Damien Hirst

ronbyrne2005 · 16-09-2008 06:39AM #1

Modern conman or artistic genius? Not an arty type myself but can't beleive the money this guy makes for his "modern art". And his glasses annoy me.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gdsgwbnOBD4BpzgNxqQLDdZm7Rqg

MagicMarker · 16-09-2008 06:44AM

If i record a record using a wooden spoon and used condom and it gets to number one, does that make me a conman? Or does it just prove people are gullible idiots?

Run_to_da_hills · 16-09-2008 06:49AM

He is not even dead yet.

Overheal · 16-09-2008 06:50AM

that can be arranged.

whiskeyman · 16-09-2008 09:13AM

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

He is not even dead yet.

Overheal wrote: »

that can be arranged.

Once we get him, we'll slice him in half and plonk him in a tank full of formaldehyde and auction him off for millions.

Who's in with me?

:pac:

Canis Lupus · 16-09-2008 09:27AM

I guess it simply boils down to the fact that people bought his work.

Personally I think it's utter bollix both in terms of artisitc merit and the price. I could never sculpt David but it can't be that hard to throw a pig into some formaldehyde.

Setun · 16-09-2008 09:54AM

Away From the Flock is an interesting work, but the diamond encrusted skull etc. is self indulgent crap tbh. And if this Sotheby's auction goes wrong for him, he's finished. /EDIT the bolox has done well out of it. Wealthy bastard.

Silenceisbliss · 16-09-2008 10:03AM

right, thats in my new top three of rediculous art works.

at number one; in the metropolitan in NY, theres a massive blank canvas on display in one of the galleries on sale for something like ~3,5million dollars. A blank canvas. the title of the "art piece" is called "the power of imagination"........

at number two, the painting by WILLEM DE KOONING: "Woman III", selling for 140 million euro at auction...seriosly....google it and ul see what the hell it is...

this new one comes in at three.....

Setun · 16-09-2008 11:15AM

Willem de Kooning is a interesting painter imo, and at least he does the work himself. Hirst doesn't really have a hand in any of his art pieces except in terms of concept, which has been pointed out already as being self-indulgent and greedy.

WindSock · 16-09-2008 11:38AM

He's a one trick pony, as far as I'm concerned.

pickarooney · 16-09-2008 11:51AM

Silenceisbliss wrote: »

right, thats in my new top three of rediculous art works.

at number one; in the metropolitan in NY, theres a massive blank canvas on display in one of the galleries on sale for something like ~3,5million dollars. A blank canvas. the title of the "art piece" is called "the power of imagination"........

at number two, the painting by WILLEM DE KOONING: "Woman III", selling for 140 million euro at auction...seriosly....google it and ul see what the hell it is...

this new one comes in at three.....

The same price as Manchester City are rumoured to be offering for Cristiano Ronaldo. Which would you prefer so see hanging?

Silenceisbliss · 16-09-2008 12:10PM

pickarooney wrote: »

The same price as Manchester City are rumoured to be offering for Cristiano Ronaldo. Which would you prefer so see hanging?

I try to ignore soccer entirely. It's a past time that just falls outside of the realm of reality completely. what a waste of space, time, money, and energy.

as far as im concerend. soccer is just a dark place in my imagination

j-bone · 16-09-2008 12:22PM

Daddio wrote: »

Willem de Kooning is a interesting painter imo, and at least he does the work himself. Hirst doesn't really have a hand in any of his art pieces except in terms of concept, which has been pointed out already as being self-indulgent and greedy.

i know someone who worked 4 him awhile back,,,(if you can call collecting dead butterflies or arranging household utensils in a display case "work",,, )

Earthhorse · 16-09-2008 12:45PM

whiskeyman wrote: »

Once we get him, we'll slice him in half and plonk him in a tank full of formaldehyde and auction him off for millions.

Who's in with me?:

We can call it "The Impossibility of Art in the Mind of Someone Thinking".

Acacia · 16-09-2008 12:46PM

Most 'modern' art seems to be people drawing like a four-year-old ( i.e. scribbling in brightly-coloured crayons or throwing a bucket of paint on a blank canvas and saying it represents your 'inner torment') or or flinging random crap together and calling it a sculpture. Appeals to pretentious types with more money than sense.

Reminds me of the episode of the Simpsons where Homer becomes a modern artist-

"Your husband's work is what we call "outsider art." It could be by a mental patient, a hillbilly or a chimpanzee." :pac:

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 16-09-2008 12:46PM

Canis Lupus wrote: »

I guess it simply boils down to the fact that people bought his work.

Personally I think it's utter bollix both in terms of artisitc merit and the price. I could never sculpt David but it can't be that hard to throw a pig into some formaldehyde.

So why the bloody hell didn't you do it first...??

stovelid · 16-09-2008 01:00PM

Don't know much about him, but I like some of the stuff: Virgin Mother, Away from the Flock, LSD, Saint Sebastian, Exquisite Pain...I just think they are visually interesting.

As for whether it's it's 'art' or not - I don't know, and I don't really care.

The prices are stupid though. The Painted Word by Tom Wolfe springs to mind.

brianthebard · 16-09-2008 01:06PM

Ugh I hate Hirst and post modernism in general, its become a celebration of the "artist" as celebrity, and the money they can create, its not about art at all. Oh Klimt, why did you have to die...

Quality · 16-09-2008 01:29PM

Interesting man, So young as well for such fame and wealth..

I am in love with his glouchestire home he bought.. Toddington Manor.. He bought it for a steal at 3million sterling.. It hasnt been lived in in 20 years. He is going to do it up as his family home and to enclose his art collection..

http://i.thisislondon.co.uk/i/pix/2007/08/ToddingtonES3008_243x175.jpg

ronbyrne2005 · 16-09-2008 04:01PM

It seems like a commercial production line to him rather than a life's dedication or other nobly driven endeavour. He also seems to be giving a token few million to charity to placate the criticism. He is just an ultra commercialised brand now. What do those pieces tell us about him or society or anything? Maybe it's satirical , taking the piss our of modern society where everything is commercialised and packaged for consumers.

Spore · 16-09-2008 04:15PM

Sounds like a bubble... bit like the tuplip thing in Holland, some day someone's going to come along and see all this for what it is - a fad that's gone horribly out of control. If Hirst failed it would of been the bubble burst, but seems like there's still an appetite out there for ridiculously overpriced trashy 'art'

Daithi McGee · 16-09-2008 04:21PM

I would not be a fan of his work but that is not to say others do seem to find something to appreciate.

I am old fashioned when it come to art. I prefer Paul Klee etc.

run_Forrest_run · 17-09-2008 01:00PM

the latest auction of his 'works' grabbed my attention lately and then this article was even more interesting: Why I was banned from Damien Hirst’s £120m gamble

I'm no art expert but I think this guy is a total chancer. His prices are crazy and of course his latest auction did well because he has trapped so many 'specullectors' into buying his stuff so obviously they want to keep the bubble intact to avoid them losing all their money and investments in the future (just my little 'ol opinion!).

meditraitor · 17-09-2008 01:07PM

This is pretty much the same opinion all the peasants had of picasso in the earlier part of last century...............;)

DublinWriter · 17-09-2008 01:10PM

ronbyrne2005 wrote: »

And his glasses annoy me.

I've a pair of his glasses - not the eye ones, but the half-pint Carlsberg glasses he designed with the polka-dot motif on the back.

I wonder how much they're worth now? Hmmm...

run_Forrest_run · 17-09-2008 01:10PM

meditraitor wrote: »

This is pretty much the same opinion all the peasants had of picasso in the earlier part of last century...............;)

was Picasso facing accusations claiming that his assistants were actually doing a lot of the design work on his pieces? <seriously, I don't know, I'm not up on all this art stuff!>

Well we are all pretty much peasants in the eyes of Hirst!

meditraitor · 17-09-2008 01:14PM

run_Forrest_run wrote: »

Well we are all pretty much peasants in the eyes of Hirst!

I read somewere he is a Billionaire, thats fnuking mental

Kold · 17-09-2008 01:44PM

There's actually a forum for this. Check Art and Architecture...

Acacia wrote: »

Most 'modern' art seems to be people drawing like a four-year-old ( i.e. scribbling in brightly-coloured crayons or throwing a bucket of paint on a blank canvas and saying it represents your 'inner torment') or or flinging random crap together and calling it a sculpture. Appeals to pretentious types with more money than sense.

Reminds me of the episode of the Simpsons where Homer becomes a modern artist-

"Your husband's work is what we call "outsider art." It could be by a mental patient, a hillbilly or a chimpanzee." :pac:

I see. And how often do you go to look at contemporary art?

Damien Hirst makes me smile, he p*sses so many people off and he almost revels in it. To say that anyone could throw a cow in a tank of formeldehyde will raise the question 'Why didn't anyone do it before?' Art since the start of the 20th century has been in constant flux as has everything else and this is a reaction. I'm not fond of Andy Warhol but I have to be amused at the way he just took art and made it his b*tch. Hirst is similar, he's a very intelligent man and through work and fortune made his living.

Say what you will but I think there's something quite awesome about being confronted with a shark, or seeing a sheep divided as if it were a diagram for an engine. As for the money, it's mainly paid for owning an important piece of art history.

PeakOutput · 17-09-2008 01:47PM

hirst is an awesome artist saw some of his pieces in berlin and in london im not an artist or anything of the sort but i know people very knowledgeable in the area and even by academics hirst is recognised as the greatest living artist and right up there with the dead ones,so its not all about the money, the chapmans are two others who make apparently visually crap art aswell but are really really successful

you cant really critisize hirst for following the lead of one of the most celebrated artists(andy warhol) of all time and having a factory like approach to constructing his art.

also if you ask 10 people who damien hirst is 8 of them wont have a clue so its hardly like he is being marketed and packaged to the mass's like a large multinational

Kold · 17-09-2008 01:53PM

PeakOutput wrote: »

the chapmans are two others who make apparently visually crap art aswell but are really really successful

The Chapmans are very gifted sculptors. I don't think they're visually crap at all.

djpbarry · 17-09-2008 01:53PM

PeakOutput wrote: »

...i know people very knowledgeable in the area and even by academics hirst is recognised as the greatest living artist and right up there with the dead ones...

Oh, people who know about art say his stuff is good? Oh, well then, he MUST be a genius so :rolleyes:.

There are people in the "art world" who think this kid is a genius - doesn't mean she is.

Damien Hirst

Comments