Vaginal Knitting???

Well...as they say, when it comes to art...keep a very open mind...thoughts please...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6RZZf6HMzo

My first thought...did she knit the jumper she's wearing...*cough*...

What.....the f***?

I.....I cant even.....

what is happening right now?

My thoughts are all over the place.

Here is my take....whatever youre 'in to', I dont feel any person should judge it. Experiment with your body, its not for me, but go for it....However, to consider this art, I will not. I think its absolutely a form of sexual experimentation, as she even said some times she gets aroused. This is not a scene from the Titanic where youre drawing a naked portrait, where the drawing ends up art...This wool/yarn/whatever, is being inserted into a vagina. I absolutely disagree with doing this in public and the fact that people call her "brave". Again, if youre into that, go for it, its different, a bit weird to me, but seriously, where do we draw the line at inappropriate these days? And its not "brave"....its inappropriate.

And the menstrating, did I just watch that???? Was that blood, from her vagina, on the friggin wool??...*barf*. You may call my reaction judgemental, I repeat, if youre in to it, great! But that is so unsanitary for others to touch that. Its inappropriate, not to mention gross, to even see it.

My opinion on this matter is anything being inserted in the vagina, anus, or penis, should absolutely be kept private. Its one thing to feel 'free' to paint/draw/write/knit naked, but in a gallery? Displaying something that came out of a vagina?...I just....I just think that should be personal. Kept to yourself.

And I honestly support naked portraits or body painting, however in a private setting with the artist and person. Or just the final product being displayed. To see one naked in a drawing or painting I have always found quite beautiful and have actually wanted one done of myself....Personally I would only want someone I know and trust to do that because Im not a huge fan of showing just anyone my body...but I think when 'insertion' comes in the picture, my gosh, close the door, experiment with that alone. It seems so strange to me.

If this is being free, we might as well remove the doors of the bathroom stalls in the ladies room. In fact make it unisex, and lets pretend its no big deal if we see a woman inserting a tampon. lets take away 'privacy'. Theyre called 'private parts' for a reason. But in this day and age doing anything with breasts, vaginas, butts, or penis' is acceptable, clothes or no clothes. Thats a shame to me.

^^^^

The only member brave enough (so far) to respond....thank you Chelsey...you raised some interesting points here....anyone else game enough?

Yes! someone else respond! Im totally curious to see points I may have overlooked. Honestly. :)

I'm pretty sure you covered most of them but...come on guys..don't be shy?

Is there anyone with a broad enough mind to say this is art?

I've been avoiding this because the title grossed me out... lol.And now seeing Chelseys response, I dont want to see. Eww.

Oh. M y. God.

I watched. I didn't want to. I shouldn't have.

Thats NOT art. That's disgusting. Sorry but I do judge that. That makes me sick to my stomach.

Oh! I did want to point out what I thought was funny (sarcastic)

They show the top part of her vagina. Oh so she had a sense of modesty? Was even that not inappropriate to share? Why didnt she share a shot of the actual wool coming out of the vagina?

I think just brief closeups of the pubic hair even sends a message that its ok to even show that part. Gee, so what can we consider inapproptiate? The whole thing? only if she showed herself with her legs wide open? ....a lot of this is mixed messages, and since she didnt seem to figure out what exactly she was trying to prove/demonstrate/teach, this further proves my point of why it should be personal.

LMAO Britt. your response was what I thought it'd be.

I didnt want to watch either, I wanted to shut it off, but I couldnt. I had to see what she would say....and she said nothing to convince me that it was art. She basically said herself it was experimentation, well exploring sexually (insertion) should not be shared with the world. That could open a whole porn debate but i wont even go there.

Im against anything that involves using body parts that way and THEN displaying it.

Sex is an absolute beautiful thing, don't get me wrong. But its a private matter. Even experimenting.

I had the volume super low so I didnt catch...what does she do with her..ahem..art?

Doesnt look like she does anything 'with it'....looks like she basically inserts the wool, then knits out of it.

hahaha im sorry but that is just,....whyyyyyyyy???

Yeah, I saw it.
Shook my head in compassion.

Am I wrong that artists are supposed to put themselves into their work, rather than the other way around.

First time I've seen this and to be honest I can't say I am surprised. These sorts of artworks have been apparent for years. Duchamp's 'Paysage Fautif' is the first that comes to mind (a landscape "painting" created from his own semen).

I think the shock comes from it being public performance piece. I was fortunate enough to attend the 13 rooms exhibition in April which showcased 13 different performance pieces revolving around the human body. Marina Abramovic was one performance artist there. In Luminosity she sat naked on a bicycle seat up against the wall with light directly on her. It was extremely painful to watch and considering she was there for such a long period of time, I imagine extremely painful to perform. In a previous exhibition I believe it was called '12 rooms' (could be 11 rooms) a performance piece displayed men in bed masturbating. These sort of artists want to confront an audience.

Has some explicit content:
http://kaldorartprojects.org.au/13rooms/marina-abramovic

Contemporary art pushes the boundaries, the disgusted and shocked reaction is what a lot of contemporary artist seek. Was I fond of this? no. Would I explore such concepts and practices in my own work ... do I even need to answer that?

Is it art? who knows what art really is anymore. I've seen a blank canvas in a gallery.

I've been trying to find out just how popular this performance has been but I can't seem to find anything. Also, did a search to see what she intended to do with the finished product again nothing. I did see on one forum someone willing to wear the scarf when it was finished..I wonder if it will go up for auction?

Mel...maybe you actually being part of the Australian art world you will know more places to look rather than just google?

OMG...I think I found it...it isn't a scarf it's a....!!!!

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/267542034087035674/

"artists are supposed to put themselves into their work, rather than the other way around."
^ Larry said it all!

This is no art. This is bullsh*t. It's just another way of marketing one's work, don't they say sex sells?

Look...I try to be as broadminded as a Neanderthal can be so...to be honest...I was surprised but not totally offended. Sometimes I wonder why these parts of our body have become 'private 'because we were all born naked..our ancestors ran around naked in the beginning so...I don't think the nakedness is the problem here..she actually isn't totally naked...it's more where the wool is placed that is disturbing I feel...but..is she trying to tell woman that the vagina has not been fully utilized as yet?

Maybe she doesn't have a basket for her wool/yarn. I have plenty I use and will gladly send her way lol.

I'm not offended. Just grossed out. Its a sanitary issue and especially with the discolored...ugh. I can't even finish that sentence. It really makes me squirm lol

"They show the top part of her vagina. Oh so she had a sense of modesty? Was even that not inappropriate to share? Why didnt she share a shot of the actual wool coming out of the vagina?"

Youtube wouldn't allow full nudity. Im sure she has some unused footage that would reveal the roots of her "art"
Did it gross me out? Nop! But what really left me puzzled is that she didnt have one friend to tell her "honey, this will not help you to become an artist"

I like her work much better than the "urinal"!!

Edited:
you all remember about the urinal case, don't you??

She's just after notoriety and Youtube hits... and we are proliferating it.........

waste of space.........

This was... Out there. I guess according to the definition of art, this would be considered art. It's self expression and um, creative. So yes, I'd consider it art. Definitely not my cup of tea though. It kind of grossed me out.

So really is this the definition of art : self expression and creative??

Keep an open mind here, this is more than art..

Each person on this earth has their own views and vision of "art". To each his or her own.

I personally would not knit from my private area, however some spiritualities support this kind of art.

Certain ancient wiccan rituals would not call this art, but a form of spiritual and ritualistic expression. Vaginal secretions and menstrual blood are very sacred ...

Real Meaning, I like you.
No, but those are attributes to what art is.

According to Dictionary.com the 'definition of art' is:

art1 [ahrt]
noun
1. the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.

2. the class of objects subject to aesthetic criteria; works of art collectively, as paintings, sculptures, or drawings: a museum of art; an art collection. See fine art, commercial art.

3.a field, genre, or category of art: Dance is an art.

4.the fine arts collectively, often excluding architecture: art and architecture.

5.any field using the skills or techniques of art: advertising art; industrial art.

...

So art could be a lot of different things, or if you are one of those people that say art cannot be defined, well more power to you. It's another one of those things where to each his own.

But in my opinion, art is self expression.

Actualy I agree with you maple and Hellon. I just were trying to provoke a discussion about the very meaning of Art. because most of people and even artists usually do not know that properly.

For example for the most dictionary found description of art, mentioned above, the "aesthetic criteria" is included, but I think the modern art is distancing itself drastically from it sometimes .Llike in the "urinal" case.

Ancient wiccan history: Poetry and sexual secretions have been used in rituals and forms of spiritual expressions. I can't assume that this lady is doing this as a spiritual nature, but it is natural and normal where my beliefs stem from.

Many spiritual beliefs are using youtube and other forms of media to share and talk about "hush hush" topics, artistry and spirituality.. is it right to share this? I say yes... I am more on the silent nature of sharing... but again, more and more people are talking and sharing things that have been practiced for centuries... just something to think about.

edit: No where in this lady's video is she saying this is spiritual.. I just wanted to express another angle on this topic. It's not gross to me, because of my spiritual upbringing is all I wanted to express.

I would like to believe that everyone in this thread knows and understands the definition of art... We can pretty much call any self-expression an art but that does not mean I have to be a fond of it..

The knitting itself I consider art, the approach taken repulsive. not creative. If on the other hand, she added patterns that were made with thread and not with blood.. I may change my mind on the creative part. Though, she could do something exceptional without having to store the thread in her private. With Knitting there are plenty of things to come up with, just as music, just as poetry.. So all in all, in my opinion, it is art just because of the knitting though it's not the most creative nor the most appealing of all.

Edit: I meant to say that if she added patterns, I would find it creative, but storing it in her private doesn't add creativity, at least in my opinion, like it doesn't add anything to the art of knitting.

Dear DP "everyone in this thread knows and understands the definition of art..."

I believe we don't. I even came across artists who do not know that.
being expressive is not the only characteristic of art it is like : every walnut is round but not anything round is walnut. People who do not understand this simple logic always mistake anything with expressive quality as art.

dear Maple it is all new to me. I did not know about the spiritual connection. Totally agree with the hush hush part.

dear EL, why not storing it in privet part?? the point is all the existence is breaded that way. (haha one needle is missing here) and coming from the same place. This is THE metaphor: The gross aspect is deliberate. Every single one of us came from the same way.( even the son of God)
then we find our place of born disgusting.

I like the fact that the thread is white.

"why not storing it in private part"

I believe everything has a purpose. Plus I don't find the place where we are born disgusting. I find disgusting the ways people treat the place where existence is formed. I supposed I can't be open minded about that, but then again each to their own.

You do have some valid points there dear RM :)

"but then again each to their own"

^^^yup that sums it up!

Something else for you to consider in the name of art :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Er0dxHCx0Z4

An extract from the Vagina Monologues...

Another to consider in the name of art, from Tolstoy's What Is Art?

To evoke in oneself a feeling one has once experienced, and having evoked it in oneself, then, by means of movements, lines, colors, sounds, or forms expressed in words, so to transmit that feeling that others may experience the same feeling -- this is the activity of art.

Art is a human activity consisting in this, that one man consciously, by means of certain external signs, hands on to others feelings he has lived through, and that other people are infected by these feelings and also experience them.

... and, above all, it is not pleasure; but it is a means of union among men, joining them together in the same feelings, and indispensable for the life and progress toward well-being of individuals and of humanity.

... possibility of transmitting his own feelings to others.

excerpts from the essay.

Its not art...... its crap...all this political correctness stuff is belly-who

Its self promotion nothing more... you tell me she's going to go sit in some art gallery somewhere...knit one pearl one, with mum and the family watching on...

What is she going to do with it then ? sell it on ebay so some weirdo can buy it and sniff it in his spare time

If that's Art then the word ART defines everything and i mean everything from an Atom to the universe and everything in between everything that is done seen smelt felt, everything that is destroyed, killed, murdered, mutilated, somewhere somebody will call it art

There are photos of people falling to there deaths in the twin towers and those out there that will call it art .....

Every single one of us came from the same way.( even the son of God)
then we find our place of born disgusting

^^ I do not think any body part thats private is disgusting. To be honest Im more fascinated with the female parts than male. I almost wanted to be a OBGYN because the vagina (well all reproductive parts) are incredible.

However, the beauty in private parts (to me) is God designed them to be used for 1 reason. To be sexually intimate with your mate (and for women to birth the child)...

sticking anything up there (some even disagree with the use of tampon) really just goes against what those parts were made for.

I do however stick by what I said about the blood part being disgusting. Thats just unnecessary. If your into this sexual experimentation, or 'art', really, the cleanliness is not a restriction here? you still knit on your menstrual cycle? What if it was a heavy flow and the whole thing was full of blood clots and just totally red.That will always be disgusting to me. This goes back to what Larry said, put yourself in your art, not your art in you. haha.

If this performer visited you city...how many of you would visit....I know I would...I'm very curious by nature :)

I'm sure there would be a que a mile long up the road, full of sexual weirdo's all fighting to get a look and get as up close as possible

I don't consider myself a sexual weirdo..just a curious person by nature. You know..we limit ourselves with our thoughts and what we are told...who says the vagina was only meant for intimate moments with our partners and child birth?

Also, if anyone has looked at the exert from the Vagina Monologues I posted, you will see that that they are reclaiming the word C*** which is considered vulgar. Why is that? It's in the dictionary...meaning female genitalia...humans have made it vulgar with their narrow minded approach to things that are slightly different and perhaps, just a little left of circle.