Now on ScienceBlogs: HeartlandGate: Anti-Science Institute's Insider Reveals Secrets

ScienceBlogs Book Club: Inside the Outbreaks

bioephemera

a blog about the intersection of science, art, and culture by Jessica Palmer, PhD

Profile

Jessica Palmer has a PhD in Molecular Biology and has been blogging about the intersection of art and biology since 2006.

read the first BioE post.

The contents of this blog are the personal opinions of the author, independent of any organizations with which she is affiliated, and should not be construed as professional advice.

Search


Recent Posts

bioephemeral sampler

Categories

Archives

Blogroll

« Iconic? "Science" says your brain doesn't buy it. . . at least according to Campbell's | Main | A not-so-fun cartoon: "plastics kill" »

Are some museum exhibits immoral?

Category: BlogosphereMedical Illustration and HistoryMuseum Lust
Posted on: March 6, 2010 5:11 PM, by Jessica Palmer

An interesting post from Repository for Bottled Monsters gathers together a few links on art/exhibit censorship, like this opinion, "Why Some Art Should Be Censored," from the Shreveport Times: "Another sort of case concerns the use of human corpses in art. There is a venerable tradition of showing the dead for various reasons, as in Rembrandt's famous The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Tulp or Goya's depictions of the horrors of war -- not to mention numerous crucifixions. . . "

Share on Facebook
Share on StumbleUpon
Share on Facebook

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/132882

Comments

1

This is a very interesting issue, implicated by exhibits like "Bodies", and by collections of medical/anatomical specimens. My own opinion is that so long as some degree of respect is paid to the former humanity of the specimens, then it is ok. So with Bodies, I consider the extreme attention to detail of the dissections and preparation to constitute that respect.

Posted by: Comrade PhysioProf | March 6, 2010 6:17 PM

2

Although some of those knockoff plastination tours utilize bodies of inmates sentenced to death in Chinese prisons. In those cases, I would say censure is apropos.

Posted by: jimspice | March 6, 2010 6:39 PM

3

I do think that we should not exhibit things that glorify torture. Ban all those crucifixes, I say, especially from art museums where innocent children might inadvertently see them.

Posted by: John S. Wilkins | March 6, 2010 7:00 PM

4

There are countless examples of natural history museum exhibits having surpassed their shelf life, particularly when they relate to outdated interpretations of human cultures, but also as they relate to now-obsolete (and laughable) ideas of phylogenetic relationships. (linear trajectory of fish--amphibian--african human--white roman male bust, for example)

Posted by: pupating | March 6, 2010 9:17 PM

5

The Shreveport Times article seems to be conflating two different issues: should art be "censored", and should "art" be an excuse to justify otherwise illegal actions? Prosecuting someone for animal cruelty or illegally interfering with corpses does not constitute "censorship", regardless of whether they claim to be an artist or not.

Posted by: Andrew G. | March 7, 2010 4:32 AM

6

"So with Bodies, I consider the extreme attention to detail of the dissections and preparation to constitute that respect."

How does that constitute respect for their humanity? I can think of a few (definitely immoral) exceptions to that rule.

I did not attend any of the exhibits as I did not feel confidant that all the "participants" on display had agreed to be there. Perhaps this view is misguided, but I had also heard stories about the Chinese prisoners.

Posted by: Isabel | March 9, 2010 3:30 PM

7

Thanks for posting this. The articles in the links really helped me with thinking about these issues, gave me a nice framework to place some of my thoughts against.

I did not attend any of the Bodies exhibits that came through Philly. It doesn't fit with my moral sense of what is right to do with a dead body. I don't personally feel comfortable making an afternoon's entertainment out of dead bodies, however respectfully they were treated, however ethically they were obtained (and I was not at all sure I could be sure of either of those things). I could listen to an argument for a different viewpoint, but that's just where I am with it now.

The cases of public art and art affecting religious sensibilities I find the most interesting and difficult to deal with.

Posted by: Zuska | March 11, 2010 12:24 AM

ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Follow ScienceBlogs on Twitter

© 2006-2011 ScienceBlogs LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of ScienceBlogs LLC. All rights reserved.