While many Neopagan responses to cyberspace are innovative and essentially positive, there is an underbelly – a darker realm which feeds on fear and powerlessness in a rapidly changing world. One of the archetypes that embodies these feelings most strongly is that of the Alien – the space-entity created by H. R. Giger, which featured in the Oscar-winning film of the same name and which has since become an icon of the cyberculture.

Drury continues:

Many of Giger’s most surreal artworks are now on permanent display at his museum in Castle St. Germain in Gruyeres, Switzerland, which opened in June 1998. The paintings draw strongly on the left-hand path of Western magic as well as on fantasy and horror fictions, as in his extraordinary The Necronomicon of 1978. There is an unquestionable potency – even a macabre beauty – in his biomechanoid creations, but his nightmare fusions of the human and mechanical also breathe a sense of no escape- a sense that we are all trapped in a virtual hell of our own making. Perhaps this is a portent of our times. …There is no doubt that, in terms of his art, Giger is a magician – conjuring dramatic visions that propel us into the darker recesses of the psyche.

But while placing Giger in the category of techno and digital magician, Drury clarifies his interpretation of Giger and his work in this context:

While he has studied the works of Aleister Crowley, like many other cyberspace enthusiasts, eh is not a magician in the conventional sense. He does not perform rituals, engage in invocations, or summon spirits. But one could hardly find a better temple of the black arts than the Spell Room at the H. R. Giger Museum, where the walls display several of his most powerful paintings and murals. It would seem that, when the thin veil across Giger’s psyche is slightly drawn aside, tempestuous visions of evil and alienation come forth. It is almost as if the dark gods were emerging from his nightmares.

Giger’s work and other material can be found at his website.

The exhibition will also give one the opportunity to pre-order the Creature Features book which features many of the artwork shown. See the full press release here.

Update: The event is this evening but several pieces are now available in a preview online for those who register. Below are a few select pieces.

Body Worlds

Throughout the history of modern medicine, human beings have been dissecting human bodies as a means of learning more about the body and how it functions. In order for medicine to progress this process has been necessary and important. It continues today as individuals donate their bodies for medical students and other scientists. But Body Worlds seems like something more than an activity facilitating the continuing advance of medical knowledge.

For me Body Worlds represents a curious and dark expression of the macabre in popular culture. In terms of it being a curiosity, on the one hand we often hear people decry violence in television and film, particularly in the horror genre, with its graphic depiction of bodily damage and mutilation. And yet the display of bodies carved into all kinds of configurations in the context of Body Worlds is considered a form of art which straddles both high and pop culture. On the other hand, as a dark expression of the macabre, I wonder why various cultures have made a value judgment against the Nazis for turning murdered Jews and other unwanted peoples into lampshades and other paraphernalia, and yet many people seem to laud the plastinates turned into poseable traveling displays as art. I understand that many of the deceased who are now Body Worlds art volunteered their bodies for use in this fashion, and thus they weren’t victims of genocide, but the question remains as to the ethical appropriateness of the use of human bodies for art or furniture. What view of human beings and sacralization related to human remains is attached to perceptions of the Body Worlds exhibit?

Another major ethical question looms in that allegations have been made that some of the bodies may come from executed prisoners in China, a country well known for human rights violations and questionable justice in speedy trials and immediate execution for a host of major and minor crimes. While von Hagens denies using such corpses in his exhibits at present, in 2004 he acknowledged such bodies were used which forced him to return them and stop the practice. Even so, news reports from this year indicate that questions remain concerning Chinese connections as the source for some the bodies.

Ultimately one’s views of the appropriateness or inappropriateness of Body Worlds and corpses as art comes down to a complex interplay between ethics related to cultural considerations. For my reflection on this phenomenon the images associated with the Frankenstein myth come to mind. (This is no doubt fueled by my forthcoming interview with Susan Tyler Hitchcock, author of Frankenstein: A Cultural History.) I envision Victor Frankenstein in his lab stitching together the pieces of cadavers in his own combination of science and art. The Frankenstein myth reminds us of the frequent human temptation to push beyond traditional boundaries of permissibility in relation to the body, science, and even art. The verdict of many readers and viewers of the various representations of the Frankenstein myth to such transgressions has been been a negative one. Is it applicable to Body Worlds? What does the use of bodies as art, whether those secured through ethical or unethical means, say about those cultures in which Body Worlds has been well received? Perhaps our sense of the Frankenstein story needs to be turned on its head: It was Victor Frankenstein who was the monster, not the creature he stitched together and brought to life. If this is so then it may be that our creation and enjoyment of plastinates reveals the monstrous in all of us.