Now on ScienceBlogs: The Laboratory at Harvard

Seed Media Group

Search

Profile

headshotbioE.jpg bioephemera is art + biology - everything from representations of science in art and literature to the neuroscience of aesthetics.

read the first BioE post
visit the old BioE archive

Note: the contents of this blog are the personal opinions of the author, independent of any organizations with which she is affiliated, and should not be construed as professional advice.

Currently Reading


bioephemeral sampler

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Shiny Objects


00ootssoeraaapsmall.jpg
thinkingbloggerpf8.jpg
intellectual-blogger-award-small-thumb.jpg
excellentblog.jpg

My Amazon.com Wish List

Categories

Archives

Blogroll

« The Goracle speaks! | Main | Gingivitis and Gonhorrea: Vintage Public Health Posters »

Why Damien Hirst's roadkill is worth more than yours

Category: Artists & ArtBooksFrivolityMuseum Lust
Posted on: July 18, 2008 1:00 PM, by Jessica Palmer

If you think that one inanimate shark is as good as another, your understanding of the art market is, as they say, dead in the water. Mr. Saunders's piece just didn't have the same quality or cache. (Although Mr. Saunders did claim his shark was more handsome.) Most important, it's not just about the work of art; rather, the value placed on a particular work derives from how it feels to own that art. Most art dealers know that art buying is all about what tier of buyers you aspire to join.

From The New York Sun's amusing review of Don Thompson's upcoming book, The $12 Million Stuffed Shark: The Curious Economics of Contemporary Art.

Thomson discusses the promotion of Mr. Saunders' stuffed shark by an artists' collective known as the Stuckists as part of their strategy to critique Hirst's "conceptual art". The Stuckists displayed Saunders' shark across town from Hirst's back in 2003, with a $1 million price tag:

saundersshark.jpg
stuffed shark
Eddie Saunders, 1989

hirstshark.jpg
The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living
Damien Hirst, 1991
Tiger shark, glass, steel, 5% formaldehyde solution, 213 x 518 x 213 cm
MoMA

Hirst's shark later sold for $8 million - despite the fact that it rotted from the inside out, fell apart, and needed to be replaced with a fresh shark. Even Hirst admitted he wasn't sure if the artwork was still the "original" piece post-shark-replacement. But responding to the criticism that pretty much anyone could have put a dead shark on display and called it art, Hirst said, 'But you didn't, did you?'

Controversy aside, the most artistically successful shark of all is clearly this one:

legohirst.jpg
Art Craziest Nation: Damien Hirst's Shark Tank
John Cake and Darren Neave, 2005

Share this: Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/76296

Comments

1

The 'my little brother can do it too' argument. That's confounding art with craft.

Posted by: Jan-Maarten | July 18, 2008 8:41 PM

2

Well spotted. You are now part of the story!
http://www.stuckism.com/Shark.html#Press

Posted by: Charles Thomson | July 18, 2008 8:58 PM

Post a Comment

(Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)





ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Follow ScienceBlogs on Twitter
Visit the Collective Imagination blog
Advertisement
Enter to win

© 2006-2009 Seed Media Group LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of Seed Media Group. All rights reserved.

Sites by Seed Media Group: Seed Media Group | ScienceBlogs | SEEDMAGAZINE.COM