If you haven't seen enough, see Patricia Piccinini's web site.

Here's some small justification offered, for recognizing this as some positive contribution to society, and not the flat-out horror show it is: Biography: Patricia Piccinini [internet archive]

Since completing a Bachelor of Fine Arts in painting at the Victorian College of the Arts in 1991, Patricia Piccinini's practice has flourished and she has become known as one of Australia's leading contemporary artists. In an early interview Piccinini vividly recalled a simultaneous revulsion and fascination at the time of her first foray into pseudo-eugenics when she created a lump-like creature from raw pigskin. While the impetus to experiment with the creation of synthetic life forms remains, since then Piccinini's techniques have evolved and she is now recognised as a forerunner among artists working with contemporary media.

Piccinini has an ambivalent attitude towards technology and she uses her artistic practice as a forum for discussion about how technology impacts upon life. She is keenly interested in how contemporary ideas of nature, the natural and the artificial are changing our society. Specific works have addressed concerns about biotechnology, such as gene therapy and ongoing research to map the human genome. Piccinini often creates acutely aesthetic and appealing works as a means of discussing complex ethical issues; she is also fascinated by the mechanisms of consumer culture.

I'd like to see ANYTHING GOOD for society, that has ever come from this. Either WITHIN her products, or PRODUCED BY her products. Isn't that what art is supposed to do? What are we supposed to have learned?