that pose?? What, they were asked before they kicked the bucket if he could use their bodies to make ‘lovemaking’ poses? How AWKWARD would that conversation be??
The idea of the exhibit doesn’t bother me – but the fact that they are real cadavers is what get me. I think models that represent the human body would be sufficient. (In all honesty, I had never heard of the exhibit before but I would probably go to one just out of curiosity.)
The guy in the picture is the “creator”. And I just knew you would be the first to point out the problems with getting permission from people before death! That was the first thing I thought when I read it too!
My family and I went to see Body Worlds in Boston a few years ago. My Dad says that’s what he wants us to do with his body when he dies, as long as they make him look good. I’ll show him this.
Val, I don’t have problem with cadavers- they are useful in medical school, it’s nice that they can open to the general public. But my first sentiment was towards Rae, who called it boring
Also, the fact that the creator is smiling and rubbing his hands together is still hilarious to me!
Rae,
I found it terribly boring too. Once you’ve seen a plastic human model, like in biology class, who needs to see it again? I had seen embryos in jars before. Not to be gross, but I thought the skin looked like beef jerky. The moral/ethical issue of using a human body….. The Catholic Church would frown upon it, I think…. but is it OK for educational purposes as in this case?
And this new “sculpture” is kind of creepy. I hope it isn’t going to be viewed by children. It’s pornographic, IMHO.
PIP –
I don’t have a problem with cadavers being used for educational purposes. But this isn’t education – its a freak show. It goes on “tours” and non medical professionals and non medical students go to look at it for reasons other than education.
It’s the deminishing and devalueing way the human body is being treated. We are not freak shows in life, nor are we freak shows in death.
Of course, that is just my humble opinion.
@Val: What is your opinion of cadavers used for anatomy courses?
How can you think it’s not being viewed for education? All of the exhibit is about is the human bodies and how they work. I don’t understand why you would visit the exhibit if you didn’t want to learn something.
Like I said, I have no problems with cadavers being used for educational purposes. If it wasn’t for the use of cadavers our medical capabilities would have been hindered.
The “tag line” for Body works is “The original exhibition of real human bodies”. This is meant for entertainment purposes, and if you learn, double points for you. He has cadavers posed playing poker, riding a horse (with a horse cadaver), having sex……this is not done for education. It is the equivalent of a freak show. They used to have dead people in bottles in those shows – same thing – except this dude has science to make them seem more alive. Most people visit it not for education but out of morbid curiosity (just read the blogs on it). The “education” that can be obtained from this exhibit does not have to come from this sort of “display”. It is more examples of people trying to have ownership of human’s. If ya can’t have them alive, then get them when their dead and make millions of money.
I guess I don’t understand. The exhibition I went to had cut out sections of anatomy and did casts of, say, just the arteries and arterioles. Maybe I’m not remembering it right. But it looked like any other museum exhibition with the unique qualities of seeing the true human form. I haven’t seen the exhibit with sexual positions though…
I kind of look at it this way-
Yeah it’s entertainment but it also has an educational quality to it. It shows people what our bodies look like on the inside. Sure- we could use pictures or photographs or non-human cadaver derived models but there is not “shock” factor in that. I think that while in most cases this stuff is “entertaining”- I still think it’s a valuable tool to possibly inspire a kid or an adolescent who sees it to think, “Hey- the human body is really, really interesting- maybe I should study it someday!”
In one of the podcasts I listen to- they were discussing how a good number of children in Great Britain do NOT know where their internal organs are. They’ll be shown pictures with various organs missing and they’re asked to point where the *heart* is- and they can’t. I think that’s sad and really freaking pathetic. Stuff like Body Worlds shows what our organs look like and how they move around. One of the bodies that was my favorite from the exhibit was the woman who was 8 months pregnant (she was ill and was going to die before the baby was born)- I thought it was fascinating how much the organs are shifted around during pregnancy, especially that late in the game.
It’s kind of like the show “Numb3rs” in a way- like Numb3rs makes math “cool” and “sexy” (mmmm…David Krumholtz, lulz) and hopefully it will also inspire more children to actually enjoy math and science and realize that it actually is a useful discipline. I like to think that Body Worlds does the same thing for biology, anatomy, and physiology.
I’ve been considering donating my body to this stuff when I keel over (I won’t be using it anymore!) or I’m going to donate my body to a medical school for dissection and stuff. It’ll probably the most useful thing I’ll ever do. :-p
Anyway- I’m going to be in South Dakota for a few days to go visit my grandparents. There is a lack of intarwebz out there so I may not be able to respond further until I get back. I hope y’all have a fantastic 4th of July!
Rae –
Have a great time!
PIP –
“I haven’t seen the exhibit with sexual positions though…”
That is what this article is about! It is the latest freak show of Von Hagens. (geesh!
)
I went to belief net the other day while looking this us and found 2 really good quotes as to why this is just wrong: http://blog.beliefnet.com/crunchycon/2009/05/guenther-von-hagens-cadaver-po.html
Wesley J. Smith:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wesley_J._Smith
But breaking “taboos” is all that matters in a hedonistic culture crumbling from the destruction of social cohesion. Further, hedonism denigrates human exceptionalism by reducing us to the level of instinctive and self indulgent beings living for the next, ever more nihilistic, thrill.
We can break this downward spiral only by seeing clearly what is happening and refusing to participate in it.
And then Catholic Philosopher Tom Hibbs:
Merely asserting that one is engaging in the laudatory practice of overcoming taboos about the proper use of dead bodies does not make it, in fact, laudatory. One might equally claim that hard-core pornography can educate viewers about sex by reducing sex to the manipulation of body parts stripped of any larger human significance.
The problem with death in our culture is not that we have taboos about it, but that we lack a rich language for articulating the experience and its meaning. It’s hard to see how Body Worlds will help solve that problem. Indeed, what is on display is not the mystery of death, but the reduction of bodies to inert plasticized parts displayed for viewers – a pornography of the dead human body.
The point is that there is no need to use real bodies. It is obscene and uncalled for in this day and age with computers.
Do you have any idea how many people these kinds of exhibits would turn people away from the medical profession or science in general? It doesn’t matter that you or others may not be religious, but many are. Do you have any idea how many religions teach about the spirit? Teach about hauntings being true? Do we really want to turn people away on the “chance” that some could be brought into the science world when computer simulation can do the same thing?
Even hollyweird got weirded out when the movie Poltergeist used real cadavers in the pool scene. That is why people say the movie got cursed! It is that curse that “caused” the death of about 4 of the cast members during the course of the movies.
Trust me when I say this is doing more harm than good in the education aspect. It may have started as a way to educate but we are now going down the slippery slope and surprise of all surprises – it went to sex.
Val, duh, of course I know what the article is about!
What I’m replying to is your claim that your main problem is the use of cadavers rather than models, which makes it a freak show. I am saying that the one I went to looked like a museum exhibit like any other. The cadavers just made it a little more interesting. I also meant to say that can’t vouch for the newest version though.
“It is obscene and uncalled for in this day and age with computers.”
Again, you are saying that simple use of cadavers is obscene, right? But people use them all the time in anatomy courses, and this just makes it accessible to the public. The whole point is that the fact that they are real is what brings interest and there’s nothing wrong than wanting to view the human body as it really is. That, in itself, is nothing obscene or damaging of the spirit. It shows how interesting and beautiful the body is. I mean, the part where we see all the fetuses at every stage of development- we can show computer simulations all we like but it can’t compare to seeing the actual little fingers and toes. Same with parts like the cast of only the arteries and arterioles. You appreciate the circulatory system a lot more than a simple computer simulation. I can understand that you view them being used in sexual positions as obscene, but in no way does letting the general public look at the real human form make it obscene by itself. I would say that those who genuinely enjoyed the exhibit liked it because it was fascinating. The first time I saw a cadaver I was 14 or 15 years old at med camp (dorky I know). Sure there were people who were immature about it. But most of us thought that being able to feel a lung, or see the arteries, heart, and intestines as they really are were fascinating. I don’t think you can claim that our viewing it is obscene because we weren’t being graded on it. There’s hardly any difference except that the general public can view it. And if that difference is obscene then you are saying that looking at the anatomy of humans in real forms should be an exclusive event…which contributes to the lack of knowledge in this country in general. I have known a few people who thought that women still have one fewer rib than men. Astounding, really.
” I have known a few people who thought that women still have one fewer rib than men. Astounding, really.”
I’m one of those dopes, I guess… I thought that was true. Really.
What’s wrong about the Body World Exhibit is that these are whole human bodies. If they were parts, I don’t think it’s a big deal. The whole body represents the whole person, who was created in the image and likeness of God. When a person dies, we bury them, we don’t dry them in the barn and then sit them on a chair in the living room. (Only a freak might do that, and then they might be charged with a crime if they were caught.)This exhibit does that in a way. The dignity of the human person is compromised.
A cadaver being used in a medical school has a higher purpose, to educate those who will become doctors some day. Working on a preserved cadaver is much closer to the real thing than viewing a dried body.
Janet –
Thanks! You said it better than I did!
PIP –
AAHHHHHH!!!!! **pulling out hair**
The use of cadavers for educational purposes with people who take this education seriously (aka med camp and med school) is perfectly okay. Putting cadavers on “display” to make a profit is disgusting.
Whoa, Whoa, Whoa…
They used REAL CADAVERS in the poltergeist pool scene?!!!
I would have quit that movie right quick.
IMDB says that it isn’t true, however the Biography on “the curse of Poltergeist” had an interview with JoBeth Williams who confirmed that she found out after the fact that the skeletons were real in the pool scene (I should have said skeletons and not cadavers…..my bad.) The special effects people said it was cheaper to buy real skeletons than to make plastic ones. Also, in Poltergeist II the actors found out after the fact that real skeletons were used in a cave scene. They refused to go back to work until the Native American Shaman blessed the cave.
“Putting cadavers on “display” to make a profit is disgusting.”
*pulls out some of her hair too* What do you think museums are for?! To make certain information available to the general public. I saw the exhibit in a museum. I don’t understand how one would go there (at least to the version I went to), and learn absolutely nothing. I mean, if it is “just to look at dead bodies” wouldn’t it get boring REALLY quickly? It seemed all in a view of education to me, dividing it into an emphasis on body systems and how they interact together. You are saying that they are NOT educational, but the exhibit I went to seemed like an educational one to me, so I fail to see the difference except making anatomy more accessible to the public…
Janet-
I would say it is definitely compromised if they are placed in certain…compromised positions. But the display I saw was like an anatomy lesson presented in an easy to navigate form, like every other museum display I’ve seen. They charge you money at the museum too so that the money spent to make the display is paid back and to fund future projects. When I went to the science museum they charged me $13 bucks, and any actual interactive displays wanted to charge me an extra 10 or so beyond that–which happened to be the most interesting. I think as long as the displays are kept educational nothing is being compromised.