Uncomfortable With Flesh

This is somewhat reminiscent of Russell Cameron’s work [stderr] and it gives me a similar delicious frisson of discomfort.

I first encountered SkinBag when I saw an image of a cloak made of faces. It blew my mind. I had actually been talking to one of my life-casting models about making a “people skin rug” and went and had 2 shots of tequila that night and started googling around (as one does!).

I sometimes do lifecasting and bookbinding and thought it would be fun to make “skinned face” casts in soft silicone and bind them in to a book with flesh textures: FaceBook!

It’d never sell. (This is not an original idea, by far, I’ve seen several nicely done books bound in well-faked human skin, including tattoos)…

Beanbag Chair [source]

The materials are latex painted onto fabric, or silicone-impregnated fabric. What makes it magic is the painting and coloring technique. [materials]

a nice bag for a phone [source]

I can imagine that some of these items might be best not used as airplane carry-on luggage. Although the zip-up skin blazer might be fun to wear to the airport so you could ask the security guy, “are you sure you want me to take this off?”

vase [source]

My favorite, by far, is the vase for orchids.

zipper detail [source]


  1. says

    I love this stuff. I’d like realistic skin covers for a couple of old grimoires I have. Yes, it makes people uncomfortable. I think that’s good. People need to be shook up now and then.

  2. komarov says

    A matter of taste, I daresay. The only vaguely useful … application I can think of might be a skin tie for those mythical restaurants that won’t let you in if you don’t wear one…

  3. says

    It’s not about useful applications, it’s art. The current piece I’m doing is based on skin, used to belong to a beautiful elk. For as long as there have been humans, there’s never been any problem using bits of other animals, flesh, skin, bone, feathers, fur, scales, nails, teeth, and so on. Our history is littered about and decorated with the bodies of our fellow animals.

    We put ourselves above and apart from all other animals. Yes, it’s okay to consume them, tear them apart and use their bits for decoration, or to make ink or paint, or clothing. And so on. We refuse to see ourselves as prey in any way. We give ourselves the eyes and mindset of a super-predator, and refuse to see ourselves the way we see all else. It’s one of the reasons we’re so busy condemning ourselves to a future of agonizing misery before we die, in bringing about the awful changes of climate. We are separate! We are better! We are great! We are so gosh darn smart! and so on.

  4. says

    etymology of “orchid”

    I don’t!!!

    I tried to summon Etymology Man, too, but I wound up with an expert in giant ants, due to a typographical error.

  5. says

    Marcus, orchid, as in orchidectomy (removal of testicles).

    1845, introduced by John Lindley in “School Botanty,” from Modern Latin Orchideæ (Linnaeus), the plant’s family name, from Latin orchis, a kind of orchid, from Greek orkhis (genitive orkheos) “orchid,” literally “testicle,” from PIE *orghi-, the standard root for “testicle” (cf. Avestan erezi “testicles,” Armenian orjik, Middle Irish uirgge, Irish uirge “testicle,” Lithuanian erzilas “stallion”). The plant so called because of the shape of its root. Earlier in English in Latin form, orchis (1560s), and in Middle English it was ballockwort (c.1300; see ballocks ). Marred by extraneous -d- in an attempt to extract the Latin stem.

  6. komarov says

    Re: Caine (#3):

    My original thought was that, if one uses a ‘human skin look’, the final product could still look a lot … well, nicer. But this is a relative term and would indeed have missed the point. Your point is well made and I’m very much biased, not that I had thought about it before. Thanks..