Very interesting. I'm not quite sure how to feel about it though. I'm fascinated by the concept of remodelling the human body but uncomfortable about it being seen as light entertainment, given the fact someone is going to die.
A documentary about the plastination process would be fair enough, but something about this isn't right, and the cameras are a central part of it. Maybe Big Brother and The Weakest Link make me suspicious of all TV these days...
It's the common problem - you can make it dry and respectable, or you can try and make sure that lots of people see it. Von Hagens' approach generally is to try and get as many people as possible in the general non-academic population to take an interest in anatomy, so I can see how it would fit with that. The danger otherwise is that we get to the Lady Chatterley trial "wives and servants" attitude.
I think it's interesting that things people are unfamiliar and uncomfortable with are often thought of initially as moral issues. Anaesthetics in childbirth certainly were, and blood and organ transplant still are in some circles. Is it possible to see which of these will remain moral conundrums and which will eventually obviously just be squeamishness? Probably not, unfortunately.
That they're going to do it doesn't bother me, I agree with Paul, it's the cameras. I think they can make compelling tv that isn't dry and overly respectable, but without creating a spectacle, I just hope they do.
I don't really see the point of it though. Robert Winston already did the televised death idea and I don't really see what the after death thing will add to it. I could understand it if it way a case of: This is Mr Smith - he's spent years doing X, Y, Z and this is the effect we believe have happened due to his life style and genetics. I can't see what they gain by takinga 'real' body and adding bits as you not likely to gain any further info from it and they could just as easily do a simulation couln't they?
I don't think it's intended as research, but as a public education exercise. I assume that if it goes off as planned then the modified cadaver will be used as a public exhibit to illustrate the human body's weaknesses and design drawbacks.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2002-09-26 12:52 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-09-26 04:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-09-26 04:31 am (UTC)I think it's interesting that things people are unfamiliar and uncomfortable with are often thought of initially as moral issues. Anaesthetics in childbirth certainly were, and blood and organ transplant still are in some circles. Is it possible to see which of these will remain moral conundrums and which will eventually obviously just be squeamishness? Probably not, unfortunately.
no subject
Date: 2002-09-26 05:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-09-26 08:09 am (UTC)No way to tell in advance. It probably depends on what the broadcaster (Channel 4 in this case) wants - they'll be signing the cheque, after all.
no subject
Date: 2002-09-26 09:26 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-09-26 10:10 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-09-26 10:38 am (UTC)