However, Shvarts is now claiming, in an interview with The Yale Daily News that her piece is not a hoax, it is in fact real and she wants to prove it. She is speaking out against the University and has shown her video footage to individuals at The Yale Daily News to try and prove her project is the real deal.

She says:

“For the past year, I performed repeated self-induced miscarriages. I created a group of fabricators from volunteers who submitted to periodic STD screenings and agreed to their complete and permanent anonymity. From the 9th to the 15th day of my menstrual cycle, the fabricators would provide me with sperm samples, which I used to privately self-inseminate. Using a needleless syringe, I would inject the sperm near my cervix within 30 minutes of its collection, so as to insure the possibility of fertilization. On the 28th day of my cycle, I would ingest an abortifacient, after which I would experience cramps and heavy bleeding.

To protect myself and others, only I know the number of fabricators who participated, the frequency and accuracy with which I inseminated and the specific abortifacient I used. Because of these measures of privacy, the piece exists only in its telling. This telling can take textual, visual, spatial, temporal and performative forms — copies of copies of which there is no original.

This piece — in its textual and sculptural forms — is meant to call into question the relationship between form and function as they converge on the body. The artwork exists as the verbal narrative you see above, as an installation that will take place in Green Hall, as a time-based performance, as a independent concept, as a myth and as a public discourse.

It creates an ambiguity that isolates the locus of ontology to an act of readership. An intentional ambiguity pervades both the act and the objects I produced in relation to it. The performance exists only as I chose to represent it. For me, the most poignant aspect of this representation — the part most meaningful in terms of its political agenda (and, incidentally, the aspect that has not been discussed thus far) — is the impossibility of accurately identifying the resulting blood. Because the miscarriages coincide with the expected date of menstruation (the 28th day of my cycle), it remains ambiguous whether the there was ever a fertilized ovum or not. The reality of the pregnancy, both for myself and for the audience, is a matter of reading.

This ambivalence makes obvious how the act of identification or naming — the act of ascribing a word to something physical — is at its heart an ideological act, an act that literally has the power to construct bodies. In a sense, the act of conception occurs when the viewer assigns the term “miscarriage” or “period” to that blood.

In some sense, neither term is exactly accurate or inaccurate; the ambiguity is not merely a matter of context, but is embodied in the physicality of the object. This central ambiguity defies a clear definition of the act. The reality of miscarriage is very much a linguistic and political reality, an act of reading constructed by an act of naming — an authorial act.

It is the intention of this piece to destabilize the locus of that authorial act, and in doing so, reclaim it from the heteronormative structures that seek to naturalize it.

As an intervention into our normative understanding of “the real” and its accompanying politics of convention, this performance piece has numerous conceptual goals. The first is to assert that often, normative understandings of biological function are a mythology imposed on form. It is this mythology that creates the sexist, racist, ableist, nationalist and homophobic perspective, distinguishing what body parts are “meant” to do from their physical capability. The myth that a certain set of functions are “natural” (while all the other potential functions are “unnatural”) undermines that sense of capability, confining lifestyle choices to the bounds of normatively defined narratives.

Just as it is a myth that women are “meant” to be feminine and men masculine, that penises and vaginas are “meant” for penetrative heterosexual sex (or that mouths, anuses, breasts, feet or leather, silicone, vinyl, rubber, or metal implements are not “meant” for sex at all), it is a myth that ovaries and a uterus are “meant” to birth a child.

When considering my own bodily form, I recognize its potential as extending beyond its ability to participate in a normative function. While my organs are capable of engaging with the narrative of reproduction — the time-based linkage of discrete events from conception to birth — the realm of capability extends beyond the bounds of that specific narrative chain. These organs can do other things, can have other purposes, and it is the prerogative of every individual to acknowledge and explore this wide realm of capability.”

If the project is indeed real, Shvarts and the Universtiy can expect to recieve some major backlash from both Pro-Life and Pro-Choice organizations. Neither side likes the way the situation is being handled, or the way that abortion and miscarriages are being so casually displayed.

Hoax or not the University needs to figure out what is really going on and show more control over the situation. What Shvarts is doing isn’t Art, its a pathetic cry for attention with the sole purpose of shocking people by shoving a private matter into the public eye.

Ms. Shvarts is engaged in performance art. Her art project includes visual representations, a press release and other narrative materials. 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 entire project is an art piece, a creative fiction designed to draw attention to the ambiguity surrounding form and function of a woman’s body. She is an artist and has the right to express herself through performance art. Had these acts been real, they would have violated basic ethical standards and raised serious mental and physical health concerns.

Apparently the situation started when she lied to her school’s newspaper and told them about her project, once they published the article her lies spread like wildfire across the internet.

She’s claiming she did it to get people talking about the controversial issue of abortion and freedom of expression.

I would say her plan was successful, but still in poor taste. I hope she enjoyed her 15 minutes of fame.

But can Art go too far?

Yale Art student Aliza Shvarts has done something unheard of for her senior art project.  Shvarts has been artificially inseminating herself and then using ‘natural’ methods has aborted each fetus.  Each abortion has been done in the privacy of her own residence and she has been documenting the experience via video in addition to saving blood from each miscarriage.  She plans on suspending a large cube from the ceiling in the center of the exhibit and wrapping it in clear sheets smeared with the blood from the abortions (kept from drying out by being mixed with Vasaline) and then displaying the videotapped abortions on the walls of the exhibit.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for a woman’s right to choose and an artist’s freedom of expression.  But I think this is a bit twisted for a school project and is definately pushing the envelope for the question “what is art?”

So will she be able to showcase her project? And what will the reaction be?  I’ll be sure to keep you posted on how the story develops.

But I’d love to hear your opinions on the matter.  Do you think that she should be able to showcase her work? Is it inappropriate? Is abortion art? Discuss.

So I ask you, is this a brilliant idea? Or a crazy one?
Could you leave everything you have and hold dear behind to start over? And if so, what do you think your life is worth?

If you’re curious about the story see the video below.

While our advancements in technology continue to amaze me, I wish that we were focusing more of our attention on more pressing matters like a cure for cancer and global warming instead of technology made to make us even more sedintary.

Check out the video below, brought to you by CIO:

I love Barack Obama, and I’m not sure if this video is unbelievably wrong…but I know that its undeniably funny.

In the spirit of Sarah Silverman and Jimmy Kimmel….

Unemployment rates have risen up to 5.1%, which is the highest the country has seen since Hurricane Katrina.

It is in such an economy that you will find people struggling to find a job, any job.  And while the average hourly salary has increased over the past year by about 3.6% the average cost of living increased by 4%.  So how is the average American expected to make it in this struggling economy?

Our three Presidential hopefuls have each sounded off on the economic crisis.  Clinton believes that once we finally get past the denial over the state of affairs in this country that we can finally make some changes to improve our situation.  Obama also calls for change, and suggests aid for homeowners and a second economic stimulus package, on top of other changes.  And McCain is looking for tax breaks and assistance for lower income families and support of a free market system.

As a young American facing a recession scares me a bit, when I see the cost of gas rise and realize how much my commute to work is costing me, how much is too much?  People around me keep telling me that with the real-estate market the way it is NOW is the time to buy, why rent?  And while I see the validity in their statements I’m unsure.  With the unemployment rate rising, and the cost of living rising above the average increase in salary who’s to say that I’m not at risk of losing my job and would be at risk of foreclosure should I decide to buy.

Only time will tell I’m afraid whether we will continue to slip farther into a recession, or if we can stop on the cusp and pull ourselves back out…

To check out Obama’s website, or to contribute to his campaign http://tinyurl.com/2leup3

I know that she works out like crazy and eats well, but from all I’ve heard she has not gone under the knife.  Well kudos to her, she looks fantastic!

Ask anyone with a background in a customer service related field and I’m sure that they will have a few doozies to tell you about a “customer,” “client,” or “guest.”

A few insights that I feel the need to share as the person behind the counter.

- Read your coupon before you attempt to use it.  It clearly states what the exceptions are and when it expires, understand that at the store level my hands are tied as to how many and what exceptions I can make as predetermined by my POS system.  You only look like an asshole when you bitch about saving a few coins and hold up the line.
- Returns and Exchanges, this policy has been almost identical at every retailer I have ever worked at, so don’t insult my intelligence by telling me that any other store would allow you to return the broken item that you bought back in 2005.
- Extended Warranties, some people have had good experiences, some have had bad experiences…I have always been fortunate enough to understand the ins and outs of these programs in order to make them work for me.  Be smart, don’t just assume that the sales person is being entirely truthful.  While they won’t lie to you (ethical reasons-duh) they may not give you the full truth as they are trying to make a sale and many/most sales associates while no longer on commision are still held accountable for performance levels around such programs.  You wouldn’t buy car insurance without reading about coverage would you?  How is reading into what your service plan would cover any different?
- Do not, do not, do not go off on the cashier or associate helping you just because you may not like what they have to say (Re: any of the above) company policy is company policy and they are just doing their job, if you want to yell, yell at the people who make the policies (the corporation) or if you are dissatisfied with a product’s performance (the manufacturer).  Yelling at the person in front of you may give you temporary satisfaction, but will not help you get what you want, it may in fact get you escorted off the premises.

Shopping is a necessary and sometimes fun activity, but just because you’re out running errands doesn’t mean that you should flick the off switch on your ability to have rational thoughts.  Be a smart consumer, do your research in advance-expecting the associate to know every little detail about the thousands of products carried in their store isn’t realistic-they’re people not computers, and on top of everything they have going on in their own lives they can’t remember the write speed of your disk drive that you bought 3 years ago off the top of their heads.  This doesn’t mean they’re an idiot, it means that they are human.

The educated consumer, who treats the store staff as they would want to be treated if their situations were reversed are the ones who are going to get the best service everytime.

So before you yell at the 16 year old kid behind the counter for not letting you return that hard drive you bought a year ago and forgot about, remember that they are just doing their job and its not their fault that you neglected to follow the return policy clearly printed on your reciept.  Besides, theres always eBay…or Craigslist.