Slashdot Mirror
Ear Grown From Van Gogh DNA On Display
First time accepted submitter afeeney (719690) writes 'The Centre for Art and Media in Karlsruhe, Germany, is displaying an ear grown from DNA contributed by a relative of artist Vincent Van Gogh. The Center said artist Diemut Strebe made the replica using living cells from Lieuwe van Gogh, the great-great-grandson of Vincent’s brother Theo. Using a 3D-printer, the cells were shaped to resemble the ear that Vincent van Gogh is said to have cut off during a psychotic episode in 1888. “I use science basically like a type of brush, like Vincent used paint,” Strebe told The Associated Press. Historians argue about whether Van Gogh cut off his own ear and if so, why, but it remains one of the most famous acts of self-mutilation in the Western world.'
I am your father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate.
Yeah I thought they had a piece of hair or something so it really was his. It's not far fetched - locks of Lincoln's hair still exist (as do samples from a great many folks, like Marilyn Monroe, Michael Jackson, and Elvis). VH1 has some "memorabilia" program that had an episode going to the home of one of the big "hair collectors" - I'm sure there is some weird name for them if one wanted to look it up - who had authenticated samples of all of the above and many more displayed and the most valuable ones like Lincoln in a big fireproof safe. Looked like a bank vault. It was pretty creepy, but very cool at the same time. He has all the documents to back them up, as well.
What? WHAT?
Fifty years of Yippie! 1968-2018
Hey bro, I hear you like art!
"Since I'm alive again, where's my damned royalty check!"
Table-ized A.I.
Not even grown on a mouse's back? Come on!
http://www.wolframalpha.com/in...
Only 1/64th blood relation.
Stir in a little melatonin and give the ear to Evander Holyfield.
Anyone else think the art piece itself looks like the contents of one of the Akira sample canisters? Maybe she can make some more of them...just in time for the things to be buried in a secret military installation beneath the construction site for the 2020 Olympics venue. :P
Friend: "The NIC is misconfigured..." Me: "No prob, I'll just telnet in and fix it." *Silence*
This is the only thing he DIDN'T want to last longer than him. Don't be cruel.
So the ear owns all of his collective works?
So as a follow-up to this success, what other missing body parts will they be growing? Jerry Garcia's middle finger? Heather Mills' leg? Rick Allen's left arm? George W Bush's brain?
No left turn unstoned.
In Monroe's case there would be little question about what to grow. Mammorabilia.
But is is Jackson's real hair?
I saw a bunch of famous peoples heads kept alive in jars.
Seriously, what's so fucking great about using a relatives DNA?
It's art, in the same sense as it is art when David Blaine tries to impress people by sitting in a Faraday cage for while, or when somebody can sell a rotting pig's carcass for millions of dollars.
I can't see it myself - but maybe I'm just not sensitive enough. To me art is something that induces you to think or feel more deeply about something important by demonstrating something 'deep', and as far as I can see, what a lot of modern art demonstrates is simply the gullibility of certain people with more money than sense. Or taste.
To me art is something that induces you to think or feel more deeply about something important by demonstrating something 'deep'...
That's an extremely narrow definition of art. To many people, art isn't something rare, deep and important that you go to appreciate, it's something you can appreciate anywhere, any time. Is the song "Happy" art? Most people would say yes, and I'd agree. How about that neighborhood mural of Julius Erving in Philadelphia? I'm not a basketball fan, but yeah, I'd say it is. Is Tchaikovsky's Violin Concerto art? I think it's the finest piece of art ever created.
How about a piece alluded to by an earlier post in this thread, "Piss Christ", a crucifix in a jar of urine? Well, I think that, along Marcel Duchamp's "Fountain", which was just a urinal are art also.
However, the great thing about art is you're not obliged to agree with anyone. My only quibble with you is that your definition excludes the majority of what I believe is art.
It is perfectly alright to have toads in your hat , so long as they are not soaked in Cadmium and mineral spirits. .... or lead.
Cadmium, is bad shit, slowly absorbed by fondling your paint rag then running your fingers through your hair, picking your nose, eating without washing and even scrubbing the pigment off your hands with mineral spirits which carry it into the bloodstream. Starry Night was a hallucinatory painting indicative of the damage being suffered.
Not to worry though, painters, real Cadmium hasnt been used in decades for ANY paint, they merely call it cadmium red or yellow. Still plenty of unwholesome shit in paint, just not Cadmium
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
The estate of John Holmes has been tossing around the idea of cloned penii to be used for transplant and are furiously sampling DNA from amongst the family.
If you have a right foot and a left foot, it only makes sense to have a foot hanging between them. Be the life of the party! Impress girls! Quit stuffing potatoes down your shorts and get the real thing!
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
You watch far too much Futurama :)
"Luck is my middle name," said Rincewind, indistinctly. "Mind you, my first name is Bad." -- Terry Pratchett
Wouldn't it be easier to just take a photo of the relative's ear?
“...like Vincent used paint.” — Vincent Van Gogh didn't use paint like a brush. he had actual brushes for that.
How about a piece alluded to by an earlier post in this thread, "Piss Christ", a crucifix in a jar of urine? Well, I think that, along Marcel Duchamp's "Fountain", which was just a urinal are art also.
Ah yes, the "Whatever you can get away with" school of art.
Which unfortunately leads to a carny/rube relationship with a person putting a dead cow on display, and then the critics stumbling to assess the dead cow in strange and mysterious ways.
Obviously the dead cow and it's putrification process is not in the least creative. The creative process is the grifter who put the dead cow there making the critics do his/her bidding.
It's a exceptionally silly game, in the end, a sort of cockamamie performance work by the critics.
Meh - critics make for shitty performance art.
"Piss Christ" is the perfect example. No particular creativity in production of the work. But purposefully designed to inflame certain subsets of society. So people discuss it for it's inflammatory virtues. Yippee skippee, that makes a group of people sitting around the breakfast table discussing last nights episode of "Here comes Honey Boo-Boo," or "Duck Dynasty" equally performance art. It makes this thread performance art.
So more the Meh. I have a broad enough definition of art to include such things. But there is art, there is good art and there is poor art. There is also art that is incomparably stupid and virtually worthless, designed to provoke, not appreciate.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Interesting news - can't wait for another organs made of DNA of famous people...
Friends, Romans, countrymen . . .
As the man actually said, "When ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise." This would be such a case.
Growing a blob of building material then using a 3D printer to make a shape out of it does not count as 'growing an ear' to me.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
If they are lucky. We need to get over the myth of the "blood relative."
The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
Then the word 'art' is meaningless.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
You watch far too much Futurama :)
I posit that it is impossible to watch too much Futurama.
I do not have toads in my hat! Se... well, lookie there.
Yeah, they need the lead for pencils.
However, the great thing about art is you're not obliged to agree with anyone.
And the bad thing is that there are those that will tax your wealth to pay for it anyway.
You think art that is designed to provoke is not art. Well, then you're probably only half blind. But whatever floats your boat.
However, the great thing about art is you're not obliged to agree with anyone.
And the bad thing is that there are those that will tax your wealth to pay for it anyway.
Yes, because people should only be taxed to support things they personally agree with. Where do I get the refund for my share of the $1.1 Trillion the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter?
But it is silly and at the utter depths of banality, and in the end, existing only to provoke. not to be admired.
Except for those who like Goatse, or two girls, one cup, perhaps. There's some provocative high art, yes no?
Because in the end, the best sculptors, painters, photographers and poets can piss in a cup with a little crucifix.
Then again, we all can. But we all can't be the best of the above. Most of us can't be among the middling of them.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
That's a travesty too. For much the same reasons.
I think you're trying to nail Jello to a board (which might get you a grant).
This is like arguing religion.