Damien Hirst: The Blue Paintings at the Wallace Collection

Human Skull in Space (oil on canvas) by Damien Hirst. The painting is the cover art for the 150th anniversary edition of Darwin's On the Origin of Species.

The Wallace Collection is preparing for a Damien Hirst exhibit titled Damien Hirst: The Blue Paintings. The exhibit will feature 25 painting by Damien Hirst completed between 2006 and 2008. The exhibited has been billed as “Hirst’s return to painting”. Sources state that Hirst’s work will be exhibited beside Old Master paintings. Of the exhibit Hirst has stated, “I’ve chosen to show my new paintings here because I love the fact that it is a family collection,”. Hirst describes the Wallace Collection as “a world away from the world.”.

According to the Wallace Collection website-- “The Wallace Collection is a national museum in an historic London town house. In 25 galleries are unsurpassed displays of French 18th century painting, furniture and porcelain with superb Old Master paintings and a world class armoury.”. For more information visit, www.wallacecollection.org.

Damien Hirst: Requiem at PinchukArtCentre

Death Explained (2007) by Damien Hirst

The PinchukArtCentre is currently featuring the art of Damien Hirst in an exhibit titled Requiem. The exhibit, considered a major Hirst retrospective, involves over 100 works by Damien Hirst dating from 1990 to 2009. The show brings together many of Hirst’s most renowned works which range from early iconic sculptures such as A Thousand Years (1990) to more recent works such as Death Explained (2007). The exhibit will come to a close on September 20th, 2009. For more information visit, www.pinchukartcentre.org.

Damien Hirst Talks Fallen Prices, Diamond Skulls, and Bronze Meteorites.

For the Love of God by Damien Hirst

Damien Hirst has been busy with the largest exhibit of his artwork to date-- which recently opened in the Ukrainian capital of Kiev at the Pinchuk Art Centre. The exhibit, titled “Requiem”, was organized by billionaire Victor Pinchuk and involves more than 100 works of art by Hirst. However, Hirst apparently has other things on his mind. He recently made statements about plans for exhibiting his $100 million platinum and diamond skull, titled For the Love of God, throughout London and that he is thinking about making bronze meteorites. Hirst also recently commented about money and the art market.

Damien Hirst is in a unique position due to the fact that he is a top selling artist as well as an influential-- did I say extremely wealthy?-- art collector. That said, Hirst has stated that he is not buying in the current market. Apparently he is waiting for prices to be more favorable before investing. Hirst stated that ’Cash is King’ in the current art market-- suggesting that artists and art dealers are willing to accept less due to the burden of the fractured economy-- thus, it is a waiting to game to capture great deals.

Hirst knows the market-- last year an auction of his work at Sotheby’s earned nearly $200 million. The irony being that Hirst’s groundbreaking auction success coincided with the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.. Since that time art prices have dropped upwards of 50%. Based on Hirst’s recent statement it would seem that he expects prices to drop further before the art market-- or the economy for that matter-- is stable. That said, Hirst views the ongoing global financial crisis as the perfect time for artists to come into their own, so to speak.

Hirst recently stated that he feels that artists have an easier time making art during bad economic times and that it is a “good thing” that art collectors are not buying art as they had in recent years. Hirst went on to suggest that artists should not create art with the idea of financial gain and that the only thing that matters is if the work is “good or not” instead of how much the art is priced or how much it cost to create.

One can assume that Hirst feels that the prior strength of the art market-- a strength that made him a very wealthy artist as well as art collector-- may have held some artists back as the pursuit of wealth overtook the pursuit of creating works that last outside of the art market bubble. The irony being that Damien Hirst has become-- in the eyes of some art critics-- the symbol of extravagance that has reduced the art market to its current condition.

Links of Interest:

Hirst Says Art Prices May Still Fall as His Biggest Show Opens
www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601088&sid=aBGFO001TIWY

Damien Hirst says crisis will stimulate artists
www.news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090424/lf_nm_life/us_ukraine_art_hirst_1

The "bejewelled trinkets" of Damien Hirst

www.myartspace.com/blog/2008/10/bejewelled-trinkets-of-damien-hirst.html

Damien Hirst is Looking Ahead

www.myartspace.com/blog/2008/12/damien-hirst-is-looking-ahead.html

For the Love of God: Damien Hirst Threatens Young Artist with Legal Action

www.myartspace.com/blog/2008/12/for-love-of-god-damien-hirst-threatens.html

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin
Senior Editor
myartspace.com
www.myartspace.com
Myartspace Blog on Twitter
www.twitter.com/myartspace_blog

Eugenio Merino's Controversial Damien Hirst Sculpture: For the Love of Gold

4 the Love of Go(l)d by Eugenio Moreno. Photograph: ADN Galeria

British art critics ranging from Robert Hughes to the Stuckists have been suggesting that Damien Hirst has a hole in his head for years. One could say that sculptor Eugenio Merino agrees with said criticism-- but not in the way you might think. Eugenio Merino has created a life-size sculpture of Damien Hirst-- complete with inflated head (representing ego?)-- which places the British art in a suicide pose.

Merino’s Hirst is posed on his knees holding a Colt 45 to his head-- a bloodied bullet wound glistens as blood runs down the sculptures mouth. The sculpture, titled ‘For the Love of Gold’ -- also known as '4 the Love of Go(l)d'-- was unveiled at the 28th Madrid International Contemporary Art Fair (ARCO) alongside other works by Eugenio Merino that parody Damien Hirst’s art and art world status. The sculpture stirred controversy within hours of being unveiled.

Merino has stated that the sculpture-- which has been placed in a tank similar to the tanks used by Damien Hirst to display the remains of animals in formaldehyde-- is symbolic of the financial crisis that is facing the art world. Merino’s controversial sculpture is a parody of Hirst’s ‘For the Love of God’, a widely successful piece involving a diamond encrusted skull that sold for more than $100 million to a group of investors in 2007-- just before the global financial meltdown.

Eugenio Merino has stated that Damien Hirst is too concerned about profit. Merino has suggested to reporters that Hirst should shoot himself since he is so concerned about money, stating that if Hirst did that the value of his work would “increase dramatically“. Merino has made it clear that the sculpture is a “joke” and that he does not wish harm on Damien Hirst-- in fact, Merino is a fan of Hirst and studied his art extensively while in art school. Merino stated, "It is a joke but it is also paradoxical that if he did kill himself his work would be worth even more,". He went on to say that the sculpture is a metaphor for the current state of the art world.

Eugenio Merino’s visual message about the excess and decadence of the art world has taken an ironic twist in that his ‘For the Love of Gold’ has already been purchased for $41,000. Other reports state that all of Merino’s Hirst parodies have been bought by collectors in Portugal and Holland. Which begs the question-- are collectors missing Merino’s message? Perhaps they are unknowing participants. Merino has stated, "It is ironic. I've never sold so much.". For the love of gold, indeed.

A collage by Cartrain involving Damien Hirst's 'For the Love of God'

Damien Hirst has yet to respond concerning Eugenio Merino's controversial sculpture. It will be interesting to see if he responds to Merino in the same way that he responded to Cartrain-- the young British street artist who made parodies of Hirst's 'For the Love of God' not long ago. Cartrain was forced to hand over the profit he made from selling his parodies-- around $200-- as well as the remaining prints and original works. Some reports have stated that Cartrain's prints and original works have since been destroyed. Which begs the question-- will Eugenio Merino's 'For the Love of Gold' share the same fate?

Links of Interest:

Spanish artist shocks with Damien Hirst gun sculpture
www.cbc.ca/arts/artdesign/story/2009/02/15/hirst-sculpture-spain.html?ref=rss

Spanish artist creates Damian Hirst suicide sculpture
www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/4693494/Spanish-artist-creates-Damian-Hirst-suicide-sculpture.html

'Suicide' sculpture of Damien Hirst causes controversy in Spain
www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2009/feb/18/damien-hirst-suicide-sculpture-eugenio-moreno

For the Love of God: Damien Hirst Threatens Young Artist with Legal Action

www.myartspace.com/blog/2008/12/for-love-of-god-damien-hirst-threatens.html

Birds of a Feather Flock Together: Damien Hirst & Shepard Fairey / Cartrain & Baxter Orr

www.myartspace.com/blog/2009/02/birds-of-feather-flock-together-damien.html

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

Senior Editor

myartspace.com

www.myartspace.com

New York Art Exchange

www.nyaxe.com

London Calling

www.myartspace.com/londoncalling

Birds of a Feather Flock Together: Damien Hirst & Shepard Fairey / Cartrain & Baxter Orr

A collage by Cartrain involving Damien Hirst's 'For the Love of God'

The story involving Damien Hirst and his copyright infringement allegations against a 16 year old street artist-- known as Cartrain-- has taken a twist. Several influential UK artists have joined forces in order to defend Cartrain. In doing so they have targeted the contradictory nature of Hirst’s decision to seek legal action against Cartrain. After all, Damien Hirst has allegedly infringed on copyright himself-- in one case he settled out of court due to copyright infringement allegations.

The battle charge against Damien Hirst has been spearheaded by Jamie Reid -- widely known for creating the Sex Pistol‘s ‘God Save the Queen‘ cover art, Jimmy Cauty -- a former member of KLF, and Billy Childish -- co-founder and former member of the Stuckists. Reid, Cauty, and Childish have produced a series of skull images which mock copyright regulations in the UK while exploring the contradictions of Damien Hirst concerning copyright in general. A website, Red Rag to a Bull, has been created so that the trio and other artists can sell parodies involving artwork by Hirst and other YBAs.

The works sold on Red Rag to a Bull include a version of Jamie Reid's famous Sex Pistols poster. In the poster the head of the Queen has been replaced with a diamond skull. According to reports, the artists have stated that the money raised from selling the parodies will be used to handle the legal expenses of Cartrain or other artists who are “bullied” by Damien Hirst or other YBAs. The trio have also stated that if enough money is raised they will create a replica of Hirst’s ’For the Love of God’ to serve as the ultimate parody of Hirst‘s work and status. Parodies of Damien Hirst and other YBAs can be purchased at, www.redragtoabull.com.

For those who don’t know about the Damien Hirst / Cartrain situation-- The Design and Artists Copyright Society, of which Damien Hirst is a member, contacted Cartrain after receiving direct instructions from Hirst. The society informed the young artist that he had broken the law by infringing upon Hirst’s copyright. Hirst’s demands were clear-- he demanded the original works and the halt of sales with the threat of legal action. Hirst also demanded the profit that Cartrain had made from selling his collages and prints. Four works were confiscated by DACS from Cartrain’s gallery on November 12th. Reports state that Cartrain only earned about £200 from sales of the work. Cartrain has stated that DACS informed him that Damien Hirst had personally ordered the action.

The situation between Damien Hirst and Cartrain in the UK is very similar to the situation between Shepard Fairey and Baxter Orr in the United States. The saying, "Birds of a feather..." comes to mind. Cartrain, like Orr, decided to make a parody of a widely known work of art by a world renowned artist-- in this case Damien Hirst -- in order to make a social comment about Hirst’s art as well as his status in the art world. Damien Hirst, like Shepard Fairey in the case of Baxter Orr, had his legal team send a cease-and-desist letter to Cartain. Again, 'birds of a feather flock together'.

That said, unlike the situation with Baxter Orr and Shepard Fairey-- Cartrain’s parodies and profit were seized by Damien Hirst's legal team. Some reports state that Cartrain’s prints were destroyed in the process. Needless to say, if this had occurred in the United States I would think that Cartrain’s Hirst parody would have been considered “fair use” due to the widely known work he parodied and the social comment he established concerning the global status of Damien Hirst within the art market.

A comparison of a poster by Shepard Fairey (left) next to a poster by Baxter Orr (right). Orr put a SARs protective mask over the famous Obey Giant image and titled it ‘Protect’. Fair Use? You be the judge.

The irony of recent events is that we have two widely known and successful artists-- Damien Hirst and Shepard Fairey --who have defended their use of images created by others-- but are quick to stamp out any work that parodies their world renowned images. One should note the contradictions and hypocrisy that is involved with these issues. Damien Hirst and Shepard Fairey have three things in common-- they have both settled out of court due to infringing on the copyright of others, they both have careers that are shadowed by copyright infringement allegations against them, and they have both threatened legal action against artists who have done something they would otherwise support had they been in their shoes, so to speak. Thus, it seems that the two are only interested in aspects of “fair use” and freedom of expression if they are the ones applying it. Fly, fly, fly.

Concerns over copyright and interpretations of “fair use” is a global issue. I find the views that people take on issues like this to be very interesting-- they are often loaded with contradictions. For example, people are quick to say “It is art!“ when a world renowned artist-- such as Damien Hirst or Shepard Fairey-- allegedly infringes on copyright. However, those same people are apt to say “it is a rip-off!” if a less known artist-- such as Cartrain or Baxter Orr-- utilizes the same avenue of creation. It begs the question-- Does this attitude concerning copyright, and who is right or wrong concerning parody or social comment, convey a new form of elitism as far as art appreciation is concerned?

Furthermore, does it seem that when it comes down to the line only works by successful artists are truly protected-- at least as far as public opinion is concerned? Is there a double standard in the art world concerning appropriation and freedom of expression? Are some birds allowed to fly while others are shot down before having the chance to spread their wings? What say you?

Links of Interest:
For the Love of God: Damien Hirst Threatens Young Artist with Legal Action -- Myartspace Blog
www.myartspace.com/blog/2008/12/for-love-of-god-damien-hirst-threatens.html

How Damien Hirst Disappointed us --- Guardian
www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2008/dec/15/damien-hirst-cartrain

God save the Damien Hirst rip-off industry! -- Independent UK
www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/art/news/god-save-the-damien-hirst-ripoff-industry-1608219.html

Artists flout copyright law to attack Damien Hirst -- Telegraph UK
www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/4609976/Artists-flout-copyright-law-to-attack-Damien-Hirst.html

Fair Use: Shepard Fairey and Baxter Orr
www.myartspace.com/blog/2009/02/fair-use-shepard-fairey-and-baxter-orr.html

Shepard Fairey sues the Associated Press over photograph of Obama
www.myartspace.com/blog/2009/02/shepard-fairey-sues-associated-press.html

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin
Senior Editor
www.myartspace.com
New York Art Exchange
www.nyaxe.com
London Calling
www.myartspace.com/londoncalling

Red Rag To a Bull vs. Other Criteria?

Cha-Ching!

A report from Bloomberg explains that Damien Hirst has opened a second Other Criteria (www.othercriteria.com) store in London. Some may recall from past Myartspace Blog articles that Other Criteria is Hirst’s publishing and merchandising venture. Of the store Hirst has stated, “I don’t think art has ever been as popular as it is today and Other Criteria aims to sell affordable art of the highest quality to everyone who wants it.” . Apparently the price for Other Criteria art and merchandise ranges from $5 to $5,800.

Some art world insiders view Other Criteria as a jab at the traditional art market. After all, the first Other Criteria store was opened next to Sotheby’s shortly after Hirst’s “Beautiful Inside My Head Forever.” which took place at the auction house. Hirst’s break from the traditional brick & mortar art market stirred shock waves of criticism from gallery owners throughout the world. Needless to say, many gallerists feared that top billed artists would decide to take their art and career into their own hands by following Hirst’s independent lead. You can’t blame Hirst for being an entrepreneur .

On the other side of the UK art spectrum, the Stuckists-- as reported by Bloomberg-- have opened up their own online ‘store’ at www.redragtoabull.com. The site states, “Red Rag To A Bull is a radical institution dedicated to the pursuit of "FREEDOM, TRUTH and JUSTICE in the art world and BEYOND". And also overblown statements.”. The purpose of the site is “for CREATIVE CRITICAL REVIEW and should be treated as such“. The sites goes on to state that, “ALL images and any proposed sale of these images is designed to create critical dialogue and may or may not be what they first appear to be.”

In a sense the site is a conceptual anti-conceptual work in progress-- if there is such a thing. Needless to say, if it had been created by anyone else it would have probably been reviewed in a art magazine or two by now. On a side note: Readers of the Myartspace Blog may recall my interview with Charles Thomson -- Co-Founder of the Stuckists -- which was posted in October of 2006.

A collage by Cartrain involving Damien Hirst's 'For the Love of God'. Cha-Ching with an extra Cha.

Viewing the Red Rag To a Bull online store I noticed that one of its directives is to support CarTrain , the 16 year old street artist who was recently threatened by Damien Hirst’s legal team on allegations of copyright infringement. CarTrain, had created, distributed, and sold prints involving a parody of Hirst’s ‘For the Love of God’. It seems that Hirst was not thrilled to discover that a young graffiti artist had profited from prints involving his copyright protected works-- nevermind the fact that he himself has infringed on copyright in the past (reminds one of the Shepard Fairey vs. Baxter Orr issue).

That said, due to the fame of ‘For the Love of God’ I’m sure CarTrain’s Hirst parodies would be considered “fair use”-- at least in the United States. After all, the images by CarTrain served as a social comment about Hirst’s status in UK society as well as the art world in general. I don’t think there was any confusion as to who created what. CarTrain established dialogue with his parody.

Cartrain has some strong support-- Stuckists James Cauty, Jamie Reid, and Billy Childish have created various prints and other products that parody Damien Hirst’s artwork. Parodies of works by D*Face and the Chapman Brothers can also be found on the site.

Links of Interest:

Hirst Opens Second Shop, Defies Slump With 3.50 Pound Keychains -- Bloomberg

www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601088&sid=aaThCKzrdQ_w

www.stuckism.com

www.othercriteria.com

www.redragtoabull.com

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

Senior Editor

myartspace.com

www.myartspace.com

New York Art Exchange

www.nyaxe.com

London Calling

www.myartspace.com/londoncalling

Damien Hirst: Does ‘Human Skull in Space’ Capture the Origin of Species?

Human Skull in Space (oil on canvas) by Damien Hirst. The painting is the cover art for the 150th anniversary edition of Darwin's On the Origin of Species.

Damien Hirst is a fan of Charles Darwin-- so much so that he has created the cover art for the 150th anniversary edition of Darwin’s On the Origin of Species. Hirst has stated that he loves the “contentious aspects” of On the Origin of Species and has noted that Darwin’s controversial theories have served as an inspiration for his art. Hirst agreed without hesitation when asked by Penguin Books to create the cover art for On the Origin of Species-- which will replace the existing 1968 edition of the book. The Hirst painting, titled ‘Human Skull in Space’ has sparked some debate over how well it depicts the views of Darwin.

Hirst has stated that the painting is a “nod to the scientific”. Of the painting Hirst has said, “The painting sits firmly in the tradition of "still life" and is made up of objects I've come to imbue with my own meanings, some of them Darwinian in origin, and that I guess are seen in other areas of my work. The painting has an X-ray-like quality to it, as if it is revealing something about the structure of the objects painted. I suppose the work, in a modest way, acknowledges Darwin’s analytical mind and his courage to believe in those ideas that questioned the very fabric of existence and belief in his time.” However, not everyone shares the view of Hirst concerning his painting and its link to Darwin.

Some interesting comments have been made concerning the choice of using a Damien Hirst painting as the cover. One commenter stated, “would a nice picture of Darwin not have sufficed? Or leave it like previous editions with just a plain cover. I expect that the vast majority of the audience will be those scientifically minded enough to be embarrassed to have that mess on their book shelf”. Another commenter mentioned, “Damien Hirst is a phenomenon of irony as marketing, Darwin reveals the organic beauty of truth. Putting them together is like Laurel and Hardy.” Others suggested that the cover art is an “insult to Darwin and science.“-- while another asked, “What's next - a birthday serenade by Britney Spears?”.

Darwin aside, what are your thoughts on ‘Human Skull in Space’? Does the painting come together nicely or does it fall short?

Link of Interest:
Damien Hirst on his painting for On the Origin of Species -- Guardian Unlimited

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

Senior Editor

myartspace.com

www.myartspace.com

New York Art Exchange

www.nyaxe.com

Damien Hirst is Looking Ahead

Damien Hirst is Looking Ahead. Image via Portfolio

Damien Hirst is considered to be one of the most tactful artists living today as far as establishing a market is concerned. While the ethics of his practice can be debated one must admit that Hirst is a capable businessman-- his actions have enforced the idea that an artist can take his or her career into his or her own hands by utilizing alternative marketing paths, such as selling art online or at auction without the help of gallery representation. However, it may very well be that recent economic struggles have finally caught up to the world renowned British artist and his business model-- at least that is what the skeptics are saying. Could they be wrong?

The media has reported on several stories that reveal the current status of the ‘dismal’ financial situation facing Damien Hirst. For example, there are reports that Hirst has dismissed 20 to 24 assistants from his production company. Further reports include information stating that only two of eight works by Hirst sold at Art Basel Miami Beach less than a month ago. However, one must remember that Hirst has been making his own rules as of late-- so it could be that he does not care about these recent losses. After all, Hirst is by no means a starving artist.

As mentioned, Damien Hirst is a very business-minded artist. Before counting Hirst out realize that he recently lowered his own prices. In fact, Hirst has stated that he is looking forward to selling his work for affordable rates within the context of recent global economic woes. He has already reduced the price of some works by half. Hirst has also said that he is looking at more realistic prices in general. Thus, it seems to me that Hirst is learning as he goes. When faced with a tough market one must learn to adapt, true?

Hirst is aware of this. As a businessman and entrepreneur he is very aware of what is needed in order to sustain his market during stages of economic strife. Hirst recently stated, "If I want to sell new work, I'll price it lower. If people have got less money, you can either just shut your door and say, 'Screw everybody', or I can wait until everyone can afford my work or price it cheaper." Thus, you can't measure the success of Damien Hirst with traditional concepts of art world success. After all, Hirst is exploring different markets in order to sustain his art dynasty, so to speak.

Do you need an example of how committed Damien Hirst is to exploring the market for his art? Look to his association with Levi’s Jeans for the answer. The artist is working with Levi’s Jeans in order to produce a limited edition collection of clothing featuring themes that are common in his art. The prices will start at $100 for tees and $250 for jeans. Hirst will utilize aspects of ecommerce when selling his line of clothing. Needless to say, Hirst is an artist who is prepared to brave the new frontier of the art market.

So what can we learn from Damien Hirst? Simple. When demand is down an artist must adapt to the art market as well as the global economy. As with any business... traditional models of commerce are meant to be broken.

Links of Interest:

Has Hirst’s Bubble Burst? [Portfolio]

Damien Hirst, of $100 Million Diamond Skull, Sees Prices Slump [Bloomberg]

Hirst Market in Decline, Say Researchers [ArtInfo]

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

Senior Editor

www.myartspace.com

www.nyaxe.com

For the Love of God: Damien Hirst Threatens Young Artist with Legal Action

A collage by Cartrain involving Damien Hirst's 'For the Love of God'

There has been some buzz about a situation involving a young British graffiti artist and Damien Hirst. Apparently the young artist, known as Cartrain, took a lesson from Banksy’s playbook-- he displayed one of his collages in the National Portrait Gallery under the nose of security and staff. So where does Damien Hirst come into play you ask? The collages by Cartrain, which the artist has sold as prints, involve a parody of Hirst’s ‘For the Love of God’. It seems that Hirst was not thrilled to discover that a young graffiti artist had profited from prints involving his copyright protected works.

The Design and Artists Copyright Society, of which Damien Hirst is a member, contacted Cartrain after receiving direct instructions from Hirst. The society informed the young artist that he had broken the law by infringing upon Hirst’s copyright. Hirst’s demands were clear-- he demanded the original works and the halt of sales with the threat of legal action. Hirst also demanded the profit that Cartrain had made from selling his collages and prints. Four works were confiscated by DACS from Cartrain’s gallery on November 12th. Reports state that Cartrain only earned about £200 from sales of the work.

People are defending the work of Cartrain by stating that appropriation is not theft. However, appropriation can be considered theft if the work is protected by copyright. It really boils down to a fine line decided by judge or jury. True, art schools and law have very different opinions about the implications of appropriation. In the case of Hirst’s work-- which is known worldwide-- one could make a case for parody within the protections of appropriation.

Damien Hirst is not the only internationally renowned artist waving the legal stick around these days. Shepard Fairey, the visual spearhead behind Barack Obama’s campaign, recently stated that he will take legal action against “bootleggers” who have “hijacked” his “style”. That said, I find it ironic that Damien Hirst would be upset over someone infringing upon his copyright considering that he has infringed upon the copyright of others. Damien Hirst and Shepard Fairey have two things in common-- they have both settled out of court due to infringing on the copyright of others and they have both threatened legal action against artists who have violated their protected works. The saying, “you reap what you sow”, comes to mind. Did I mention that Cartrain is 16 years old? ‘For the Love of God’-- Indeed.

Links of Interest:

‘Appropriation’ isn’t theft, Mr. Hirst

Damien Hirst 'threatened to sue teenager over alleged copyright theft'

How Damien disappointed us

With Barack Obama Posters Comes Fame

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin
Senior Editor
www.myartspace.com

Damien Hirst Lowers Prices and Slams a Price Tag on Pants

From "Show me the Money!" to "Let's make a deal!"

Damien Hirst has been shaking the foundation of the mainstream artworld more than usual as of late. First he bypassed his dealers in order to sell at auction-- breaking auction records along the way. Then he returned to one of his first dealers while keeping other dealers on the fence, so to speak. Now, with an artworld recession lurking in the background, he is openly stating that the market for his work and the art market in general is over-priced.

There is a bit of irony to his statements considering that critics of Hirst have long stated the same about the artist who has fetched millions for his work with relative ease. The artist, businessman, and entrepreneur is now looking forward to selling his work for affordable rates within the context of recent global economic woes-- reducing the price of some works by half. Hirst has also said that he is looking at more realistic prices in general, "If I want to sell new work, I'll price it lower. If people have got less money, you can either just shut your door and say, 'Screw everybody', or I can wait until everyone can afford my work or price it cheaper."

The Damien Hirst X Levi’s® collection

Do you need an example of how committed Damien Hirst is to his recent statements? Look to his association with Levi’s Jeans for the answer. The artist is working with Levi’s Jeans in order to produce a limited edition collection of clothing featuring themes that are common in his art. According to Art News Blog the prices will start at £55 for tees and £150 for jeans. When asked about the difference between expressing himself in art versus fashion Hirst replied, “I don’t see a difference really, anything done well is art, but this way a lot of people get to own my stuff and in a not too precious way.” It will be interesting to observe how Hirst utilizes the internet for his new ventures. He has a history of exploring eCommerce.

Links of Interest:

Damien Hirst Sees the Writing on the Gallery Wall

End of Days Watch: Damien Hirst Admits His Art is Overpriced

Damien Hirst Levi's Jeans and T-shirts

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

Senior Editor

www.myartspace.com

www.myartspace.com/blog

www.myartspace.com/interviews

The Outsiders

Steve Lazarides presents The Outsiders

Gallerist Steve Lazarides, who began his career as a car salesman and factory worker in the UK, may very well be the New York art world's sensation of the moment due to his controversial exhibit titled The Outsiders. British artists who have utilized satire in order to explore American iconography dominate the exhibit. The exhibit includes works by Polly Morgan, Jonathan Yeo, and Antony Micallef. Lazarides runs two galleries in the UK and is the agent of Banksy. Rumor has it that Lazarides is seeking a permanent gallery space in New York.

Lazarides utilized a disused space in the Bowery in downtown Manhattan in order to open The Outsiders exhibit late in September. Since that time the show has had more foot traffic than the recent Gilbert & George retrospective at the Brooklyn Museum of Art. Over twenty thousand people have viewed the exhibit so far-- including Damien Hirst who purchased a portrait of Paris Hilton composed of pornographic images by Jonathan Yeo for $40,000. The Outsiders will come to a close on October 31st.

Links of Interest:

www.lazinc.com

www.antonymicallef.com

www.jonathanyeo.com

www.pollymorgan.co.uk

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

Senior Editor

www.myartspace.com

Damien Hirst Lives Big

Damien Hirst: Show me the money!

While the validity of Damien Hirst’s art can be debated his fortune can’t be denied. The controversial British artist creates art that fetches big money in galleries, at auction, online or anywhere else he decides to sell it. Some critics have went as far as to say that he is a thorn in the side of the traditional brick & mortar art world. Hirst has a brick & mortar space of his own. As with his fortune-- think big.

The controversial British artist purchased a 300 room mansion in Gloucestershire a few years ago with his wife Maia Norman and has been repairing the rundown structure ever since. The structure, known as Toddington Manor, was built in 1820 and had been vacant for over 20 years at the time the couple purchased it. Hirst has stated that the manor will eventually house a collection of his own works that will be open to the public. However, he has went on to say that the project may not be complete by the end of his lifetime.

Regardless of what you think of Hirst one must admit that it is a major accomplishment for an artist to achieve the financial success he has had. After all, at one time he was just another hopeful artist walking the streets of London. Ok, ok... Charles Saatchi played a major role.

Charles Saatchi: Indeed.

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

Senior Editor

www.myartspace.com

Is it Art? Student creates art with feline corpse

Is it Art? Student creates art with feline corpse

Apparently there has been some controversy at Alfred University over an art student who displayed a dead cat as art. The art student had placed the altered corpse on display in an exhibit space located within the university student-operated Moka Joka coffee shop. So far the identity of the art student has yet to be made public. However, according to a Morning Times reporter the school has acknowledged that the student had posed the decayed corpse of the cat in a manner that made it appear as if it was in the process of being electrocuted by electrical wires that had been forced into its decaying flesh.

According to the article the student had discussed the controversial piece during an art class shortly before placing it on display. The piece, which was not preserved, was removed by campus officials due to concern over student safety and health within a location where food is served. However, some individuals are defending the controversial piece as being no different than the preserved animal corpses that British artist Damien Hirst has utilized within the context of his work. Maybe art critic Robert Hughes was correct when he suggested that Damien Hirst is responsible for the decline in contemporary art? What say you?

If an animal corpse in a Hirst piece can be considered art does that mean an animal corpse that has been utilized by an art student within his or her work should be considered acceptable as well? Or is it an issue of ‘good art, bad art’? Where should the line of ethics be drawn?

Link of Interest:
www.morning-times.com

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin
Senior Editor
www.myartspace.com

The "bejewelled trinkets" of Damien Hirst

Damien Hirst is getting some royal treatment. However, it is not in the way that he would like. Sir Peter Maxwell Davies, the Queen’s composer, has attacked the “dumbing down” and commercialization of the arts due to the success of Damien Hirst. Sir Peter lashed out at bankers, educationalists, politicians and religion as the fuel for the “dumbing down” problem. During a speech he used Damien Hirst’s record breaking auction at Sotheby’s as an example.

In a speech to the conference of the British Academy of Composers and Songwriters, Sir Peter said: “We can all learn from a recent auction of art as an instantly recognisable iconic commodity, where it has become part of the entertainment industry, crossed with investment banking. The artist had the wit to sell a golden calf and other bejewelled trinkets, but all creative artists, in whatever branch of the arts they work, must ponder the implications of so much money scrambling after manufactured artefacts without content – with just a brand tag supposed to guarantee market value.”

Sir Peter went on to say: “It reminds me of the Liberace museum in Las Vegas, where the great man’s tatty stage costumes are exhibited, each with a fabulous price tag, and we are supposed to be uplifted. There are, of course, interesting visual artists out there, but this auction pantomime reflects the reductio ad absurdum of an art world where the principles of the market reign supreme.”

Sir Peter Maxwell Davies is not the first to complain about the “dumbing down” of the arts in the UK. Charles Thomson and the Stuckists have been speaking out against the “dumbing down” of art in the UK for nearly a decade. UK art critic David Lee has warned about it as well. What say you?

More on Hirst from the Myartspace Blog:

'Bling' Skull goes for Big Bucks
www.myartspace.com/blog/2007/09/art-space-news-bling-skull-goes-for-big.html

Damien Hirst and his Diamond Skull

www.myartspace.com/blog/2007/06/art-space-news-damien-hirst-and-his.html

Is Hirst A Copycat?
www.myartspace.com/blog/2006/11/art-in-news-is-hirst-copycat.html

Damien Hirst takes a shark-sized bite out of traditional galleries by taking a different marketing path
www.myartspace.com/blog/2008/09/damien-hirst-takes-shark-sized-bite-out.html

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

Senior Editor

www.myartspace.com

Damien Hirst Donates Sketches to Charitable Cause

Damien Hirst has donated three sketches to the Buy Art Fair in order to raise money for charity. Proceeds will go to the Five Stars Scanner Appeal in order to help raise £1m for an MRI scanner for the new Manchester Children’s Hospital. The three sketches-- a butterfly, shark, and skull, are worth an estimated £2,000 each. The MRI scanner will help doctors to diagnose cancer in young patients.

Marc Quinn's Golden Fetish

Photo: © Getty Images

Marc Quinn’s golden sculpture of Kate Moss has finally been made public at the British Museum as part of its Statuefilia exhibition. As expected, Quinn’s statue of Moss is in a similar pose as his bronze sculpture of the British model titled Sphinx. Apparently the golden version of Kate Moss was to be titled Siren, but has been renamed Aphrodite. According to the museum the piece is the largest gold sculpture to be made since the days of ancient Egypt. Quinn created the sculpture with over two millions dollars worth of gold. It has been suggested that the piece will earn six times that once sold.

As I’ve mentioned before… I’m not exactly impressed with art that meshes with celebrity. Marc Quinn and Daniel Edwards take top prize for that as far as I’m concerned. Will Damien Hirst be able to top Quinn's golden Moss? Perhaps Andres Serrano will sculpt Kate Moss or another celebrity in his own little way? That might actually be interesting.

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

Senior Editor

www.myartspace.com

Damien Hirst takes a shark-sized bite out of traditional galleries by taking a different marketing path

The Kingdom (lot 5, Evening sale)tiger shark, glass, steel, silicone and formaldehyde solution with steel plinth, 214 by 383.6 by 141.8cm., executed in 2008.

Sotheby's London is in the process of auctioning off 223 artworks by Damien Hirst directly from the studio of the artist. The Sotheby's London auction, titled Beautiful Inside My Head Forever, has caused much debate concerning the harm it could have on the primary market. Some traditional galleries and supporters of traditional galleries have been in an uproar over the influence that an auction house can have on the art market. The success of the first night has made their concern a blunt reality.

Hirst has played his part in fueling the fire. While he has stated that he will never stop working with galleries he has also went on to say that selling at an auction house is a very “democratic way to sell art” and that it is a “natural evolution for contemporary art”. Hirst has made other statements that question the validity of traditional galleries and enforce the assumption that they cater to specific collectors. Such as, “There’s a hell of a lot of money in art - but the artists don’t get it”, and, “The artist doesn’t make any money, but everyone else does.”. Concerning the current auction, which ends today, Hirst stated that he embraces the challenge of selling his work in that way. For weeks critics and art world insiders have speculated about the risk that Hirst had taken with his career. Criticism aside, the result from last night was in Hirst’s favor. Will other artist heed his call?

Needless to say, hundreds of traditional gallery owners and supporters do not want the primary market to evolve in that manner. What Hirst observes as evolution is considered by many to be an unneeded and possibly dangerous revolutionary step against the long-standing system of art commerce. Only time will tell if that success will spur other artists to deal directly with auction houses instead of their galleries. One thing is for certain, some traditional galleries focusing on major artists are undoubtedly nervous about the success of Beautiful Inside My Head Forever.

My guess is that the plight facing traditional galleries will become worse before it gets any better. A good gallery owner learns to adapt to changes in the art market. However, galleries are faced with stiff competition in the market of today. Many feel that they have to scramble to be accepted into major art fairs before rival galleries ‘steal’ their slot. If the art fair is invitation only they wait on pins and needles hoping that they will be selected. Now they have even more competition to face in the form of auction houses representing the blunt of an artists career.

Traditional gallery owners are faced with questions about how they can remain valid in a market that appears to be dominated by nontraditional ways of conducting commerce involving art. It is as if there is a joint front against the way things were, so to speak. The question is… will this shift in art market dynamics be a positive change for artists? Or has Hirst bitten off more than what others will be able to chew?

Links of Interest:

www.sothebys.com

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin
Senior Editor
www.myartspace.com

Marc Quinn and his Golden Idol

Detail of "Siren"-- British Museum/PA Wire

If you want to make headlines with your art you need only knock on the door of celebrity-- or so it seems. We have seen this time and time again in recent years. Since I’ve been cynical of Daniel Edwards work involving celebrities in the past I feel that I must stick to my guns and cast an eye at Marc Quinn’s most recent work. Quinn has created a sculpture of British supermodel Kate Moss-- again.

This is not the first time that Marc Quinn has used Kate Moss as his muse. In 2006, he unveiled his Sphinx, a painted bronze statue of Moss that caused some controversy due to the provocative yoga pose of the statue. The end result then was the same as now-- headlines for the artist. Quinn’s new sculpture of Kate Moss, titled Siren, is a 110-pound statue worth over $2 million in solid gold. Detailed images of the statue have yet to be made public. However, some sources have suggested that the statue of Moss involves the same edgy pose as Sphinx-- why break from a successful formula, right?

When asked about Siren, Quinn stated, "I thought the next thing to do would be to make a sculpture of the person who's the ideal beauty of the moment, but even Kate Moss doesn't live up to the image.". Maybe Kate Moss is his ideal of beauty? She certainly is not mine. Maybe the next thing to do is for certain aspects of the art world to go beyond bling and celebrity. Britney Spears pregnant on all fours as imagined by Daniel Edwards, a diamond skull thanks to Damien Hirst, and now Kate Moss made out of gold by Marc Quinn! I don’t think I can handle much more of this meshing of celebrity and bling. What say you?

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

Senior Editor

www.myartspace.com

Art Space News: 'Bling' Skull goes for Big Bucks

(The work, entitled "For the Love of God," is a skull cast in platinum and encrusted with 8,601 diamonds.)

Damien Hirst's latest piece-- "For the Love of God"-- sold last Thursday for 100 million dollars (75 million euros), a record price for work sold by a living artist. A spokeswoman for the White Cube gallery in London, where the piece had been on display, stated that the diamond-encrusted skull was sold to a group of anonymous investors. The skull has been hammered in the press and by onlookers for being nothing more than a form of 'bling'-- an overly expensive item that is nothing more than an indication of wealth.

Hirst remains best known for earlier conceptual works in which creatures including a shark and a cow were preserved in formaldehyde within glass tanks. Critics have stated that the British artist would not have a career had a "corpse not been involved"-- a statement referring to Hirst's earlier work, statements he has made to the press, and his most recent venture. Nevertheless, Hirst has earned a large following of supporters throughout his career regardless of the controversy that surrounds him.

The controversy over Hirst's art is not the only media bombardment that the artist has had to deal with. He once made the grave error of stating that the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States were like a work of art. On September 10, 2002, on the eve of the first anniversary of the 9/11 World Trade Center attacks, Hirst said in an interview with BBC News Online:

"The thing about 9/11 is that it's kind of like an artwork in its own right ... Of course, it's visually stunning and you've got to hand it to them on some level because they've achieved something which nobody would have ever have thought possible - especially to a country as big as America. So on one level they kind of need congratulating, which a lot of people shy away from, which is a very dangerous thing."

Due to public outrage, Hirst issued the following statement:

"I apologise unreservedly for any upset I have caused, particularly to the families of the victims of the events on that terrible day."

'Bling' or not-- the skull sold. What do you think? Does Hirst profit off of death and suffering? Does it matter if he does? Do you think there was a sense of passion behind the creation of "For the Love of God"? Or do you assume that the piece was nothing more than an example of a man showing off his wealth? Discuss.

Art Space News: Damien Hirst and his Diamond Skull

('For The Love of God' by Damien Hirst is currently on display at the White Cube gallery in East London.)

Controversial artist Damien Hirst is at it again. He has unveiled his latest work - a £50 million diamond skull titled 'For The Love of God'. The skull is the most expensive piece of contemporary art ever created. Hirst has stated that the skull (encrusted with 8,601 diamonds) is a "celebration against death". However, art critics feel that it is more of a celebration of Hirst's hefty bank account. Others have mentioned that it is a 'celebration OF death' due to the history of blood diamonds and the diamond trade in general.

Hirst, 41, is no stranger to creating work that critics observe as being audacious- at best. However, the multi-millionaire artist has captivated several major art collectors and has a huge following of supporters throughout the world.

Strong support for his work has not protected Hirst from people questioning the validity and merit of his new piece. Many have stated that the skull is nothing more than a publicity stunt. Critics have also lashed out at Hirst for being a 'wannabe Warhol' in that he often does not take part in the physical creation of his work.

The skull is a platinum replica of a human skull purchased by Hirst two years ago in a London taxidermy shop. Hirst has stated that he hopes it "makes the people who see it feel good, that it’s uplifting, that it takes your breath away". I think the only breath being taken away is from the gasps of viewers when they discover the cost of the sparkly skull. Hirst went on to say, "I wouldn’t mind if it happened to my skull after my death.".

Regardless of the controversy surrounding it, I will admit that the skull offers a unique vision of life and death. However, I personally do not think this is a piece that will stand the test of time. Some things are better left buried, right?

What do you think about this piece? Is it art? Is it simply an expensive stunt? Does it portray the vision Hirst desired to capture? Does it matter that his work is often created by studio assistants? What do you think about 'For The Love of God'? I look forward to reading your comments!

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

Art In The News: Is Hirst A Copycat?

[Damien Hirst’s disputed 2000 work Valium, top, and the 1984 drawing by computer graphics artist Robert Dixon]

We all know that artists are known for 'borrowing' images from time to time. However, some 'borrow' more from an image than they should. This seems to be the case with Damien Hirst from the viewpoint of Robert Dixon. Dixon charges Hirst with stealing one of his patterns.

Dixon recently went public with his accusations. He claims that Hirst copied 'True Daisy', which was published in the Penguin Dictionary of Curious And Interesting Geometry in 1991. The piece in question,'Valium' (2000) by Hirst, does look like 'True Daisy' (1984) by Dixon. What do you think? Does it matter if Hirst did 'borrow' the pattern? Mr. Dixon feels that it does matter.

Dixon claims that Hirst would have never created 'Valium' had he not observed 'True Daisy'. Both images share the same number of 'spots' and the same pattern of movement. Dixon claims that the chances of two artists creating similar images with the same amount of 'spots' is very slim. Dixon has since contacted Hirst demanding financial compensation and an acknowledgement of his artistic contribution. Hirst has yet to respond.

The conflict between Dixon and Hirst over 'True Daisy' is nothing new. Three years ago Dixon accused Hirst of copying the circular pattern for a children's coloring book. However, keep in mind that Hirst is no stranger to acts of plagiarism. In 2000 Hirst paid designer Norman Emms compensation after copying a toy that Emms had designed.

What do you think about these claims? Are they legitimate? Or do you think that Dixon is after something else? Is it possible that Hirst may have created 'Valium' with no prior knowledge of 'True Daisy'? Should Dixon be compensated? Should Hirst get a restraining order? Discuss. I want to read and respond to your opinions!

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

Does Wealth and Fame Cause Artists To Decline in Their Artistic Endeavors?

We have all heard stories about famous artists who struggled in poverty yet continued to create art that was outstanding. Names like Vincent Van Gogh and Amedeo Modigliani come to mind. Art spanning the length of their careers has continued to inspire others decade after decade. However, there are also famous artists who became very wealthy during their lifetime from the sell of their art who seem to have lost their artistic flare for exploration. While their wealth increased their skill seemed to deteriorate. The question at hand... did their approach to artistic creation decline as their fame and wealth increased? Or is it just an issue of their personality and work ethic.


'Apparition of the Visage of Aphrodite of Cnide in a Landscape' Salvador Dali

Take Salvador Dali for example. During his years of 'struggle' he created images that have continued to speak to observers from one decade to the next. He had a great passion for his work during his early career. However, most critics agree that his later work, after he became extremely wealthy and concerned with financial gain, seemed to decline as far as the artistic message he was conveying. I've even heard people suggest that his work became stagnate or dull compared to his pre-wealth art. If this is so, do you think it was due to him feeling overly comfortable with his financial situation? Or was it simply a matter of personality and work ethic.


'Two Doves with Wings Spread' Pablo Picasso

After all, artist like Picasso continued to develop in new directions long after becoming overly wealthy. The same goes for Monet. Were these artists more interested in artistic exploration than artists who seemed to pursue wealth over the direction of their art? Or were they simply not blinded by the wealth they had acquired?


'Hymn' Damien Hirst

I'm sure you can discover contemporary artists of wealthy status who have started to repeat themselves or who have revealed a lack of direction with their art. For example many have stated that Damien Hirst has lost direction with his art (Though some would say he never had one.) Critics have claimed that his recent work is nothing more than 'throwaway one-liners'. So what do you think? Is wealth linked to a decline in artistic endeavors? Or is all this negative press simply the work of critics who strive to bash any wealthy artist they can in order to advance their own careers?

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin