Dr. Gunther von Hagens... artist or sick fuck?

MANNHEIM, Germany (CNN) -- At Mannheim's Museum of Technology and Labor, an exhibit gives us the real inside story.

On display are corpses without skin -- artful, eerie sculptures of the lifeless. A rare peek inside the human body that provides insight into the strength, beauty and fragility of people.

The corpses are preserved with injections of plastic by a process invented by Dr. Gunther von Hagens, the curator.

When the cadaver hardens, the body parts keep the same shape and color as when they were alive.

The exhibit is so popular that on a recent cold Saturday, 10,000 people waited patiently, as long as five hours, to see the bodies.

A half million visitors are expected to view the four-month exhibit, which ends in March.

The cadavers are the bodies of people who signed agreements before their deaths to have their remains put on display.

But some people are critical of the exhibit.

Dr. Klaus Unsicker of Heidelberg University said that "what happens in Mannheim is an enormous PR story, with the goal really -- to better sell corpses. Right? So it is the first industry that sells dead people."

Von Hagens disagrees.

"This is not a hall of death. This is a hall of teaching and of understanding the nature in ourselves," he said.

Von Hagens said his mission isn't making money, but to unveil the human body as never before. The infinite intricacies of what he calls "our inner face."

For example, we see what cigarettes do to the human lung, and how misshapen and discolored organs become when we abuse them.

One visitor says the exhibit gives her a greater understanding of the body.

"How intricately and marvelously we are put together," she said.

http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9802/07/cadaver.art/split.big.jpg'>

http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9802/07/cadaver.art/face.big.jpg'>

http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9802/07/cadaver.art/image.gallary/arm.big.jpg'>

http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9802/07/cadaver.art/image.gallary/brain.big.jpg'>

http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9802/07/cadaver.art/image.gallary/face2.big.jpg'>

http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9802/07/cadaver.art/image.gallary/skin.big.jpg'>

http://www.channel4.com/science/microsites/A/anatomists/images/fencer.gif'>

http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9802/07/cadaver.art/

Okay, so I don't know if this has been a thread before, and I know it's really old and probably all of the europeans know about it already, but I find this shit um-- interesting. Someone I know went to the exhibit when it was in Berlin, and I got to see photographs of almost all of the cadavers (and there were a LOT) although I couldn't find very many photos on the internet... anyway... so this guy gets permission from the "original owners" before they die, for whatever reason this somehow fascinates them, and they want to contribute as best they can-- be preseved forever in some sick kind of immortality.... now I can understand this if it were strictly old people and stuff. Looking through the book from the exhibit, I see MULTIPLE pregnant females and it gets me thinking- It seems weird to me that so many young expectant mothers (ages 20-25, 6-8 months pregnant) actually die from natural causes, and before they die somehow find the time to actually consider donating their bodies to this freak, get the paperwork completed, and then sit down and die... I don't know, sounds weird to me... anyway... enjoy.

FIRST and I recon it is cool

Actually none artist or sick fuck...just a scientist with good promo skills and desire for money...

I'm getting sick of that whole story, everytime Dr.Hagens starts touring the world the whole world speaks about it...promo-promo-promo.

Same happenned with the Saatchi collection in NY...guilianni said he'll close it down...Only to have it in full effect on the openning with an audience 10 times bigger than it would normally be...each british artist that was part of the exhibition did a full-sold solo show in galleries in NY after that was over.

It's a clearcut case of marketing tactics, based on fake ethical issues and soapbox controversy(sp?)

I think it started when the sex pistols and the rolling stones toured the states.

In my opinion what is questioned in this case has been answered in the past..way past. Leonardo Davinci and later Caravagio procceeded in studys on dead bodys to make coclusions about nature and of course painting..Caravagio was often dragged by the police for breaking in cemateries and opening graves.

I wont say that it isnt a tad sick but i guess that its the price you have to pay for those masterpieces...Based on how you use stuff sometimes the cause is more important than the means.

http://161.58.208.54/artchive/h/holbein/christ_entombed.jpg'>

Hans Holbein.

The said work, apart from being a true masterpiece from any angle, has been the subject of conversation among painters and scientists. The focus area is the hand on jesus, bruised and stuck in an acward position after being nailed. Doctors say that this is one of the most precise medical represantations of its time. Holbein was known for being exact in everything he did, some maps used for backgrounds on his works are proven to be more exact than the ones sailors used at that era.

Coincidence? i'm dead sure that holbein did experiments.

http://digilander.libero.it/debibliotheca/Arte/Leonardoana_file/pics/TN_slide0014_image042.JPG'>http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1485000/images/_1487753_vinci_shoulder150.jpg'> http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/giorgio.vasari/vinci/vinci25.jpg'>

I dont even have to say anything about the artistic value of davincis work. His works in anatomy are products of experiments he did with dead bodies...the return for that is the contnuation of what the egyptians and greeks started...

http://www.oil-paintings.com/caravagio/carav04.jpg'>

Caravagio.

I think this one illustrates everything we talk about from every side of it.

Curiosity/Research/Good use of information

And on the other hand:

http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9802/07/cadaver.art/image.gallary/skin.big.jpg'>

Its funny how the Doctor used an old ass sketch as a background..the perfect indicator proving that he did nothing new, contributed nothing...both artistic and scientific....good job

http://www.pixunlimited.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/gallery/2001/05/29/hirst.jpg'>

Damien hirst,

the bad boy of saatchis collection and the most famous contemporary british artist. If you see whats so great about all that drop me an email

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/455000/images/_455902_damien_hirst150.jpg'>

Another one....

http://www.svaneholms-slott.se/jaktt.jpg'>

And to end my rant, i have more respect for hunters that exhibit their 'trophys' as stupid and moronic that is, than artists who use shock tactics as a way to hide their lack of quality and of course make money...at least hunters are honest about what they do.

thats fucking wrong

Wow ... great insights, Tesser. I'm not sure if a lot of America is privy to knowledge of Dr. Hagens work, so it was interesting to hear about it from a few people who had obviously thought about it.

I like the he Caravagio painting. Look at the lines in the forehead of the guy doing the prodding.

yeah man, shit's amazing..Caravagio was a thug...it sounds funny but i read a book about him that listed all his records with the police...dude was down for no particular reason.

On a sidenote, to avoid i aint hating the Dr. Hagens exhibits i'd watch the saw as a medical thing...i'm mostly hating the media for overpumping it and tagging it 'art' and i think he also agrees with them.

damn, have i cleared the issue just like that?

Bump!

tess - I strongly disagree

(tho, it is worth noting that the good doctor never says he is an artist, he's a doctor)

How can you say he has contibuted nothing? There is NO WAY to be more anatomically correct than that. This is the proverbial it. This is the culmination of anatomical art. IF you don't think this guy is original because of Da Vinci, then Da Vinci is merely a rip off of Roman scultpure, with its high attention to anatomic detail.

And EVERYONE KNOWS the romans were big into ripping off the Greeks, and the Greeks ripped off the Egyptians and Phonecians etc etc etc

I'm going to see that exhibit in January. I can't wait.

art can't be defined, it doesn't mean anything at all.

is this just a rip off too, or an important step..?

http://www.pitt.edu/~bookctr/generalreading/bargain/books/0517223651.jpg'>

not good

Where did he get the bodies from? are they people who donated their bodies to "science" or are they just unlucky unidentified corpses?

On another note, von hagen's been milking bodyworlds for every penny it's worth. I've seen him on GMTV, channel 4 and BBC and there's adverts all over the tube.

Is it just me or is this hugely disrespectfull to the dead? When I eventualy die I would rather not have my body injected with plastic and be paraded around the world for the profit of a german proffesor.

people get uptight so easily

let me assure that FAR more disrespectful things can happen when you donate your body to science than this...................

of COURSE he's milking it.............duh.............

why would you get your knickers in a twist over this more than, say, exhibit of egyptian tombs and mummies? those *graves* were *robbed*. Does it make a difference that they are older? If so, where is the "human dignity cut-off point"? Or is it that the people in question are from your culture and therefore deserve different rights?

So much historical data is gleened from the raping of graves and religious sites. Nobody peeps. Your home quite possibly stands on someones grave.....................................

I dont really see where you disagree and your non definition of art aint helping...anyway, he's anatomically correct, yes...over known things...ripping off doesnt exist in the cases you mentioned, its evolution

that shits straight up motherfuckin fuckin shit bicth fuck

NASTY ASS MOTHERFUCKER SHIT!

...its aight, but if its not illegal and on a wall, its not art.

Originally posted by bodice_ripper

Does it make a difference that they are older?

Yes it certainly does.

Originally posted by Tesseract

I dont really see where you disagree and your non definition of art aint helping...anyway, he's anatomically correct, yes...over known things...ripping off doesnt exist in the cases you mentioned, its evolution

how is this exempt from your evolution argument? It isn't *drawn*? if anything that underlines that this is a step forward, not a repeat.

oh, and you feel free to try and define art........................................it won't work. It's and abstract concept that people differ on...a bit like "soul".:P

Originally posted by can of worms

Yes it certainly does.

"If so, where is the "human dignity cut-off point"? Or is it that the people in question are from your culture and therefore deserve different rights? "

blah blah blah blah blah FREE HITLER!

http://www.pixunlimited.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/gallery/2002/03/18/bodyworlds1.jpg'>

shut up already

Would you guys think it was cool if I had collected aborted fetuses and stillborn children, contorted them and then stuck them on a wall and on cubes. No you probably wouldn't becuase that "crosses a line" If one is art than so is the other.

aw shit...dont give that *if it isnt crap*..when i say evolution i mean ADDING something to what already exists...thats the definition of it.

by checking that you see the exclusion:

http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9802/07/cadaver.art/image.gallary/skin.big.jpg'>

And define art? for you? i could never do that...i can do it for me though. To keep it undetailed i'd say that there are criteria on the importance of art...its called history of art. The soul has to do with creation mainly, the valuation of it is more rational and less ainigmatic than that.

thi shit is GAY!

Originally posted by socrates

Would you guys think it was cool if I had collected aborted fetuses and stillborn children, contorted them and then stuck them on a wall and on cubes. No you probably wouldn't becuase that "crosses a line" If one is art than so is the other.

graffiti sucks

hahahhahahhahahha

:insert sentence here:

Tess, I'm not sure what you are getting thick with me for? you just stated that you could only define art for yourself. I agree with this idea completely.

I just am'nt clear why you feel this isn't adding anything. but, its like, no big deal dude

however, bodice_ripper puts the foot down about the romans adding (as opposed to plagirising) to the greeks. Most of what people think of as classical roman sculpture are in fact copies of greek orignals

intellogent cobersation?

may I join?

Lost in translation, no big deal indeed.

"however, bodice_ripper puts the foot down about the romans adding (as opposed to plagirising) to the greeks. Most of what people think of as classical roman sculpture are in fact copies of greek orignals"

thats a fact, agreed, thats where globalisation started

Thanks for posting that picture of the rider, bodice. I was trying to find that one. I think Dr Hagens has plenty to offer the scientific world as far as learning from bodies preserved with his process, but I find some of the poses that he has the cadavers in sort of distasteful and certainly more "artful" than anatomically correct- whether he claims to be an artist or not.

Anyway, displaying mummies in museums is about the biggest violation of the dead that I can think of.