Performance Artist Walks Naked Through Gallery Holding a Baby For Art?


MM_nackte_Leben_8

There’s a clear theme running through the works of performance artist Milo Moiré… nakedness.  We’ve previously seen her sans clothes in her controversial work “Plop Egg” where she inserted eggs into her vagina to create a plop artwork (see HERE), and we followed her as she walked to Art Basel with the names of her outfit scrawled across her naked body in black marker-pen (see HERE).

The black bars are out again hiding her important bits in her latest work titled THE NAKED LIFE – How little abstraction can art tolerate?  In celebration of the exhibition “The naked life” in the LWL Museum of Art and Culture, Moiré held a baby and looked at the nude paintings in the exhibition and, because of their own nakedness, became a part of it.

According to her website: “Moiré challenges the fundamental attitudes towards abstract and figurative art. Isn’t a painting depicting natural themes itself an abstraction? What could be the absolute motif of an exhibition dedicated to the naked life, an exhibition which appeals to specific sensory experiences? In keeping with the approach of the artists exhibited, Milo Moiré brings everyday life to art. And yet, she goes one step further in removing herself from the abstract form of representation and shows her main motif of the naked life: A naked infant safe in the arms of a naked woman. This direct confrontation with live nude art challenges others to reflect on familiar forms of perception. How close may a form of representation in art approach real life?”

So this brings us back to the recurring theme when it comes to Moiré’s body of work (pun intended)… is it ART? Let us know what you think in the comments section below!

MM_nackte_Leben_3

MM_nackte_Leben_0titel_web_blog

MM_nackte_Leben_5

MM_nackte_Leben_6 (1)

MM_nackte_Leben_2

And don’t forget, if you’re looking for a piece of original art to hang on your walls, check out artFido HERE!


Like it? Share with your friends!

24.3k shares

65 Comments

  1. The sexual frustration here is hilarious. She is hot. I have been with women with bodies like that, and for all the clowns complaining, it is as good as it looks. Sorry you never had a chance. I love looking at her. I don’t really care if men can’t get away with doing it.

    Men and women complaining about her actions are simply losers. The women are ugly, the men are repressed gay or frustrated.

  2. To those who consider this art because the pictures she’s looking at contain nudity… the “art” is in the artist’s expression, technique and interpretation of the subject he/she chose for the piece itself… not the subject. So the fact that the artist chose to portrait nudity doesn’t make it more artistic than portraying dressed people. There’s no “double standard” in portraying nudity and banning actual nudity in a public space.

  3. If this is art, so is me smearing poo all over the bathroom wall. Also, that is not her baby. I would respect is a smidge more if she had actually given birth to the child, and it was some personal statement, rather than a crass publicity stunt.

  4. I believe it shows the hypocrisy of our culture when all of the art she is looking at contains nudity, yet she is viewed with disdain for being nude. She is making a point and exposing society’s assumed righteousness concerning nakedness (and always identifying it with sex) I like her performance art and take it for what it is.

  5. Well I guess I’d actually like to see all of her naked…..you know cause were here and all, even if her tits are fake. So the fact that she obviously has had plastic surgery tells me to a degree that she is just looking to show off. As for me, see her as art? uhhh, hell no. As an attractive woman that is tickling those lower parts of my brain, yes.

  6. Desperate lady seeking attention!!!! Buy a puppy ma darling!!!!! She should have been frog marched out by the police. There are children walking about and this should never have been allowed to happen!

    1. OMG a kid might see a naked human! Think of the consequences! The horror, Imagine the wars caused by this! Ahhhhh if only that kid hadn’t seen a unclothed human!

  7. If this is Art, then it is the most inexpensive form to popularise oneself. It is amazing nudity still gets the attention these days, eg: music video clips in recent years.

    People do anything -including criminal activity -to become popular. We – the foolish public – seems to be happy to pay for their stories.

  8. That baby is not naked like you said! I dare her to hold the baby naked too, if she is so comfortable with popping eggs out of her vagina, she should not have a problem with the baby popping poop on her! Hehehe

    1. It seems to me she’s making a statement that beauty is in the eye of the beholder? If we assume the subjects in the works in the gallery are portrayed as they were and considered attractive (beautiful/handsome) in their time, why is that not the case now without superficial adornments (from specific clothes/shoes to makeup to plastic surgery)?

  9. Those breast implants are simply too large for such a slender frame. I also don’t understand such full coverage makeup. Is that part of the art? She would probably look just fine without it. This is the best narcissism presented as art that I’ve seen in a very long time.

  10. It’s exhibitionism, not art. An ugly female would be stopped and thrown out, and a male artist doing this would be arrested. This does little more than reveal the special high status and privilege that all beautiful women enjoy.

    1. Spot on. That is the true significance here. She is playing up to our culture’s voyeurism in order to gain exposure. It would be more honest for her to say, “I’m only allowed to get away with this because I’m so beautiful.”

      1. The true significance of this art is how she evokes contempt and exposes society’s unhealthy attitudes towards sex. You two losers are a prime example. Righteous complainers about this stuff are always either jealous (ugly women), sexually frustrated (ugly men or hyper-religious types who probably get sex illicitly anyway), or repressed homosexual (hyper-religious guilt ridden).

        Which are you two guys?

        1. Ad hominem. Your prejudice about the reasons you perceive they have to disdain this performance does not invalidate the point made. There is a strong side of narcissistic exhibitionism to this and a less sexual standard conforming person would have a hard time pulling this off.
          Also, careful with all that edge, you might cut yourself.

  11. oh wow naked in 2015. I am shocked.
    It saddens me how (usually goodlooking) artists think that nudity is provocative and interesting today.
    Courbet was painting vaginas in 1866. Yes, at that time it was indeed shocking… But today? …meh… be more creative and educated maybe.
    Try to get my attention without showing me your tits.

    1. Does it have to be shocking to be art?

      I think it’s an interesting juxtaposition when there are members walking into these galleries in order to appreciate art that features nudity, yet when a person is nude alongside those paintings they are judged differently.

      1. How did you conclude that from what I said?
        Ofc not, and also not the point. :P

        It could be an interesting performance, but her urge to show her body is a bit.. tοo obvious?
        I like your point of view, but I can’t get her previous works out of my mind :(

  12. Yes it is.
    Look carefully at the paintings, she looks at. What do you see? Nudity. Sometimes it is pure but mostly it is quite erotic. What is the problem with her naked body? :)

    And yes, artists love attention. Those who paint want to focus it on their works and who makes art by their bodies wants to be in the centre of attention ;)

      1. Eeek! Now, I don’t like women and I never have but to only have a Disqus account for misogny is a little more pathetic. They’re trying to take your masculinity away! The damn sluts!

      2. You are not an alpha. You are a beta B- low grade lamer. You are threatened by women. Real alphas aren’t threatened by women. This is an experiment by real alphas to root the betas out.

    1. You aren’t alpha A. You are beta B- lamer. You are threatened by women. Real alphas aren’t threatened by women. This has been an experiment by real alphas to root you betas out.

  13. She’s done this sort of art before. Not holding a baby. Just getting naked and walking around. It’s not art though, because we know why she does it. Fake tits and plastic surgery says it all.

  14. How little abstraction can art tolerate?… She could have learned how to hold a baby first, it was just plastic and superfluous in my personal opinion.

    1. As long as you make serious artistic mugatu faces.. you should be good. no smiling. It Has to be for Art. As soon as people sense otherwise.. they’ll become disgusted And call the police.

Join the artFido Newsletter

artFido’s videos and content are viewed more than 2.5 billion times a month. This makes the network the seventh most viewed media company in the online sphere, behind the Walt Disney company in sixth place, and in front of US media giant Comcast in eighth place.*
* Statistics provided by research group Tubular Labs