Comments on: Damien Hirst – The Rijksmuseum – and the Ultimate Bling

By: Leo

Leo — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 23:20:26 +0000

Actually, Germaine Greer does have a point, and one I made in my previous post on Hirst. http://leoplaw.com/2008/09/09/damien-hirst-like-rembrandt/ Hirst's artform is selling, nothing more. Its hard to glean whether Greer approves or disapproves, she seems more intent on lampooning Hughes. But if Greer thinks hand crafted artwork is a thing of the past she'd better think again. There are other rising tastes and fashions that are turning heads opening wallets. Venosa has a valid point in his discussion with Peter Gric. Street art (read graffiti) and Low Brow (read comic) are starting to move off the streets and pages into the galleries. These have a heavy graphical and hand crafted approach. Paint will have its day and take shape again. So as for starving dogs and cans of shit, that's all they ever will be. Like heavy hangover from a binge and wondered at what ever inspired it, swearing never again.

By: Otto Rapp

Otto Rapp — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:15:15 +0000

Well, the saga doesn't stop there. Hirst has his defenders. Germaine Greer thinks Hughes (and the rest of us poor and unwashed masses) simply "don't get it". My question to Greer would be: "What is there not to get?" Nothing he does is really very clever (other than his uncanny ability to bilk nouveau rich people and con curators) - I believe the 'work' is simplistic to the point of childish exhibitionism, and perhaps that is the appeal for Greer and the moneyed Lemmings, much like the stockmarket investors getting fleeced by BRE-X Fools Gold (the then corporate Headquarters Sign in Calgary looked as if designed by bling-artist Hirst). Post-Modernism is gasping it's last breath, with Guillermo Vargas Habacuc and Piero Manzoni as 'fine' examples of it's decline. Hello Tate Gallery: How about a group show with Hirst? Greer lectures us from a podium of superiority, the "illuminati literati", which is laughable and sad at the same time. The Guardian also ran a poll, titled: An artistic licence to print money? And guess what: 87.7% thought Hirst was a Huckster. But Greer and her ilk know better, of course. I wonder if former BRE-X VP John Felderhof owns a Hirst - naw, he is to smart for that. But what is conceivable is that they could probably be neighbors in the Cayman Islands (as long as Hirst and his rotting fish are located downwind, I guess).

By: Leo

Leo — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 00:10:32 +0000

Thanks Otto for blogging my post.
The other by Robert Hughes is rather sharp. He does have a rather acid wit that is very entertaining.

By: Otto Rapp

Otto Rapp — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 23:35:48 +0000

Leo: I also blogged your entry, along with this one - read it, you will truly enjoy it: Robert Hughes critique of Damien Hirst

By: Leo

Leo — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 22:32:22 +0000

That’s a brilliant article Otto.

Poor Damien is worried that galleries can no longer afford his artwork for posterity, meaning he’s worried he might be forgotten, because the public won’t see his artwork as it is stored away in private collections.

“And when you have some Russian squillionaire who started buying art three minutes ago but has the GNP of Georgia in his pocket, how can museums compete?”

By: Otto Rapp

Otto Rapp — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 21:59:56 +0000

This is unreal! Just about everyone, except maybe Museum Curators (and perhaps nouveau-riche people with too much money and lack of brains) are on to Hirst being a fraud. And yet, the circus continues!
The sad thing is that he siphones off a considerable amount of money from museums and collectors that could be spent on REAL ART!
Here is a poingnant column by Maclean Magazine’s Andrew Potter Snarkiness about sharkiness misses the point
Cheers
Otto