Professor Rejects Camera Implanted In His Head

Stenchwarrior writes "A New York University professor temporarily removed the camera he had surgically installed in the back of his head to get rid of one of the apparatus' parts after his body rejected it, myFOXny.com reported Wednesday. Photography professor Wafaa Bilal was in near constant pain after part of a thumb-nail-size camera, implanted in December as part of an art project commissioned by a new museum in Qatar, was rejected by his body."

Comments

Why didn't he wear a strap on?

[Jophish]

Did it never occur to him to just strap a camera to his head? Or just wear a hat with a camera on. Methinks that the main reason for having this implanted was to generate publicity for this project.

Re:Why didn't he wear a strap on?

[Arancaytar]

Art is not practical, reasonable or logical.

Thus, everything that is neither practical, reasonable or logical must be art!

Re:Why didn't he wear a strap on?

[DrXym]

Did it never occur to him to just strap a camera to his head? Or just wear a hat with a camera on. Methinks that the main reason for having this implanted was to generate publicity for this project.

I think you nailed it. Only an attention whore would do this and it sounds like the bugger got his attention too. And a septic head.

Re:Why didn't he wear a strap on?

[Arancaytar]

Ssh! Don't explain the joke!

Re:Why didn't he wear a strap on?

[Jason Levine]

That was the first thing I thought of when I first heard about this teacher. How much did it cost him in medical bills to implant a camera in his head? I'm sure insurance didn't cover that. (If it did, what kind of plan is he on?!!) How much less would it have cost for him to take a $5 hat and install a camera in it? Then, when you inevitably needed to replace some camera part (or the entire camera for an upgrade), it would be relatively easy to do. Either remove/replace camera or just get a new hat. No additional surgery/recovery required!

Sometimes the super-cool sounding high tech approach isn't the best approach.

Re:Why didn't he wear a strap on?

[Kozz]

Why didn't he wear a strap on?

I swear, if I had a nickel for every time I heard that... well .... *uncomfortable silence*

Re:Why didn't he wear a strap on?

[timeOday]

It's plain stupid. Now he has no choice but to stare at people behind him all day long.

That is the whole point. If he just wore it like a backwards headlamp, he could take it off at his convenience, which would defeat the purpose of committing to live with it as if it were natural. Even if he had the discipline to never take it off, his audience couldn't be sure. That does matter in an art project.

Re:Why didn't he wear a strap on?

[Kenoli]

That is the whole point. If he just wore it like a backwards headlamp, he could take it off at his convenience.

He could cover the installed camera at his convenience just as easily. The only point is publicity.

Stupid art tricks

[bradley13]

This is right up there with locking yourself in a cage for month - a totally meaningless, useless trick meant only to get attention.

Re:Stupid art tricks

[Sonny Yatsen]

Yeah, I totally agree. I mean, I'm clearly no art critic and claim no deep understanding of art, but what does this bring as "art"? This brings no insights and adds nothing. And frankly, the fact that it's funded by a new museum in Qatar makes it worse in my eyes. Places like Qatar and Abu Dhabi have demonstrated that they have more money than sense for decades, building one extravagant, useless building after another. This "art" project is about as artful as having a toddler splatter his spaghetti on a canvas.

Re:Stupid art tricks

[j00r0m4nc3r]

This brings no insights and adds nothing.

Your failure to derive insight from this only speaks about you, not the work.

Re:Stupid art tricks

[timeOday]

You are certainly entitled to your own opinion about any piece of art, yes. Whether you are qualified as an "art critic" is something for the audience of your criticism to decide. Do you have any insight that others have found worthy of listening to and/or paying for?

Re:Stupid art tricks

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

Let's change the subject slightly

Yeah, I totally agree. I mean, I'm clearly no astronomer and claim no deep understanding of the stars, but what does this bring as "science"? This [routine observation] brings no insights and adds nothing. And frankly, the fact that it's funded by a new observatory in California makes it worse in my eyes. Places like California and New Mexico have demonstrated that they have more money than sense for decades, building one extravagant, useless telescope after another. This "science" project is about as scientific as having a toddler point to the night sky and gurgle.

Same ideas, different subject. We can't know in advance what we will see or discover when we look into the telescope. That's why we look at all. A similar thing can be said of art. We cannot know the impact or impression of a work until it is created.

Now, I'm not entirely unsympathetic to your viewpoint, and frankly I have a low opinion of modern artists. But this professor went out on a limb to create something entirely unprecedented, and that's about as close to creative research as I think art professors can get. So I'm willing to cut him some slack here.

In short, If I can spend time investigating the Goldbach Conjecture, I don't see why this guy can't bolt a camera to the back of his head.

Well..

[RevWaldo]

...I guess he didn't see that coming.

.

Re:Well..

[interkin3tic]

It's just as well, I hear the camera adds ten pounds, his neck was probably getting tired.

Surprised Mann wasn't first

[CRCulver]

I'm surprised that this artist was the first to try implanting a device, as Steve Mann has been increasingly merging technology with his body for three decades now.

Cool insight...

[MoldySpore]

While many may say "this is just a stunt" or whatever, regardless if it is or not it was interesting none-the-less. There have been many instances of technology being implanted into people lately, especially in and around the head. While perhaps not as invasive and technical as a chip implant that gives the blind the ability to see, I think the day of artificial technological implants of this type are just around the corner. This sort of trial and error with the implanting of hardware on the human body is necessary for us to get an idea of what the human body will accept and reject, and what procedures of implantation can help reduce the chances of rejection.

Groucho

[FatLittleMonkey]

Man goes to a doctor and says, "Doctor, I hurts when I do this!"
Doctor says, "Well, don't do that."

Eye of the beholder

[varmittang]

Not everyone likes your artwork. Including your own body.

Re:Eye of the beholder

[alvinrod]

Well, they say everybody's a critic.

FTFY

Ah, but hindsight...

[Randwulf]

Ah, but hindsight is 20/20!

Re:Ah, but hindsight...

[Hojima]

it looks like his idea didn't... *glasses*... develop well.