# Body Worlds and the public display of cadavers



## SRoper (Dec 14, 2007)

I was wondering what people think about the Body Worlds exhibit and the public display of cadavers in general. I have my own views, but I want to hear what others think first.


----------



## VictorBravo (Dec 14, 2007)

Something I wrote a bit over a year ago when the body mongers came to our town:

<center>Grapes and Figs</center>: Neither could they blush.


----------



## VaughanRSmith (Dec 14, 2007)

As long as I don't have to touch them.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Dec 14, 2007)

somewhat disturbing, but fascinating, as well...depends on one's view of the sacredness of the image bearer and does that extend to the flesh...


----------



## Davidius (Dec 14, 2007)

jdlongmire said:


> somewhat disturbing, but fascinating, as well...depends on one's view of the sacredness of the image bearer and does that extend to the flesh...



Assuming it extends to the flesh, are models of dead people be worse than pictures/paintings of live people?


----------



## panta dokimazete (Dec 14, 2007)

well - I do not believe they are models - it is my understanding that they are actual dead bodies, so that takes them into a different class than mere models, in my view.


----------



## VictorBravo (Dec 14, 2007)

The blog link I posted was about a Body Exhibition that was touring the country. They are real cadavers placticized by a technique developed by a doctor from Germany.

One problem with the exhibit I referenced was that nobody was willing to verify how they got the bodies. They all came from China and were "unidentified."


----------



## panta dokimazete (Dec 14, 2007)

victorbravo said:


> One problem with the exhibit I referenced was that nobody was willing to verify how they got the bodies. They all came from China and were "unidentified."



hmm...my "disturbing" meter just pegged out....


----------



## Davidius (Dec 14, 2007)

So what would you guys think about it if the bodies were of individuals who had "elected to have their bodies donated to science"?


----------



## panta dokimazete (Dec 14, 2007)

well - I'd be *less* disturbed...I think I will still opt out of the "show".


----------



## VaughanRSmith (Dec 15, 2007)

I think that the majority appeal of these kinds of things is voyeuristic. Just like people craning their necks at a car accident, or gathering at the scene of a fire. I think it appeals to something wicked in humanity and veils itself (sometimes thinly) in other reasons.


----------



## BecomingReformed (Dec 15, 2007)

victorbravo said:


> One problem with the exhibit I referenced was that nobody was willing to verify how they got the bodies. They all came from China and were "unidentified."



Okay, now I'm very glad that I didn't let my friends bully me into going to see the exhibit. Personally, I just don't understand the fascination. I think it might be something about breaking the cultural taboo about respect for the dead. 

My concern is that ultimately these exhibits reduce human beings into objects. It's too easy to forget that these "cadavers" were made in God's image and housed human souls.

Of course, this is just my


----------



## calgal (Dec 15, 2007)

Cadavers are used in anatomy classes and med schools throughout the country. I am confused as to how this is any different than that. If seen as an educational experience it would be a LOT better than ER or Grey's Anatomy to show the reality of the medical field: yes you ARE working on humans.


----------



## Guido's Brother (Dec 15, 2007)

I went to see Body Worlds 3 in Vancouver and took my kids with too. My wife saw it in Portland this past summer. 

I don't have a problem with it. It did not glorify death. It was very tastefully done. It inspired awe in us at the intricate design of the human body. It was truly amazing and invoked reverence and praise for God. One of the displays actually had a quote from Psalm 8:4-5 prominently displayed above it. 

So far as I know all the bodies on display were of people who had willed their bodies to science and education.

I might also add that they had a display of unborn children at various stages of life as well. These were all children whose mothers had died of natural causes -- they were not aborted. I think this can be a powerful pro-life tool. When you see it, it's plainly obvious that these are not blobs, but real human beings. The people who put on the display in Vancouver recognized that, I think, because they had that part of the exhibit right at the end and people could walk around it if they wanted to.


----------



## Davidius (Dec 15, 2007)

Guido's Brother said:


> I don't have a problem with it. It did not glorify death. It was very tastefully done. It inspired awe in us at the intricate design of the human body. It was truly amazing and invoked reverence and praise for God. One of the displays actually had a quote from Psalm 8:4-5 prominently displayed above it.



That's a good point. Through this kind of exhibit those of us who aren't doctors get to see God's amazing creation in a way which would be otherwise impossible.


----------



## Pergamum (Dec 15, 2007)

My view is that the motive is what matters. If for education, then a display of cadavers would be educational to show the complexity of the body. If, however, this is advertized as "art" then it is sick and is treating cadavers as an object of entertainment.


----------



## Guido's Brother (Dec 15, 2007)

Pergamum said:


> My view is that the motive is what matters. If for education, then a display of cadavers would be educational to show the complexity of the body. If, however, this is advertized as "art" then it is sick and is treating cadavers as an object of entertainment.



I can agree with that. In the nature of the case, Body Worlds is usually (always?) displayed at science/education venues such as Science World (Vancouver) and the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry (Portland).


----------



## Pergamum (Dec 16, 2007)

Yes, in like manner doctors and medical personnel practice operations by slicing up cadavers sometimes. This just makes good sense......
...But if Walmart advertized "home operations kit" and included a cadaver to slice up for recreation than I would oppose this same action as being awful and morally unjustifiable.


So much of morality lies in the motives.


----------



## ReadBavinck (Dec 16, 2007)

Read this essay by Michael J. Lewis Body and Soul and listen to his interview with Ken Myers in the most recent (Vol. 88) Mars Hill Audio Journal


----------



## py3ak (Dec 16, 2007)

Pergamum said:


> Yes, in like manner doctors and medical personnel practice operations by slicing up cadavers sometimes. This just makes good sense......
> ...But if Walmart advertized "home operations kit" and included a cadaver to slice up for recreation than I would oppose this same action as being awful and morally unjustifiable.
> 
> 
> So much of morality lies in the motives.



I wonder where in WalMart they would carry that. Next to "automotive"?


----------



## Pergamum (Dec 16, 2007)

Ruben: Ha, next to frozen food maybe. I know that they would have the cheapest cadavers in town! Perhaps "Made in America" would be stamped on them too.


----------



## py3ak (Dec 16, 2007)

Then the easy way to volunteer would be to get a "Made in America" tattoo. You got any contacts in Bentonville? We could try to sell them on this.


----------



## kvanlaan (Dec 16, 2007)

> They all came from China and were "unidentified."



:shudder:

I know what that means. I've got stories for you that would curl your toes.


----------



## SRoper (Dec 16, 2007)

Guido's Brother said:


> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> > My view is that the motive is what matters. If for education, then a display of cadavers would be educational to show the complexity of the body. If, however, this is advertized as "art" then it is sick and is treating cadavers as an object of entertainment.
> ...



I believe the exhibits are actually classified as art exhibits so that they don't have to comply with laws requiring death certificates for cadavers.


----------



## SRoper (Dec 16, 2007)

Pergamum said:


> Ruben: Ha, next to frozen food maybe. I know that they would have the cheapest cadavers in town! Perhaps "Made in America" would be stamped on them too.



Made in America? In Wal-Mart? I think you've been out of the country too long!


----------



## SRoper (Dec 29, 2007)

I promised I would state my thinking on the subject.



CarolinaCalvinist said:


> So what would you guys think about it if the bodies were of individuals who had "elected to have their bodies donated to science"?



The difference seems to be the same as the difference between prostitution and forced prostitution. The latter is much worse, but that does not justify the former.



calgal said:


> Cadavers are used in anatomy classes and med schools throughout the country. I am confused as to how this is any different than that. If seen as an educational experience it would be a LOT better than ER or Grey's Anatomy to show the reality of the medical field: yes you ARE working on humans.



There are several differences. First, the cadavers used in anatomy classes are used for specific and noble purpose: the education of the students who need to know anatomy so they can heal others. Second, the cadavers are returned to the earth after the class is over (they are often improperly returned by cremation, but they are returned nonetheless). Third, the public display of cadavers is using a person's body for profit.

I find the public display of cadavers to be rather appalling and not at all in keeping with the dignity of man. That man can be treated as another medium like clay or paint does not sit right with me. It is exploitative to put a human person on display for profit.

I'm not impressed by the appeals to the educational value of such displays. Even assuming that the display is primarily educational and not entertainment (which in the case of Body Worlds is far from clear), it seems that there are some things that are educational that should not be displayed publicly. Doctors and other health workers often need to view and touch the naked body to make a diagnosis or treat a patient. An argument could perhaps be made in favor of artists studying the nude figure. This, however, does not make public displays of nudity acceptable. I believe Thomas Hibbs, Professor of Ethics and Culture at Baylor, is exactly right when he writes, "Indeed, what is on display is not the mystery of death, but the reduction of bodies to inert plasticized parts displayed for viewers—in short, a p0rnography of the dead human body."


----------

