Artistic differences

The concept of what is and what isn't "art" has been one that has always eluded my more scientifically minded self. In school, I received higher marks for my knowledge of the human anatomy than I did for my attempts to paint it. But who says art and science are mutually exclusive? I don't know the answer to that either, so it forces me to conclude that maybe I am willfully ignorant of what makes ART.

Which is why THIS is driving me crazy. For those who don't have time to pursue the link, it's a story about an art student at Yale who claimed that her senior thesis was video footage of her undergoing a series of self-induced abortions in a bathtub, as well as some other "artistic" portrayals of the process involving the purported bodily excretions that would result. Before anyone cries foul, the next day, the student admitted that it wasn't true. But that was after millions of people who read about it on the Web puked and the Yale administration shat a cow.

They're calling it a work of "creative fiction," much like H.G. Wells' little "War of the Worlds" ruse on the radio that scared the pants off thousands of people in New Jersey. Or in another way, it's like that viral marketing attempt by the Cartoon Network guys to market a late-night show in Boston, sending the city into lock-down, bomb scare mode. It gets people talking about "issues," namely the things that scare them. In this case, I think it creates a reason to have a meaningful conversation about the great "abortion" debate--which, let's face it, has become a political farce, degraded by the use of its emotional power as a cause to rally everyone behind a wide range of social and economic issues on a political platform. Much like the existence of three-legged aliens, there is nothing but creative fiction behind it.

So on one hand, I give kudos to this girl for getting people to notice what she was doing. On the other hand, EWWWWWWWWWWWWW.