One of the difficulties with assessing contemporary art is that the self-referential nature of much work makes it difficult to distinguish between a banal work of art and one that takes banality as its theme (much like the imitative fallacy described below). Nevertheless, Ben Lewis, Prospect’s art critic, makes a valiant attempt at bringing Damien Hirst down a peg or two in the current issue of Prospect. How might we make a case against Hirst, asks Lewis?
One way is to point to the large amount of terrible work that he has produced. All great artists have produced bad works, but surely none have made as many as Hirst.
Let us know what you think of Damien “diamond geezer” Hirst below (and check out Tom Chatfield’s related post on this blog, “The test of art.”)
Share
Comments
Print
Add Comment
Finally… I thought it was just myself that was mystified by Hirst. He has yet to produce anything mildly interesting. A constant rip off other peoples work and ideas or boring repetition of old art school exercises. In fifty years time his work will be worthless. In my opinion both Damian Hirst an Jeff Koons are over hyped and vastly over valued.
David Cairns
I think all artists undergo a phase where they still find their own style. Maybe that what happened to Hirst. Maybe those times when he made terrible art works those were the time he was experimenting some ideas..
I guess, art is sort of relative. So, i find it hard to judge what is a great artwork or not..
http://tmq.info/blog/2008/05/14/the-end-game
What does End Game mean to you?
How do you make sense of the skeleton?
How about the medical equipment?
Do you believe in destiny?
Can death be prevented?
How does the skeleton and equipment affect you?
How does seeing a dead body affect you?
If someone you knew or loved died, how would you deal with it?
great post !!
I read a few of your other entires.where can i subscribe to your blog?
Thank you for sharing.
I never think art is difficult to make that from heart ant idea