Art?! Sick More Like!

[lou]

Let's take money out of the equation for now.

If this was self funded would people's opinions be exactly the same?

Yes!! The money is just another small part of my rage! My husband and Brother have this condition and are both enormously offended by what this womans doing..... they feel shes making a mockery of them.

As far as "raising awareness" theres plenty of ways of doing that without this debarkle. For the record I dont know a single person alive who doesnt know what a seizure is!

[lou]

It's raised awareness but not in a positive way. You also overestimate the numbers that read newspapers, and even if people did buy these publications reporting it, you assume people will read it. Yeah, there are people who read their paper from cover to cover, but there are plenty who only read the sport, or only read the business sections.

And how exactly is she making people more aware about epilepsy? Most adults are aware that the condition exists. We don't need some self-absorbed arty fitting in front of us to know what a fit involves. Some of us have had to help a person, and even those who haven't seen a person fitting would be able to guess what was going on when it happens.

Do we need to see a fit to understand how a person is affected? I say no. I have asthma, but I have enough conviction in my ability to communicate my experiences of the condition, how it affects me, and what it is like to have an asthma attack without having to actually show you what an asthma attack is.

Rather than raising awareness about a potentially fatal condition, all this smacks of is a publicity stunt by a person who looks to be more interested in raising awareness about their own profile.

[Houdini Logic]

I could be being really stupid/ignorant here (so apologies in advance) but I don't personally understand the 'raise awareness' argument?

It's not like something like drug abuse or self harm where people have the choice whether they do it or not.

Even if people are 'aware' that epilepsy is shit for the people that have it - it doesn't actually accomplish anything

[Guest MarshallForEngland]

I would recommend reading one of the books by Oliver Sacks on this subject, particularly the final section of The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat in which he mentions the feeling of intense euphoria some epilepsy sufferers have immediately before and sometimes during a seizure.

[ozleicester]

I think possibly the point has been lost, this is being performed as a work of art.

Now i happen to quite like surrealist and Modern art, and really am not a fan of Still life or portraiture, but... i accept that others see a nice painting of a pear as art.

Im not sure i understand this persons intent, but, im not here to judge what others believe art to be.

I would be interested to see if the same level of outrage occurred had there not been money involved.

Art is not about money.

[lou]

I think possibly the point has been lost, this is being performed as a work of art.

Now i happen to quite like surrealist and Modern art, and really am not a fan of Still life or portraiture, but... i accept that others see a nice painting of a pear as art.

Im not sure i understand this persons intent, but, im not here to judge what others believe art to be.

I would be interested to see if the same level of outrage occurred had there not been money involved.

Art is not about money.

You dont have a partner with the disease obviously, I couldnt give a toss about the money its not Art its offensive end of.

By the same token itd be interesting to see if the silly bint would have bothered had she not made money from it

[davieG]

I think possibly the point has been lost, this is being performed as a work of art.

Now i happen to quite like surrealist and Modern art, and really am not a fan of Still life or portraiture, but... i accept that others see a nice painting of a pear as art.

Im not sure i understand this persons intent, but, im not here to judge what others believe art to be.

I would be interested to see if the same level of outrage occurred had there not been money involved.

Art is not about money.

I just don't understand the concept of it being art - would watching someone have the shits, or someone pissing their pants, or some kiddy injuring themselves, or some old person dropping dead in the street, or a fox being slaughtered by hounds, oh sorry that ones sport be classed as art?

[Lillehamring]

You don't know they're happening? You could probably find 10 examples in your daily newspaper of public money being irresponsibly pissed up the wall. This probably isn't even in the top 50 most worthless wastes of taxpayers/lottery cash this week but it's the one we have a thread about because people are clearly uncomfortable with the idea, and they still would be even if it was costing nowt.

I don't really consider it apathy. I just find it very hard to get enraged about 2 thousand pounds being spent on this when we're, for example, gunna waste 4.5 billion this year killing British soldiers and Afghan citizens in a pointless, unwinnable war.

At least this miiiight raise a few peoples' awareness about epilepsy I guess.

Also, I don't play the lottery so you and I aren't paying for it.

good post, i happen to find the majority of 'performance' or 'installation' art fairly tedious but, from an artistic point of view, this intrigues me. A lot of posters seem to have entirely missed the point of what she is doing, the event is called 'involuntary dances', as such i believe she is trying to express her body's relation to movement, seeing the spasming for as a form of expression...

On a non-art, social level, i can see how quite clearly how this has the potential to 'raises awarness' and understanding - most people will simply not sit down and read a pamphlet on the effects of epilepsy, most people if they were to see a person having a seizure would feel many emotions raging from fear to embarrassment - she is using her natural condition to show that what happens during a seizure is nothing more than a natural 'invlountary' series of movements.

this is not about making more people familiar with a word, 'epilepsy', it is too encourage people to understand and to help remove the stigma attached to seizuring.

so much of performance art, and why i so often find it tedious, is because it is art for art's sake. What this woman is doing, by exposing her own condition, is offering people the chance to break down their prejudices and misconceptions about an illness that many people have heard of, but likely very few people understand.

one of my best mates is epileptic, this 'performance' doesn't mock him, i suspect if i were to see it it would actually help me to understand better the risks and the trouble that it gives him.

the fact that people find it shocking and offensive only goes to emphasise that a woman publically having a seizure is still considered distasteful, or disturbing - this woman has to live with the disease every day of her life, she is demonstrating something that to her is a perfectly natural bodily function, anyone who would find this 'offensive' AS AN EXHIBITION should really ask themselves the question why.

we happily watch people having sex, and does anybody really find that sight of someone vomitting or peeing that disturbing. so why should this be considered any differently, to her it is a natural bodily function.

yes, it is an extreme thing to do, but so is throwing yourself under a horse, but sometimes it takes an extreme act to desensitise society.

[Guest]

the fact that people find it shocking and offensive only goes to emphasise that a woman publically having a seizure is still considered distasteful, or disturbing - this woman has to live with the disease every day of her life, she is demonstrating something that to her is a perfectly natural bodily function, anyone who would find this 'offensive' AS AN EXHIBITION should really ask themselves the question why.

Wrong. I don't find it shocking or offensive. I find it totally pointless, and potentially dangerous. As someone who lives with a potentially life threatening condition, I find the thought of inducing an asthma attack totally wappy. Knowing the effects that it has on me, and how long it takes me to get over one, the last thing I want is another asthma attack full stop. If anything, what this woman does is belittle and mock epilepsy. "Oh, look what I can do, I can induce fits, and I don't care about the after effects", or "see how this doesn't really bother me in the slightest", when I know people who have taken weeks to recover after seizures. I would even go as far to say that if she wants to mess around with her condition that much, then she shouldn't be entitled to have any medical supervision on hand, but no doubt I'll be shot down for being cruel for that.

If she's that good a performer, then why not simulate the action of fitting? It's not impossible, I've seen some pretty naff actors manage to pull off a convincing performance on TV before now.

[Lillehamring]

Wrong. I don't find it shocking or offensive. I find it totally pointless, and potentially dangerous. As someone who lives with a potentially life threatening condition, I find the thought of inducing an asthma attack totally wappy. Knowing the effects that it has on me, and how long it takes me to get over one, the last thing I want is another asthma attack full stop. If anything, what this woman does is belittle and mock epilepsy. "Oh, look what I can do, I can induce fits, and I don't care about the after effects", or "see how this doesn't really bother me in the slightest", when I know people who have taken weeks to recover after seizures. I would even go as far to say that if she wants to mess around with her condition that much, then she shouldn't be entitled to have any medical supervision on hand, but no doubt I'll be shot down for being cruel for that.

If she's that good a performer, then why not simulate the action of fitting? It's not impossible, I've seen some pretty naff actors manage to pull off a convincing performance on TV before now.

i wasn't refering to anyone specific, just generalising about people finding it shocking or offensive...

i too live under the shadow of an asthma attack, i know what it is like - and i've seen how people react to an asthma attack, which i suspect isn't as significant an episode as an epileptic seizure - those people who are familiar with an asthma attack know how to react and behave, those who don't tend to get scared or embarrassed...

if i saw someone having an asthma attack i'd be fine, whereas a seizure i wouldn't know what was happening, it is healthy for society to experience these things, ignorance is the greatest weapon against tolerance...

as for someone simulating the action of fitting, well, personally i think that is more patronising than what this woman is doing, i'm sure if non-epileptic tried to pass off a seizure as artistic expression, people would be absolutely livid - and even the best actor in the world can't really replicate the unexpected randomness of the characteristics of seizure.

i really don't think she is doing it to 'show off', i'm sure she takes her condition very seriously, she obviously feels strongly about the message she is trying to put across, otherwise she wouldn't be taking the risk... if it isn't about a message for her and purely for the sake of 'art', that is a different matter, but at bottom this is her body and she has the right to use her body to express herself in anyway she sees fit. People risk their lives in many walks of life from the construction industry all the way to formula one drivers, so again the question has to be asked, why is what this woman is doing so very different that makes her behaviour so intolerable, be it through the offense it may cause or it's perceived 'pointlessness'?

[stez]

she could've just brought a pamphlet out.

[Guest]

i wasn't refering to anyone specific, just generalising about people finding it shocking or offensive...

i too live under the shadow of an asthma attack, i know what it is like - and i've seen how people react to an asthma attack, which i suspect isn't as significant an episode as an epileptic seizure - those people who are familiar with an asthma attack know how to react and behave, those who don't tend to get scared or embarrassed...

if i saw someone having an asthma attack i'd be fine, whereas a seizure i wouldn't know what was happening, it is healthy for society to experience these things, ignorance is the greatest weapon against tolerance...

as for someone simulating the action of fitting, well, personally i think that is more patronising than what this woman is doing, i'm sure if non-epileptic tried to pass off a seizure as artistic expression, people would be absolutely livid - and even the best actor in the world can't really replicate the unexpected randomness of the characteristics of seizure.

i really don't think she is doing it to 'show off', i'm sure she takes her condition very seriously, she obviously feels strongly about the message she is trying to put across, otherwise she wouldn't be taking the risk... if it isn't about a message for her and purely for the sake of 'art', that is a different matter, but at bottom this is her body and she has the right to use her body to express herself in anyway she sees fit. People risk their lives in many walks of life from the construction industry all the way to formula one drivers, so again the question has to be asked, why is what this woman is doing so very different that makes her behaviour so intolerable, be it through the offense it may cause or it's perceived 'pointlessness'?

If she took her condition seriously, she wouldn't be risking her own health and well-being by inducing fits. If she wants to raise awareness, simulation is not patronising, not to me. Or like Stez has just put, why not write her experiences down? Or talk about them. I don't need to see a real life fit to understand what one does.

Yes, she has a right to use her body how she wants. That being the case, it just backs up my feelings that she shouldn't have medical assistance on tap. I feel like that about anyone who abuses their body, whether inducing fits or drinking themselves into a state, takes drugs, whatever. I have no sympathy. The paramedics on standby could be better used elsewhere.

I have to disagree; I think she is "showing off". I don't believe her motives are altruistic in any way. This is just something that she can use to promote herself, and her "art". I wouldn't be surprised if she saw this stunt as a means to an end.

[Lillehamring]

If she took her condition seriously, she wouldn't be risking her own health and well-being by inducing fits. If she wants to raise awareness, simulation is not patronising, not to me. Or like Stez has just put, why not write her experiences down? Or talk about them. I don't need to see a real life fit to understand what one does.

Yes, she has a right to use her body how she wants. That being the case, it just backs up my feelings that she shouldn't have medical assistance on tap. I feel like that about anyone who abuses their body, whether inducing fits or drinking themselves into a state, takes drugs, whatever. I have no sympathy. The paramedics on standby could be better used elsewhere.

I have to disagree; I think she is "showing off". I don't believe her motives are altruistic in any way. This is just something that she can use to promote herself, and her "art". I wouldn't be surprised if she saw this stunt as a means to an end.

ok...

but...

a pamphlet will not replicate the experience of witnessing a seizure.

i haven't really given the thought of her having medical support or not, but if someone is paying for it then what difference should it make, should all funding of the arts be stopped on the premise that at least one person will find the art distasteful or pointless?

if she is doing this purely for artistic reasons, then clearly she is prepared to risk her life for her art - well better than someone painting a wall red or standing in a box - for me the element of risk adds to the sense of 'involuntaryness' which the event is celebrating, it gives it a certain unpredictable uncontrollable element.

[Webbo]

I have to disagree; I think she is "showing off". I don't believe her motives are altruistic in any way. This is just something that she can use to promote herself, and her "art". I wouldn't be surprised if she saw this stunt as a means to an end.

Who knows what goes through the minds of these arty types? She probably does think it's a work of art (or at least has manged to kid herself into believing it).

This ranks below Tracy Emmin's bed and that chap who made art out of elephant dung but the art world probably think this is marvellous.

The other 99% of us can laugh at what a bunch of w@nkers they are.

[Guest]

ok...

but...

a pamphlet will not replicate the experience of witnessing a seizure.

i haven't really given the thought of her having medical support or not, but if someone is paying for it then what difference should it make, should all funding of the arts be stopped on the premise that at least one person will find the art distasteful or pointless?

if she is doing this purely for artistic reasons, then clearly she is prepared to risk her life for her art - well better than someone painting a wall red or standing in a box - for me the element of risk adds to the sense of 'involuntaryness' which the event is celebrating, it gives it a certain unpredictable uncontrollable element.

We'll have to disagree on this then.

I don't see how witnessing a seizure can be better than describing one and its effects. I personally would find the latter more compelling, as I would be able to hear or read the account and be able to visualise the effect better than seeing it. Seeing a convulsion is not going to make me empathise with it at all. But then again, maybe I am a freak, or something.

The paramedics, even if paid for privately in the first instance, will be taken away from doing something more useful, like saving a person who is fitting through no fault of their own, thus impacting on the public sector in the long run.

[Daggers]

I put a video of me wanking on my plasma TV, and placed it facing out of the lounge window, all in the name of art - and you would be amazed at the offence it "apparently" caused.

I reckon some people just live to be offended.

All I wanted to do was raise the awareness of problematic masturbation when someone has washed the tupperware and put in in a different cupboard. Tossers.

[intotheforest]

Mine would.

Putting her health at risk for the sake of 'art' is utterly pointless.

What if it's a fatal seizure?

What kind of sick person would pay to watch an epileptic seizure?

The fact that we are paying for this is annoying enough but I seriously question her judgement and those of the people who want to see her.

Exactly. £2000 and inviting people to film this on their mobile phones if it happens; it's just not right.

I completely disagree with this anyways, especially when a mate of mine died of one at work in June - reading his facebook the days before his death now where he complains of this headache is chilling.

But to willingly do this is outrageous and just wrong and inhumane.

Yes it's not being forced upon us, but should such a thing be put on the table for us to view in the first place?

[Lillehamring]

We'll have to disagree on this then.

I don't see how witnessing a seizure can be better than describing one and its effects. I personally would find the latter more compelling, as I would be able to hear or read the account and be able to visualise the effect better than seeing it. Seeing a convulsion is not going to make me empathise with it at all. But then again, maybe I am a freak, or something.

The paramedics, even if paid for privately in the first instance, will be taken away from doing something more useful, like saving a person who is fitting through no fault of their own, thus impacting on the public sector in the long run.

don't get me wrong, i'm not saying i would go out of my way to see it or would consider it to be a success if i did see it; i guess, ahem, i'm playing devils advocate on this one - i just find that with a lot of these things it is very easy to just dismiss them as frivolous or wrong, but often there is more to it than meets the eye...

a lot of people wouldn't recognise a seizure, and won't take the time to read a pamphlet about it - so if it educates just one person it could save a life.

i suppose it's akin to jade goody's media circus when she died, to many it seemed tastless and merciless, to others it was educational and helpful

[Guest]

don't get me wrong, i'm not saying i would go out of my way to see it or would consider it to be a success if i did see it; i guess, ahem, i'm playing devils advocate on this one - i just find that with a lot of these things it is very easy to just dismiss them as frivolous or wrong, but often there is more to it than meets the eye...

a lot of people wouldn't recognise a seizure, and won't take the time to read a pamphlet about it - so if it educates just one person it could save a life.

i suppose it's akin to jade goody's media circus when she died, to many it seemed tastless and merciless, to others it was educational and helpful

I bet you can't guess which camp I fall into

[lou]

She wasnt offering to give advice on how to treat her seizure, just asking people to film it on their mobiles. Anyway she could have done that without this circus IF thats what she wanted, and not some shameless, exhibitionism.

You seriously think someone isnt going to spend 5 mins reading a pamphlet would spend money and a couple of hours waiting for this idiot to "perform"

As for a lot of people not recognising one, I dont believe that to be the case I certainly dont know of anyone who wouldnt know that someone was having one!

This is a bloody insult to all sufferers and the memories of those whove died from it IMO.

RIP Rach. x

[ozleicester]

I am certainly not trying to offend anyone or downplay the importance of the issue, however there are thousands, even millions of depictions every day, that people could see as mocking someone elses problems.

Thousands die on our roads... and i am sure if i watch TV (yes..even TV is art) i will see a show with a car crash.

People are murdered every day and again, TV, Movies, Theatre will all show dozens of murders every day.

Are these offensive?

I just dont believe we have the right to decide what someone else considers art.

As for taking a shit..piss etc being classed as art , yes there have been people who have displayed such items as "art" Not to my liking and i wont go to see it, but it does raise questions and make me think, so.. is it then art?

sigh

Now.. lets talk art vs porn...

[davieG]

I am certainly not trying to offend anyone or downplay the importance of the issue, however there are thousands, even millions of depictions every day, that people could see as mocking someone elses problems.

Thousands die on our roads... and i am sure if i watch TV (yes..even TV is art) i will see a show with a car crash.

People are murdered every day and again, TV, Movies, Theatre will all show dozens of murders every day.

Are these offensive?

I just dont believe we have the right to decide what someone else considers art.

As for taking a shit..piss etc being classed as art , yes there have been people who have displayed such items as "art" Not to my liking and i wont go to see it, but it does raise questions and make me think, so.. is it then art?

sigh

Now.. lets talk art vs porn...

If you're saying someone having a dose of the shits is art then porn isn't porn it's art and should be viewable on mainstream TV and art studios like any other art.

If it's something you wouldn't like children to see then to my mind it's not art, it may be thought provoking but so is calling someone a **** loudly in the middle of a supermarket, or violently attacking someone in the street but they are not considered acceptable or artistic.

To my mind thought provoking does not by itself = art.

As for murders on TV shows they are make believe and not the sole aim/target of the programme. If this person was re-enacting her seizures as part of an education programme, not as an artistic event then that would seem to be a better, safer, repeatable and more educational way to get her message across.

Fame for 15 minutes to enable an on going notoriety to be gained in order to make future monies off the back of it in our celebrity obsessed society seems to be the sole aim here. In fact she's probably half way there just by the publicity gained from her intention to do it.

[James.]

If you're saying someone having a dose of the shits is art then porn isn't porn it's art

That's some pretty fucked up porn you're watching davieG.

I'm surprised at the outrage about this. There's a shitload more money being wasted elsewhere that makes £2,000 look ridiculously small. Not to mention the fact that I now know more about epilepsy than I did before I found out about this show - maybe she's right after all...

[ozleicester]

If you're saying someone having a dose of the shits is art then porn isn't porn it's art and should be viewable on mainstream TV and art studios like any other art. 1

If it's something you wouldn't like children to see then to my mind it's not art, it may be thought provoking but so is calling someone a **** loudly in the middle of a supermarket, or violently attacking someone in the street but they are not considered acceptable or artistic.

To my mind thought provoking does not by itself = art. 2

As for murders on TV shows they are make believe and not the sole aim/target of the programme. If this person was re-enacting her seizures as part of an education programme, not as an artistic event then that would seem to be a better, safer, repeatable and more educational way to get her message across. 3

Fame for 15 minutes to enable an on going notoriety to be gained in order to make future monies off the back of it in our celebrity obsessed society seems to be the sole aim here. In fact she's probably half way there just by the publicity gained from her intention to do it. 4

1) Im not saying the shits are art... however others in the past have.

2) Agreed, just being thought provoking is not art.. ..quite a number of foxestalk posters would otherwise consider themselves artists

3) She states that part of the "exhibition" is to raise awareness

4) our society which focuses on celebrity rather than on people who achieve, is just sad, however there are many many artists who were not.. and are not, famous in their lifetime, but whose work becomes valuable much later.

the art v porn line was more a throwaway one.. but, where is the line drawn...

some people dont want their kids to see a naked statue of david... eros...etc... whats the difference between those.. and Marilyn chambers... ..or who ever the current star is

[lou]

That's some pretty fucked up porn you're watching davieG.

I'm surprised at the outrage about this. There's a shitload more money being wasted elsewhere that makes £2,000 look ridiculously small. Not to mention the fact that I now know more about epilepsy than I did before I found out about this show - maybe she's right after all...

Maybe if it was your loved one who was so distressed by this story youd understand why I was so outraged. Im not having a dig at you. Everyones different I know but my relative was very upset by this... hence so was I. We have to live with this every day and honestly I cannot see how what this woman did is helping any sufferers. It could have been acheived without the offence