Elizabeth byrne benjamin / post modern

Today, I went to the Rollins Museum with my Religion and the Body class. Through out the presentation of the various pieces of art I kept the idea of authenticity in my head. As I was walking through, I found myself still having trouble in finding the difference between authentic and original. There were new pieces of art that challenged religion and pieces that re created those of Adam and Eve along with images of Christ. The way I saw these images that seemed as though they were very old (yet only a few years old) were original, but not authentic. I have come to think of it as knowing the background of such pieces of art in order to tell if it is "real" or not. However, when I though back to the Cartier watch that Doc Rog bought in China it is neither original nor authentic.

Another piece of work that provoked a lot of thought and disscusion was a video that was made by a contemporary artist who makes videos of her work. Throughout her career she has had her friends or volunteers go out in the nude for various exhibitions around the world. In the particular video that was showing the women were only wearing panty hoes standing for three hours. They were aloud to sit and lay down but they had to stay stationary. They ranged from 18-60, different weights and heights, with only red, blonde, and black hair. (this particular show was in Berlin , the colors representing Germany's flag) The video was controversial because some critics saw it as worthless and demeaning to women and others saw it as empowering and liberating to women. This brought me to the idea of post modern art and how people see it. With in our culture we are some what used to seeing nude bodies in art, however is it still an art with nude bodies if people are paying to go see it? Fifty years ago this type of art may have been shunned as looked at as pornography, but in contemporary society is it really any different?