damien hirst talking about the **** he makes…literally, his own words
it sickens me that bollax like this is even given the title of art
rumour has it, you better sell your damien hirsts quickly, before everyone realises they are, sh*t!
hes even comparing himself to architects- when paxman raised the point that he does not paint his own spot paintings, he says that architects dont build their own houses!
very very annoying man…
While no great fan of Damien Hirst’s work, that’s a pretty corny and hackneyed opinion.
stupider whowever pays millions for his ‘art’ which is an insult to real artists … he’s laughing all the way to the bank :doze:
Oh right, the old “Modern art is **** I could have drawn that”. Well, why didn’t you? Damien Hurst may seem old hat now, but at the time his work first came out, it was new and thought-provoking. He was important in influencing many other artists, and steering aesthetics in the 90’s generally, whether it’s obvious or not.
You’ve got to remember context. We’ve all seen stuff cut in half now, but at the time it was new. And regarding artists not doing their own work - that practise goes back to the Old Masters, most of them had apprentices/lackeys to do their work for them too, it’s not new.
They could save themselves some cash and get pimary school child to paint a picture. It’d be of better artistic merit.
from what i can remember i watched a program that mentioned that he buys his own paintings secretly to make people think that he’s the big deal…personally i do like a bit of contemporary art there are loads of undiscovered hidden jems…but only the ones that put effort into it or have an interesting idea…the whole “black dot on a white piece of paper” doesn’t do it for me.
if art was a steady type of income i’d already drop everything and become an artist because deep down this is who i am, well i’m also a frustrated gypsy wannabe…fair play to all the artists that get by on hype, if some posh tw@t wants to spend money on controversial art then so be it.
I think this says it all
:D:D (and if we pick Arse will we get the one in your photo? 
)
i didnt say 'modern art is st’. i do say Damien Hurst work is st. 
I like a quality piece of artwork as much as the next man. But some of these so called artists make my skin crawl with the levels of pretentiousness they have reached! :crazy:
How can a messy bed (Tracey Emin) be considered art? Or a Piece of Blutak stuck to the wall? :ermm:
Interestingy, the Blutack was the brainchild of another “Art Installation” called “Light goes on and Off”, which won the turner prize and netted him a £200k prize!?!?!!! :blink: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Creed
I don’t know what annoys me more. The artists (and I use the word begrudgingly) or the pretentious wan*ers who actually pay a fortune for their crap?! :ermm:
In fact, if you can’t beat them join them… Lets have an LB “Crap Art” online exhibition! :w00t:
Take a picture of your “piece of art” and post it here for all to see! 
Let me start it off…
This is my first piece of art. I call it “Londons Bad Eyesight”. It’s my Oakley sunglasses and hard case that I left on top of a police car, before driving off. They were run over by a london Routemaster double decker bus. :pinch:
Opening price of only £500 for this beautiful peice of work…
Edited for mong spelling! 
What makes art “art”?
And what makes “an artist”?
And why get so het up over something that has no effect on you?
Here’s a song by one of my favourite artists on this very topic (although focusses more on Lady GaGa than modern art :hehe: )
EDIT : for anyone who can’t be arsed listening to the song - or just wants to respond with “she can’t sing” :hehe: - the relevant bits are:
this is a picture of my right arm fresh casted, taken by me on the 3rd of February 2012. cast was made from Ealing Hospital, full documentation available on request.
as my arm is now healed and no longer in cast, this is now a rare image and my limbs will not be seen in cast again for (hopefully) a very long time.
i see Roadrunner has a very competitive piece, but mine is a true find.
i think the opening for this will be … £ 700.
:laugh:
I thought that Damien Hirst programme was great, I like what he does. Makes me think - yeah its pointless but its brilliant.
Clearly these artists are too commercial. They should be more like Vincent van Gogh- live in poverty and be mean to people.
…having said that I thought Damien’s skull drawings had some oommph about them in a transient sort of way.
Mr-C The best definition of “what is art” hat I’ve heard was by Brian Sewell. (The art critic/historian.)
“It’s what a load of over educated people like me say is art.”
So there you have it , and from the expert. Worryingly, he’s probably right.
Clever and insightful analysis of Hirst and the contemporary art market by Hari Kunzru:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2012/mar/16/damien-hirst-art-market
In a nutshell:
This isn’t just art that exists in the market, or is “about” the market. This is art that is the market – a series of gestures that are made wholly or primarily to capture and embody financial value, and only secondarily have any other function or virtue.