Damien Hirst: Fantastic Or Fraudulent

// January 11th, 2011 // b-inspired // b-uncut

Damien Hirst is a divisive figure in the art world, but are his works any good?

Damien Hirst is highly controversial and perhaps a little too ‘out there’ for the general population. At 45, he may not be a kid any more but he sure likes to attract attention as if he still is. Hirst held his recent Christmas party at St Mark’s church in Mayfair, with invitations featuring his face superimposed on an image of Jesus Christ. Some people might think that sounds like Damien having a laugh. It might have been a touch tongue in cheek, but it’s the general consensus that this is a guy thats biggest fan stares back at him in the mirror every morning. Hirst is quite the egomaniac.

But with what regard do the public hold Mr Hirst?

It may only be satire but, The Daily Mash have probably got it near to the mark. They feature an article declaring ‘More than 90% of Britons think they could do better art than Damien Hirst’. Of course this is a jokey piece, with no poll of 100,000 people to fall back on. But actually, the general content of the article probably sits pretty well with where most people are on Hirst: ‘Art prices should be based on skill’. They go off on a bit of a (humorous) tangent, but I could imagine hearing the same kind of talk in pubs up and down the country.

Courting controversy?

Hirst’s latest piece is a dead babies skull, which he has cast in platinum and studded with diamonds. Does this art work have the skill of a Renoit? It’s certainly airs more on the side of raw than Rembrandt. B-Uncut has often raised the question of ‘what really constitutes art?’ and Hirst is great example for that debate. Is the guy really that talented or is he making the most out of courting publicity in a modern world of gossip and PR? I’m not saying everyone should paint like Picasso but is Hirst a step too far and a regressive figure head for modern art?

The critics choice?

Some think Hirst is an untalented, one trick, shock and awe flogging, pony. Others think he does have talent and is actually underrated. Hirst appears to be one of those figures that simply guarantees to divide opinion, which in many ways makes him a polarisation of the whole modern art movement. In truth, probably the last person that cares either way is Hirst. As long as he is in the public eye and infamous, Hirst will fulfil his mantra.

What do you think of Hirst? Let us know…