Hirst and Bling
This weekend will see one of the most talked-about art auctions for decades at Sotheby's in London, when Damien Hirst puts up new works for an estimated total of 80 to 120 million pounds. Never one to duck controversy, Hirst's career has included a range of 'punk' tactics, and he has said of this auction "I was too young to be a punk in the 70's, so I'm doing it now...". If Hirst wants to be a performace artist he has done well, as thousands of people have queued for two weeks to see the works, and celebrity art junkies have flown in from the four corners of the world. the new works re-visit old themes - the most renowned being animals in formaldehyde - but now with added bling: diamonds and solid gold now adorn many pieces. The centrepiece of the auction will be the Golden Calf - again, a calf in formaldehyde, but this time with solid gold horns and a gold-plated case. Critics are divided over Hirst's real value as an artist. Is this art, or media hype? Is Hirst pulling off the ultimate irony by persuading the richest people in the world to out-bid each other for the privilege of worshipping a golden calf in their home? London critic Ben Lewis,who has been banned from the sale for his highly critical reviews of Hirst's work (including a recent article entitled "Who put the Con in Contemporary Art?") questions Hirst's motivation, and claims this is all about money. He writes, “There's a hell of a lot of money in art — but artists don't get it,” says Hirst, owner of some 40 properties, who buys Bacons for tens of millions of pounds and has a net worth of several hundred million."
Prophet or profiteer? It is difficult to say, and Hirst himself has claimed that his work can only really be judged in the long term. "In 200 years we'll know if I'm any good", he has said. By which time, of course, he will be long gone and will have joined the rarest group of artists in history: those worth millions before they die.
There is hype here, without question... but I can't help feeling that there is also something deeper in Hirst's referencing of biblical themes - once the covenant and now the golden calf... if nothing else, the very subject matter of this auction draws attention to deep questions about art. We are left wondering if there really is any difference between paying millions for a Van Gogh that in the artist's troubled lifetime was considered a worthless experiment and paying millions for a dead cow with golden horns. Perhaps it is the very fact that the super-rich will clamour to buy what is 'hip' that corrupts art and renders it idolatrous , and perhaps Hirst - by giving us actual idols - is hitting a bulls-eye for truth? If so then that, at least, would be artful.
