"Memorial for unborn children"

Remove all ads!

I recently saw a picture of an artwork by a Slovakian sculptor named Martin Hudáček, he had religious reasons for making the work which is aimed at highlighting post abortion trauma. I'll post links shortly.
This really tugged at me, I found myself staring at it for a long while, and my interperation of the art being the idea of a ghostly child forgiving the mother, but I feel it going further to how any woman who has suffered a miscarriage could also feel the need for forgiveness from their unborn child as many women blame themselves in those circumstances too.

Ive posted this in this forum because of the sensetive topics to which it relates.

hi-res photo:

http://i.imgur.com/0o6nZRS.jpg

Articles with images:

http://ionsg.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/martin-hudaceks-memorial-for-unborn.html

http://www.roseandherlily.com/2012/11/the-child-who-was-never-born_29.html

Interview with the artist:

http://evenifministries.wordpress.com/2012/09/16/410/

http://reclaimingourchildren.typepad.com/lumina_a_ray_of_light_aft/2012/09/unborn-memorial.html

 

Wow, that is powerful. I'm sure he will upset many people with it.

 

I just have a difficult time accepting a man can fully understand the issue well enough.

 

I admit I didn't read through all the articles but it seems a bit patronizing in my opinion if the sculptor in this case has no real life experience with post abortion trauma. Context does matter and I think the art piece would be better if it was shaped by someone who has actually lived through it or at least had someone close go through it. I'm sure it works well as a propaganda piece for the pro-life community though.

 

I agree that it would be impossible for the artist to know exactly what a mother in that scenario feels, but he may not be going for that. He may be coming from the perspective of the dead children (which he obviously also can't fully identify with, not being dead), which leads us to consider whether an artist really needs to be fully informed about his subject to create art around it. If art in some cases is simply intended to make us think, I'd say no.

 

IMO men need to stay out of the abortion debate. The "artwork" is patronizing -- a ghostly child offering support for a crying non-mother. The artist is just tearing down women who have had abortions. Such actions are deplorable.

 

I didn't look at the images, but as a writer, I am FIRMLY of the belief that an artist can express art from a perspective other than his/her own. I have written from the POV of men, of teen-agers, of people in different careers than mine, etc. If I could only write about what I've actually experienced, I wouldn't write at all, as it would be too confining. One of the reasons, and perhaps the main reason, I write is to explore other perspectives. I think it is true of other types of artists as well. While I disagree with his opinion, I do not agree that he does not have the right to share it, whether artistically or in other ways just because of his biological sex.

 

I think people should try reading the articles.

 

Okay, I've looked at the pictures and read the articles, and my opinion on the art itself has not changed. I found it odd that the Google translation of the Slovak page (quoted in the second article) said "but also from the permanent intellectual impairment (sometimes physical) of every woman who chooses to conceive their unborn child": not knowing Slovak, I don't know what much of that really means (it seems to imply that it's the "conception" that causes this, which would then extend to all pregnant women, plus what the heck does it mean by "permanent intellectual impairment"?), nor did it give any indication as to WHO said it.

But yeah -- I think just because he's a man it doesn't mean he shouldn't create the art that moves him. And to be honest, though I disagree with his opinion, I still find the actual sculpture very beautiful. Without the title, as the end of the first article pointed out, it could be the sorrow (not guilt/shame/etc.) of any mother who had lost a child. Plus, based on some of the comments I saw, SOME women who've had abortions have found it very moving and healing. To me, that's a good thing. I just don't think it should be used to "prove" that ALL women who have abortions should feel guilty or become Christian.

 

Just why exactly does the ghostly aborted baby look like a four-year old? Is the artist also debating the nature of the afterlife, aborted fetuses keep growing in heaven and so on? Boy, this guy's got all the answers, doesn't he.

 

Yes, men should totally stay out of the abortion debate, because everyone knows they have nothing to do with reproduction.

 

A man's mandatory role in the reproduction lasts a few minutes and the woman's role lasts nine months. I think the same proportions should be used to determine the right to be heard in abortion issues.

 

I don't think there is any other political debate in existence where it is considered the least bit respectable to attempt to completely exclude people due to arbitrary reasons they can't control, even though they have just as much responsibility for, and an emotional stake, in the outcome. But when you are defending what is little different than infanticide all sorts of mental gymnastics are required. Of course, the whole argument of "who gets a say" has at it's premise the idea that the child, who would obviously choose to live rather than to die, should have no voice or rights at all. And, of course, nobody would be advocating this if they themselves had a chance of being killed. It truly astounds me that it is usually liberals, who pride themselves on their compassion for others, are the ones who champion intentional killing of a developing human. The cognitive dissonance must be overwhelming.

 

Thankyou damedog and you're not the only person who has noticed the inconsistency.

As someone with historical and political understandings I can see why the "liberals" became defenders of abortion with few limits but I see and have argued there is a logical inconsistency when caring for people of other genders, orientations, skin colors, & immigration status but not age (pre vs post birth).

 

Currently a fetus is not legally alive until it is born (i.e., until the first breath) -- this has very strong religious foundations that have yet to be overturned. So it is also quite ironic the very groups that have defined when life begins are so in arms when that "non-life" is terminated. Just change the damned definition. Unless Congress changes that and gives a fetus rights at some point during gestation then what a woman does to her own body is her business and others should stay out of the argument.

 

That's probably because more value is put to the woman's right for her body than the unborn fetus, and yes, it's a fetus not an infant or a child. The medical definition of the two latter require birth so children or infants cannot be aborted. Calling a fetus a child or infant is just hyperbolic nonsense.

As for the political debate itself. No one is attempting to silence you from having a debate. I'm talking about excluding the man from the legal process that is abortion as a political point of view. That is not giving you a veto over what the woman chooses to do with her body. That still doesn't make me pro-abortion mind you, in a perfect world there would be no abortions. Then again, in a perfect world the wannabe senator from Missouri would be right and women had a process to prevent pregnancy in cases of rape. Unfortunately it seems we don't live in a perfect world after all.

 

lol - this isn't really my fight, but calling a living thing something fundamentally different because it's inside or outside a body cavity is ... what exactly?

 

...Calling it by its proper medical definition.

 

Or as damedog says, cognitive dissonance to think there's a real difference. Giving them their "I'm now a baby!" certificate when they come out doesn't change what they were biologically one minute earlier.

 

As someone who had an abortion, I like that sculpture. I was a young and VERY stupid teenager and have to live with my decision forever. That sculpture is very soothing IMO