"its an amazing work of art"... give me a break. Museums have been doing this for decades. This installation belongs at seaworld not at an art gallery. The curator has to say this drivel because it has cost so much of the galleries money. Again this is a brand, not an artistic revelation - and not an original brand at that.
did he buy the shark just to kill it? thats so horrible. why is that irrelevant to all of you? he killed an innocent animal and you guys are calling it art? are you fucking kidding me
The only "concept" this piece of "art" makes me contemplate is the profound stupidity of some people & the incredible lengths those people will go to to justify that stupidity. If half the effort & creativity they spent EXPLAINING their art went into actually CREATING art, they might actually produce something worthwhile. Hirst pays a TAXIDERMIST a $100K to do all the work of creating this piece, slaps some pseudo-intellectual BS name on it & still has the balls to call himself an artist. Ugh
@chaosproduction Yes, let's talk about ignorance. Architects at least know how to DRAW. Hirst, on the other hand, has made a "career" out of capitalizing on modern society's cult of celebrity. People buy his NAME, not the crap he passes off as "art". If congratulating 9/11-attackers gets him headlines, the INK is all he cares about because it'll just elevate his "name-value". Hirst himself has said, "I can’t wait to get into a position to make really bad art & get away with it". Ignorant indeed
@chaosproduction Secondly, let's talk about architecture. The "modern" (60's) architecture is universally considered (by normal people) to be ugly dehumanizing CRAP because it elevates "concept" above more important considerations (for a building) like functionality, beauty, & a "sense of belonging" to the environment around it. This "shock art" crap that Hirst & others like to pontificate about is nothing more than a con-job. Just because you're drinking their kool-aid doesn't make it "art"
@chaosproduction Oh yeah, one last thing. How many claims of appropriation, plagiarism, & copyright infringement does Hirst have against him already? For an "artist" whose main selling point is his ability to create "high concept", LIFTING those concepts from other artists (and even CHILDREN'S TOYS) is a pretty serious blow to his credibility as an "artist". You're right, the architect doesn't build the tower, but at least he THINKS IT UP HIMSELF. Hirst is an overblown FRAUD. Case closed. Powned
@pudgimelon Yes, ignorance. Architects know how to draw. So you think art is just drawing huh? Talk about small minded. Art is more than just pretty pictures, it can also be ideas. The plagiarism of Hirst is a different subject.
As for the 9/11 thing that just got taken the wrong way, he was simply saying how amazing it was that they managed to pull off the attacks without been stopped. That didn't mean he was happy at what they did, or applauding them in such a way. But that is irrelevant.
@pudgimelon (Continued) Con job? Because you don't fully understand it, it is somehow a con? This is what I meant by ignorance. Just because you don't like something, or don't get it doesn't mean it is a ''con'' or ''crap''. But anyway, the majority of what you wrote is completely unrelated to what I previously said.
@pudgimelon (Continued) I wasn't referring to Hirst in the first place, I was actually talking about your comment about Damien getting HELP on his work. Yes he got help, so what? So did artists like Rembrandt, Picasso, he's not the only one. Like I said about the architect, they design it, think of the idea, but they don't actually create it. Same goes for many artists, without them the idea wouldn't exist, that goes for them all, not just Hirst (forgetting the few claims of plagiarism).
Seriously? This guy is such a fake that he not only copies other artists, he even copies himself! It's like those "painting mill masters" who hire other artists to paint-by-numbers duplicate versions of their "masterpieces" (and then the "master" signs them).
This is not art, it is cult of celebrity at its worst. Heck, he even buys his own pieces just to pump up the value of his "name". Architects ARE artists, this guy is a FRAUD
@pudgimelon Yes, well I was never talking directly about Hirst. I was focusing more on your comment about him getting help, and how you think conceptual art isn't art (if that is what you were previously trying to get at). I'm aware he plagiarizes, I don't respect him for that.
all this bollocks is for snobby cunts with more money than they need, ill just go and find a stuffed snake and put it in a tank, snakes kill people right? then i can sell it for a few millions because i really worked hard putting a fucking dead snake into a tank but hey "its a work of art!" oh and even more pathetic when they say theres a story behind it, "it tells a story of death!" NO SHIT SHERLOCK its a shark that kills and its dead big fucking deal..
ahah haha ah.. this shite really makes me laugh, the artists, the people who buy their shitty "art" what a bunch of wankers, more money than brains. Get a human skull cover it in diamonds, give me £50 million please. How the fuck is that art? seriously, there's some stupid half wit dumb fucking people on this planet, the way this prick in the video goes on about a shark in a tank is a work of art.. a dead shark is a work of art... wow he really worked hard to create the shark didnt he?
My asshole, bullshitting cousin is an artist specialising in conceptual, 3-D works.
There was great controversy over his College graduation piece- a series of naked human torsos arranged in improbable & intimate ways (having sex, giving birth etc). Everyone thought they were fantastically well-made, until the College discovered they were unclaimed Asian road-accident victims, ‘preserved’ & shipped over.
After a week they began to decay, filling the gallery with flies & a vile stench.
No, it's not a piece of art. That would mean every scientist since the 19th century who's ever put anything in formaldehyde is an artist. Michelangelo's David is art. Picasso is art. The Sistine Chapel is art. The Mona Lisa is art. Those can't be recreated. For once, I completely agree with Karl Pilkington on this one.
Fuck conceptual art. Fuck performance art. Marcel Duchamp is probably rolling in his grave.
This is a very debatable subject. I personally am a fan of "The Physical Impossibility of Death in the mind of someone living". But others (Cough PETA) may not. So there really isn't much use defending your case (Whether you like it or not) Because there's always going to be a point from the opposition to rebut, and nullify.
@iloveouranful No, it's not a piece of art. That would mean every scientist since the 19th century who's ever put anything in formaldehyde is an artist. David is art. Monet's Water Lillies is art. The Sistine Chapel is art. The Mona Lisa is art. Those can't be recreated. For once, I completely agree with Karl Pilkington on this one.
Fuck conceptual art. Fuck performance art. Marcel Duchamp is probably rolling in his grave.
The fact that he killed a shark for this shit is just icing on the cake
@guitarded112 If "everything is art" then nothing is art. If everyone's an expert, no one is. If everything is music, nothing is. Get the picture? You may think you're being profound but you actually sound like a naive teenager.
I strongly recommend people read "The $12 million Stuffed Shark" to understand its the investor / dealer world behind Hirst. You'll never look at the art world as we know it, with the same eyes and understanding after reading the antics of the world's richest collectors. And dealers.
@YoungBL I can appreciate art, but your comment here is pretentious crap. So what if someone prefers to go to an aquarium than the MET, just because a person is interested by different things, doesn't mean that they lack the intellect that you have.
And belittling people on the internet who are less eloquently spoken than yourself is the lowest form of wit. It's called "being a cunt".
that guy Damien Thirst is a con artist...he plagiarized Steven Spielberg's ideas for his movie "Jaws"....i think Spielberg should sue him. Enough said.
The attempt to collapse all cultural meaning into mere simulacra was the excuse behind the GREED of 80’s Art market: that Art no longer had any purpose beyond it’s promotion. Damien Hirst is an old 80s whore, a Homer Simpson, surviving into the 90s, dragging intellectual Artistic civilsation back to a hoary stone Age. I personally cannot wait until the sub-prime reality of his crap, plagiarised merchandise hits him slap in the gonads. Maggot breathed cretin.
Ok, the curator's explanation made sense but was incredibly assinine. Is the fact that a shark must swim continually to survive, and this one isn't, supposed to be the punchline to the joke?
Hirst made this artwork to shock you, even though you dont like it your still on here talking about it. You say you could put a dead animal in a tank, which you could, but he done it first. Its something different, he has taken art to the next level which is what artist strive for.
@777loksta "You say you could put a dead animal in a tank, which you could, but he done it first."???? Done it first?!?! What a laugh! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
This is the what you get when you allow the group of nefarious social engineers to take over Culture and turn it into what they want. Culture and Art become nothing but a tool to turn our world into a sea of meanlingless, atheism and indifference. Worse is yet to come...
This kind of modern "art" sucks. To me the purpose of art is the part that can be seen, not the idea behind it. I want the beautiful piece on my wall, not something ugly that has an "amazing" message (or no message at all) to it. I think it's ridicilous that absolutely anyone can be an "artist". Those of us who have the gift of art, should be called artist. You have to earn it with something.
Slaughter and taxidermy is not art. It would be one thing if the poor thing had died naturally and been found, but my god. This takes no skill or creativity; just inhuman brutality, which I guess you can say sets Hirst apart.
@seanalienko yes, that's the point, but there is agreat challenge of putig something to the gallery, please go tomorrow and try to put something :) Wonder what kind of results you going to get.
ART? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH DONT MAKE ME LAUGH this is pure cut animal cruelty.
i dont like that hirst purposefully hired someone to kill the shark i thnk its inhumane, however i do think its art, the whole point is to make your own impression on the shark, its totally subjective, thats why conceptial art is cool
How is this art, did he create sharks, are they his creation no. By putting it in formaldehyde that doesn't make it art. That's like me scraping up a dead bird from the road and putting it in a container and going hey whoop de doo look at me I'm so cool and artistic look at this dead bird in my lunch box.
@emilytodd28 - i agree with you it's just a dead animal in a tank, my goldfish died last week he was floating arould in his little tank is that art ?, if so where's my big fat cheque? the whole thing's stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't see what's so controversial about the preserved shark, it's kinda cool. It is much better than the crucifix of Christ sitting in a piss bucket and daring to that art. Or the holy mother Mary made from elephant dung. my favorite Hirst art will always be the butterfly's though, very cool how they look like a stained glass church window....absolutely genius!
@AserehtArt nahh we stood there, killed them just to stare at them like a bunch of cunts, like all these snob bastards, we kill them for a very good reason, not just to stand there and look at it for hours and hours, bunch of sickos they are, n him cutting open a fucking sheep to see the insides the sheep was there already, he took a blade to it like a butcher would how the fuck is that art? this mans a fucking wanker, and all the people who buy this shite are just hilariously pathetic humans.
@Brady2k10 There is no need in this world to curse like that.
You are very rude.
What is art is determined by the ARTIST. What ever the viewer decides to make of it is up to them. After all that is one of the concepts of Post Modern Art, the viewer makes the meaning. Whether you are educated in the arts or not may change your opinion. In my opinion this is a piece of art.
Sorry to disgruntle you.
It would be nice of you to show a little bit a respect when you reply.
@AserehtArt man look at you trynna act all nice if you think this is art then i think you're an idiot so if i go get an elephant right now, cut it open and put it on display you think thats art? ha some people in this world i swear.. i can curse how much i want to curse and there is reason to curse like that because this is a load of shit to me and i think the people that like this shit are even more fucking stupid than the artist, please show respect when i reply why should i?
@AserehtArt you're 15 thats why, try being nice all your life and see where it gets you, it wont get you shit because all the other brain dead idiots on this planet follow the system, try to be nice blah blah blah work for some asshole boss they hate in an office everyday for 30 years, im 22 not 15 and ive obviously been brought up a lot different from you, you're still a kid, aint u got school to go to kid?
at less when i talk about hirst, duno the other ppl, what i miss in his work is the problematic, that mean what his work is about from the perspective of the art it self, because, duchamp allready make us reflexion about object, so in that case the instalation of objets is some thing of the past to, an now become an a recepy or schol, so i dont see the new on hirst, i respect any artist but "for me" is not the greatest artis in our generation, for the other side ppl start to get bored.
how does this raise any question about if art can be so easily replicated? hasnt art been easy to replicate far far far before this? I mean how hard would it be to replicate Klien's blue paintings? or all the white paintings done in the 50's and 60's? come on! you could buy a Donald Judd piece at home depot! Warhol? Fluxus? what about claes oldenburg? Pollock? All conceptual art? Oh! ha! the fountain! so how does this piece raise a question about easy replication?
he wants people to react like you all have so really hes won, he wanted to be famous and allowed to get away with crap art, so fair do's, hes alot richer than any of us will probs ever be
sorry that you dont know anything at all about. why are you even watching a video about art?Artists come up with concepts that are so huge that its impossible for someone to execute it alone. hire scientists! send dimensions to factories! you must not like to think very much. from Warhol to Serra to Koons....who creates art alone anymore? go take a course on contemporary art so you dont sound so clueless and ignorant. they have sense! its a smart investment. whoever buys it will be even richer.
Art is for enjoyment, whether that be visual, audible, physical or whatever... Modern art has focused more on intellectual enjoyment. In a way, it has followed on from (or led by artists such as Marcel Duchamp I should probably say) the modern media which focuses more on the "public's" reaction to events rather then presenting the facts to the public. Modern art has moved to engage the viewer and to evoke a response. Art by its very nature can't be defined. So it is and is not art.
i just had a damien hirst type idea.. using a cow cut up into 5 parts from head to ass in 5 glass parts, each spinning in the opposite direction as the piece infront and behind it... the idea is that this big heavy lump of a thing carrying so much weight is now free.
who are you to say what art is about? the greatest works in history could be easily replaces. Craft is of the past and the mind has taken over in art. I am sorry that you are living in the renaissance!
so if hirst doesnt preserve the shark himself and physically place it in the tank, why does he get recognition for it? anyone could think of that, its just a question of having the resources. a load of bollocks, in my opinion.
@rorschach18 if you design/engineer the very first computer, but you have a technician physically build it for you, do you get recognition for it? of course.
Impressing how these pseudo-intellectual fools that consistitute the modern society are able to take every concept that used to have a sense and drain it from any meaning to the point of making it..well, superficial. A trend, a fashion. Everybody just want to show off in an infinite, yet funny to watch, cycle of meaninglessness. Philosophy, litterature, art, music...everything is simply used as a tool to gain attention.
...and they quote oscar wilde, but just read the wikipedia article. Bravo.
Sometimes you just have to put a dead shark in a bathtub and cover him with glue. I personally would rather observe a LIVING shark, but I guess this kinda of art is reserved for the Starbucks generation.
This guys a genius, he takes the absolute total ignorance of so called "art experts" today and makes ALOT of money off their stupidity. I mean seriously who would pay millions of dollars for a dead shark in a tank? Ill tell you: Absolute total idiots i.e. modern day art critics.
Yeah, idiots that sell the piece for twice what they paid for it a few years later, making millions. But I suppose you think it's better to shove it all in a mattress?
The biggest pile of shit I've ever seen or heard and there are pricks paying masses of money for this? why? I'll tell you why you bunch of ignorant fucks... because they're board and have nothing better to do with their useless lives and money. Hey!!! Hirst! You suck balls man... learn to paint or something... twat!
He may be a twat and a commercially driven whore, but he makes way more money than you do, and manages to convince people to pay millions for his shit. And you know what? At least he can spell properly. Can you do those things? I don't think so. Go back and cry in your little hugbox.
Today we are going through what I describe as the artistic dark ages. Whether it be music , celebrities , sport and art. We are putting Cocacola infront Petrus! Hirst , Koons etc are just riding on investment energy. In the future time will distill the garbage and what will be left behind will be worthwhile. That shark will be binned within 50yrs. My cousin in Ireland is a taxidermist ,and he says formaldahide can preserve maxi 30yrs in a tank. In Dry 80yrs maxi.
The shark was dead already. Hirst bought it from a shark hunter in Australia. The sad state of affairs today is that the concepts of art are progressing too far for the public to be able to catch up. People don't think anymore, they just want to be entertained by pretty colors. Even if you trace art back to iconography, the point of art was to get you to think, a giant fucking shark in a tank definitely gets you to think.
Artist Eddy Saunder's "Shark" appeared 2 years before Damien Hurst's "Shark" in the same format behind ribbed sections of glass. No one paid attention. When Nicolas Serota of Pimlico / Tate Gallery London displayed Hirst's "Shark" it was bought by Saatchi & Saatchi for millions. Indeed formaldehyde is needed to preserve yet another ephemeral blurb in commercial art. Jeff Koons sold a bronzed miniature train of whiskey bottles for $4 mill. Have fun. They're laughing all the way to the bank!
sticking a dead shark in a tank does not make it art, anyone could do that, I have a tank with a goldfish in it, can I sell that for 50,000,000?? I am usually incredibly tolerant with conceptual art but this isnt art.
@fenderkid6 I have an idea... How about impaling yourself and sticking yourself in formaldehyde. It would be a conceptual piece on the massive amount of ignorance that manifests itself on the newly developed YouTube social interaction discussion network by people who are envious of how much money others make. Ha, ha. See, I'm funny when I talk about art on YouTube, too.
they talk a lot of bulls**t these self important "artists" next time they will sell you a piece of poo in a carboard box for 50 million and tell you is a commentary on society and reflection on values bla blah a la mierda con Hirst
the curator likes th shark because th lender is an uber-rich collector whom he wishes to cultivate --artistically th work is bankrupt --th curator is a sophist and a fraud
it must be nice to have enough money to do big projects like putting a shark in glass.I think most artists who have some training with 100 thousand bucks can do something that others will notice especially when you pay someone to do it for you..long live painting!
YOU ARE INVITED TO A PARTY OF ART HATERS. The audacity to begin this pandering little piece of reportage with an image of the Greek Kouros (An ALPHA WORK OF CREATION!) then to say that anything Damian Hirst does is art, just proves the world is suffering from a severe case of perceptive myopia. ArtCop
"its an amazing work of art"... give me a break. Museums have been doing this for decades. This installation belongs at seaworld not at an art gallery. The curator has to say this drivel because it has cost so much of the galleries money. Again this is a brand, not an artistic revelation - and not an original brand at that.
thechannelers 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is ridicilous, any fish in a tank can now be called art?
Funny how we went to my high school and everyone in my art class talks about how amazing he is
lilmissashleym 2 months ago
did he buy the shark just to kill it? thats so horrible. why is that irrelevant to all of you? he killed an innocent animal and you guys are calling it art? are you fucking kidding me
smokesomelissy 3 months ago
@smokesomelissy shut it
MrStupidfag 2 months ago
I agree with too many things being art these days, but this IS art.
DarkAngelEU 5 months ago
gotta understand im a gangster i dont care bout respect and all that shit, i dont do it.
Brady2k10 6 months ago
@Brady2k10 oh dear...
corpsemunger 5 months ago
The only "concept" this piece of "art" makes me contemplate is the profound stupidity of some people & the incredible lengths those people will go to to justify that stupidity. If half the effort & creativity they spent EXPLAINING their art went into actually CREATING art, they might actually produce something worthwhile. Hirst pays a TAXIDERMIST a $100K to do all the work of creating this piece, slaps some pseudo-intellectual BS name on it & still has the balls to call himself an artist. Ugh
pudgimelon 7 months ago
@pudgimelon Talk about ignorance.
An architect doesn't build the tower, but without them it wouldn't exist.
chaosproduction 5 months ago
@chaosproduction Yes, let's talk about ignorance. Architects at least know how to DRAW. Hirst, on the other hand, has made a "career" out of capitalizing on modern society's cult of celebrity. People buy his NAME, not the crap he passes off as "art". If congratulating 9/11-attackers gets him headlines, the INK is all he cares about because it'll just elevate his "name-value". Hirst himself has said, "I can’t wait to get into a position to make really bad art & get away with it". Ignorant indeed
pudgimelon 5 months ago
@chaosproduction Secondly, let's talk about architecture. The "modern" (60's) architecture is universally considered (by normal people) to be ugly dehumanizing CRAP because it elevates "concept" above more important considerations (for a building) like functionality, beauty, & a "sense of belonging" to the environment around it. This "shock art" crap that Hirst & others like to pontificate about is nothing more than a con-job. Just because you're drinking their kool-aid doesn't make it "art"
pudgimelon 5 months ago
@chaosproduction Oh yeah, one last thing. How many claims of appropriation, plagiarism, & copyright infringement does Hirst have against him already? For an "artist" whose main selling point is his ability to create "high concept", LIFTING those concepts from other artists (and even CHILDREN'S TOYS) is a pretty serious blow to his credibility as an "artist". You're right, the architect doesn't build the tower, but at least he THINKS IT UP HIMSELF. Hirst is an overblown FRAUD. Case closed. Powned
pudgimelon 5 months ago
@pudgimelon Yes, ignorance. Architects know how to draw. So you think art is just drawing huh? Talk about small minded. Art is more than just pretty pictures, it can also be ideas. The plagiarism of Hirst is a different subject.
As for the 9/11 thing that just got taken the wrong way, he was simply saying how amazing it was that they managed to pull off the attacks without been stopped. That didn't mean he was happy at what they did, or applauding them in such a way. But that is irrelevant.
chaosproduction 5 months ago
@pudgimelon (Continued) Con job? Because you don't fully understand it, it is somehow a con? This is what I meant by ignorance. Just because you don't like something, or don't get it doesn't mean it is a ''con'' or ''crap''. But anyway, the majority of what you wrote is completely unrelated to what I previously said.
chaosproduction 5 months ago
@pudgimelon (Continued) I wasn't referring to Hirst in the first place, I was actually talking about your comment about Damien getting HELP on his work. Yes he got help, so what? So did artists like Rembrandt, Picasso, he's not the only one. Like I said about the architect, they design it, think of the idea, but they don't actually create it. Same goes for many artists, without them the idea wouldn't exist, that goes for them all, not just Hirst (forgetting the few claims of plagiarism).
chaosproduction 5 months ago
@chaosproduction "forgetting the few claims of plagiarism"??
Seriously? This guy is such a fake that he not only copies other artists, he even copies himself! It's like those "painting mill masters" who hire other artists to paint-by-numbers duplicate versions of their "masterpieces" (and then the "master" signs them).
This is not art, it is cult of celebrity at its worst. Heck, he even buys his own pieces just to pump up the value of his "name". Architects ARE artists, this guy is a FRAUD
pudgimelon 5 months ago
@pudgimelon Yes, well I was never talking directly about Hirst. I was focusing more on your comment about him getting help, and how you think conceptual art isn't art (if that is what you were previously trying to get at). I'm aware he plagiarizes, I don't respect him for that.
chaosproduction 5 months ago
all this bollocks is for snobby cunts with more money than they need, ill just go and find a stuffed snake and put it in a tank, snakes kill people right? then i can sell it for a few millions because i really worked hard putting a fucking dead snake into a tank but hey "its a work of art!" oh and even more pathetic when they say theres a story behind it, "it tells a story of death!" NO SHIT SHERLOCK its a shark that kills and its dead big fucking deal..
Brady2k10 7 months ago
ahah haha ah.. this shite really makes me laugh, the artists, the people who buy their shitty "art" what a bunch of wankers, more money than brains. Get a human skull cover it in diamonds, give me £50 million please. How the fuck is that art? seriously, there's some stupid half wit dumb fucking people on this planet, the way this prick in the video goes on about a shark in a tank is a work of art.. a dead shark is a work of art... wow he really worked hard to create the shark didnt he?
Brady2k10 7 months ago
My asshole, bullshitting cousin is an artist specialising in conceptual, 3-D works.
There was great controversy over his College graduation piece- a series of naked human torsos arranged in improbable & intimate ways (having sex, giving birth etc). Everyone thought they were fantastically well-made, until the College discovered they were unclaimed Asian road-accident victims, ‘preserved’ & shipped over.
After a week they began to decay, filling the gallery with flies & a vile stench.
SuperTruth77 7 months ago
I put sparkles on my cat's shit; very unique. I'll sell it for only $100!
smokenfly514 8 months ago
meh it just looks like another museum exhibit piece, not of an artwork...boring as far as art goes
Kurturmis 8 months ago
Look at the grin on this guy, he blatantly knows it's bullshit
theeleventhjoker 9 months ago
No, it's not a piece of art. That would mean every scientist since the 19th century who's ever put anything in formaldehyde is an artist. Michelangelo's David is art. Picasso is art. The Sistine Chapel is art. The Mona Lisa is art. Those can't be recreated. For once, I completely agree with Karl Pilkington on this one.
Fuck conceptual art. Fuck performance art. Marcel Duchamp is probably rolling in his grave.
ferretyluv 9 months ago
amazed people are still going on about this piece.
move on. the art world has.
TallManUTube 10 months ago
This is a very debatable subject. I personally am a fan of "The Physical Impossibility of Death in the mind of someone living". But others (Cough PETA) may not. So there really isn't much use defending your case (Whether you like it or not) Because there's always going to be a point from the opposition to rebut, and nullify.
iloveouranful 10 months ago
@iloveouranful No, it's not a piece of art. That would mean every scientist since the 19th century who's ever put anything in formaldehyde is an artist. David is art. Monet's Water Lillies is art. The Sistine Chapel is art. The Mona Lisa is art. Those can't be recreated. For once, I completely agree with Karl Pilkington on this one.
Fuck conceptual art. Fuck performance art. Marcel Duchamp is probably rolling in his grave.
The fact that he killed a shark for this shit is just icing on the cake
ferretyluv 9 months ago
If he had designed the shark, that would have been a work of art. As it is, Hirst is just a taxidermist.
jprice721 10 months ago 2
@jprice721 No, he payed a taxidermist
theeleventhjoker 9 months ago
its a toss up, dead shark ina tank, live sharks and other LIVE animals at the aquariums, o.O
NegrOnomikalG 11 months ago
poor sharky:( - idiot
ohhhthatslyksowierd 11 months ago
it is very sad, but i saw it in the saatchi gallery, it was very powerful.
torontonian1978 11 months ago 2
Everything is art.
guitarded112 11 months ago
@guitarded112 If "everything is art" then nothing is art. If everyone's an expert, no one is. If everything is music, nothing is. Get the picture? You may think you're being profound but you actually sound like a naive teenager.
sleepcity 11 months ago
I strongly recommend people read "The $12 million Stuffed Shark" to understand its the investor / dealer world behind Hirst. You'll never look at the art world as we know it, with the same eyes and understanding after reading the antics of the world's richest collectors. And dealers.
donnybrooklads 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"so mean actually kill one of these beautiful sharks just for art?!"
Don't you eat beautiful dead animals on a daily basis?
If anythiing, this artowrk is showing the beauty of the creature.
demhead 1 year ago
I rather go to a aquarium
henrydu2003 1 year ago 8
@henrydu2003 "I radder doe to dah aquarium"
You're a moron. You'd obviously rather go to the aquarium than the MET.
YoungBL 2 months ago
@YoungBL I can appreciate art, but your comment here is pretentious crap. So what if someone prefers to go to an aquarium than the MET, just because a person is interested by different things, doesn't mean that they lack the intellect that you have.
And belittling people on the internet who are less eloquently spoken than yourself is the lowest form of wit. It's called "being a cunt".
CWoodbridge 2 months ago
How is a dead shark art? No artist made the shark, just preserved it. That doesn't belong there. : I
moondragono9 1 year ago 2
Shitty degenerate Jew art
Joe090490 1 year ago
@Joe090490 you are an idiot.
rossmc72 1 year ago
@Joe090490 Jew? How is that jewish? Are you a fucking arsehole?
amatorynumber 9 months ago
i'd hate to try hanging that on my wall
weefeatures 1 year ago
that guy Damien Thirst is a con artist...he plagiarized Steven Spielberg's ideas for his movie "Jaws"....i think Spielberg should sue him. Enough said.
mazingerZful 1 year ago
The attempt to collapse all cultural meaning into mere simulacra was the excuse behind the GREED of 80’s Art market: that Art no longer had any purpose beyond it’s promotion. Damien Hirst is an old 80s whore, a Homer Simpson, surviving into the 90s, dragging intellectual Artistic civilsation back to a hoary stone Age. I personally cannot wait until the sub-prime reality of his crap, plagiarised merchandise hits him slap in the gonads. Maggot breathed cretin.
DIONYSES000AD 1 year ago
Ok, the curator's explanation made sense but was incredibly assinine. Is the fact that a shark must swim continually to survive, and this one isn't, supposed to be the punchline to the joke?
marlboroman1985 1 year ago
Ahahaha! The guy's like, it represents our fear and taps into our emotions and stuff like that. When I saw it, I said, "Cool, a dead shark."
Jughead2950 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is not art.
misfitmorgan 1 year ago
What is so special about this art? It's just a shark in formaldehyde
xDeAdlYSp1Derx 1 year ago
a dead shark isn't art.
eljaviwashere 1 year ago 3
Hirst made this artwork to shock you, even though you dont like it your still on here talking about it. You say you could put a dead animal in a tank, which you could, but he done it first. Its something different, he has taken art to the next level which is what artist strive for.
777loksta 1 year ago
@777loksta "You say you could put a dead animal in a tank, which you could, but he done it first."???? Done it first?!?! What a laugh! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
MaximilianMontesa 1 year ago
This is the what you get when you allow the group of nefarious social engineers to take over Culture and turn it into what they want. Culture and Art become nothing but a tool to turn our world into a sea of meanlingless, atheism and indifference. Worse is yet to come...
thegreatfearblog 1 year ago
Someone please explain in a sense-able manner why Hurst's art is good
Crimelord2k10 1 year ago
great
mikkoanton 1 year ago
This kind of modern "art" sucks. To me the purpose of art is the part that can be seen, not the idea behind it. I want the beautiful piece on my wall, not something ugly that has an "amazing" message (or no message at all) to it. I think it's ridicilous that absolutely anyone can be an "artist". Those of us who have the gift of art, should be called artist. You have to earn it with something.
Ssmoooothie 1 year ago
The only thing he has done is place God's / Nature's creation in a tank and taken credit for it.
stereokid 1 year ago
Slaughter and taxidermy is not art. It would be one thing if the poor thing had died naturally and been found, but my god. This takes no skill or creativity; just inhuman brutality, which I guess you can say sets Hirst apart.
mirrorcleworld 1 year ago
It's a shark in a glass tank!!!, and i will say again what i said at the time i saw it in New York, A LOAD OF CRAP !!!!!
TamaraAndTheDemon 1 year ago
i have seen live sharks, dead sharks at various aquariums. , really, put anything in a gallery, it instantly becomes a piece of artwork.
seanalienko 1 year ago 9
@seanalienko yes, that's the point, but there is agreat challenge of putig something to the gallery, please go tomorrow and try to put something :) Wonder what kind of results you going to get.
arvumbrasas 1 month ago
yo this is awesome!!!!!!!!!!
RussianPolarBEAR4 1 year ago
ART? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH DONT MAKE ME LAUGH this is pure cut animal cruelty.
SuperReiReiChan 1 year ago
@SuperReiReiChan No it's art. Who gives a shit about the stupid shark. It's worth it.
sparkyinbath 1 year ago
@sparkyinbath Exactly
RussianPolarBEAR4 1 year ago
@sparkyinbath They're an endangerd species.
SuperReiReiChan 1 year ago
@SuperReiReiChan The tiger shark is not an endangered species you big fat retard
RussianPolarBEAR4 1 year ago
i dont like that hirst purposefully hired someone to kill the shark i thnk its inhumane, however i do think its art, the whole point is to make your own impression on the shark, its totally subjective, thats why conceptial art is cool
wateringcan16 1 year ago
Damien Hirst is the wealthiest living artist... Ever...
ferociousjamesoppold 1 year ago
This is sick...
xxxbabyxxx666 1 year ago
How is this art, did he create sharks, are they his creation no. By putting it in formaldehyde that doesn't make it art. That's like me scraping up a dead bird from the road and putting it in a container and going hey whoop de doo look at me I'm so cool and artistic look at this dead bird in my lunch box.
emilytodd28 1 year ago
@emilytodd28 you're an ignorant piece of shit
RussianPolarBEAR4 1 year ago
@emilytodd28 - i agree with you it's just a dead animal in a tank, my goldfish died last week he was floating arould in his little tank is that art ?, if so where's my big fat cheque? the whole thing's stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
TamaraAndTheDemon 1 year ago
I hate how people kill things for no reason.
dogrichmancat 1 year ago
@1.08 it moved
stevemcqueenforever 1 year ago
I think its a great idea.
sparkyinbath 1 year ago
@sparkyinbath agreed
RussianPolarBEAR4 1 year ago
I don't see what's so controversial about the preserved shark, it's kinda cool. It is much better than the crucifix of Christ sitting in a piss bucket and daring to that art. Or the holy mother Mary made from elephant dung. my favorite Hirst art will always be the butterfly's though, very cool how they look like a stained glass church window....absolutely genius!
MultiMeli123 1 year ago
@MultiMeli123 well, i've seen preserved shark at aquariums. it was cool too.... but putting in a gallery makes it cooler?
seanalienko 1 year ago
well the little poor shark is better there than in open sea...where capitalist countries like U.S.A kills all of them....slowly
DunneArtmateur 1 year ago
I think Hirst wrote the curator's speech..
AlcatrazPirate 1 year ago
so mean actually kill one of these beautiful sharks just for art?!
lioumichelle 2 years ago 24
@lioumichelle
How terrible. That would be so much worse than killing an animal for food or clothing.
fluorogoat 1 year ago
@lioumichelle Did you kill that chicken, cow, pig, or fish, just to eat it?!
AserehtArt 8 months ago
@AserehtArt nahh we stood there, killed them just to stare at them like a bunch of cunts, like all these snob bastards, we kill them for a very good reason, not just to stand there and look at it for hours and hours, bunch of sickos they are, n him cutting open a fucking sheep to see the insides the sheep was there already, he took a blade to it like a butcher would how the fuck is that art? this mans a fucking wanker, and all the people who buy this shite are just hilariously pathetic humans.
Brady2k10 7 months ago
@Brady2k10 There is no need in this world to curse like that.
You are very rude.
What is art is determined by the ARTIST. What ever the viewer decides to make of it is up to them. After all that is one of the concepts of Post Modern Art, the viewer makes the meaning. Whether you are educated in the arts or not may change your opinion. In my opinion this is a piece of art.
Sorry to disgruntle you.
It would be nice of you to show a little bit a respect when you reply.
AserehtArt 6 months ago
@AserehtArt man look at you trynna act all nice if you think this is art then i think you're an idiot so if i go get an elephant right now, cut it open and put it on display you think thats art? ha some people in this world i swear.. i can curse how much i want to curse and there is reason to curse like that because this is a load of shit to me and i think the people that like this shit are even more fucking stupid than the artist, please show respect when i reply why should i?
Brady2k10 6 months ago
@Brady2k10 Yeah well at least I'm not being an asshole like you.
Learn to control yourself or shut the fuck up.
Usually it pays to be a little nice, but in this case it's no use trying to defend anything to such a narrow-minded, sailor-mouthed, "Gangster".
Most men out there have a bit of respect no matter who they are when they talk to women, guess you're not.
AserehtArt 6 months ago
@AserehtArt thats right, most men do, im not most men, i have nothing to say to you so you can fuck off now if you want
Brady2k10 6 months ago
@Brady2k10 Yeah especially to a 15-year-old.
I don't know who you are, but at least I tried to be nice.
AserehtArt 6 months ago
@AserehtArt you're 15 thats why, try being nice all your life and see where it gets you, it wont get you shit because all the other brain dead idiots on this planet follow the system, try to be nice blah blah blah work for some asshole boss they hate in an office everyday for 30 years, im 22 not 15 and ive obviously been brought up a lot different from you, you're still a kid, aint u got school to go to kid?
Brady2k10 6 months ago
@lioumichelle it was fully grown and there dosnt seem to be wounds so it probably just died of old age then he put it in the tank
SPORE11165 7 months ago
Put Hirst's round blue buttocks in the tank, that is installation art.
tietajajoshua 2 years ago
at less when i talk about hirst, duno the other ppl, what i miss in his work is the problematic, that mean what his work is about from the perspective of the art it self, because, duchamp allready make us reflexion about object, so in that case the instalation of objets is some thing of the past to, an now become an a recepy or schol, so i dont see the new on hirst, i respect any artist but "for me" is not the greatest artis in our generation, for the other side ppl start to get bored.
Notus3D 2 years ago
sharkshits...
alexspil 2 years ago
YOU ROUND BUTTOCK BLUE HOMOSEXUAL.
tietajajoshua 2 years ago
how does this raise any question about if art can be so easily replicated? hasnt art been easy to replicate far far far before this? I mean how hard would it be to replicate Klien's blue paintings? or all the white paintings done in the 50's and 60's? come on! you could buy a Donald Judd piece at home depot! Warhol? Fluxus? what about claes oldenburg? Pollock? All conceptual art? Oh! ha! the fountain! so how does this piece raise a question about easy replication?
lloplop 2 years ago
if art its take cheaper things, put and idea on it and sell them expensive, we could say USA goberment is the best artist of all times.
Notus3D 2 years ago
umm I think you have the USA confused with China!
lloplop 2 years ago
he wants people to react like you all have so really hes won, he wanted to be famous and allowed to get away with crap art, so fair do's, hes alot richer than any of us will probs ever be
aoyt3 2 years ago
the guys work is shit period, however it is not his work its just any idea he had.
So i have to take my hat off to this guy for getting other people to do all the work and then get some body with more money than sence to buy it.
bravo!!!!!!!!!!
steveis33 2 years ago
sorry that you dont know anything at all about. why are you even watching a video about art?Artists come up with concepts that are so huge that its impossible for someone to execute it alone. hire scientists! send dimensions to factories! you must not like to think very much. from Warhol to Serra to Koons....who creates art alone anymore? go take a course on contemporary art so you dont sound so clueless and ignorant. they have sense! its a smart investment. whoever buys it will be even richer.
lloplop 2 years ago
o artista é muito muito muito bom!!!
brazillix007 2 years ago
Jew = Modern Art
Dr Lasha Darkmoon: The Plot Against Art, Part 1
2040whiteminority 2 years ago
Art is for enjoyment, whether that be visual, audible, physical or whatever... Modern art has focused more on intellectual enjoyment. In a way, it has followed on from (or led by artists such as Marcel Duchamp I should probably say) the modern media which focuses more on the "public's" reaction to events rather then presenting the facts to the public. Modern art has moved to engage the viewer and to evoke a response. Art by its very nature can't be defined. So it is and is not art.
munkifisht 2 years ago
i just had a damien hirst type idea.. using a cow cut up into 5 parts from head to ass in 5 glass parts, each spinning in the opposite direction as the piece infront and behind it... the idea is that this big heavy lump of a thing carrying so much weight is now free.
warlockboyburns 2 years ago
............right.
lloplop 2 years ago
How can it be art if you can just so very easily replace it, thats not what art is about.
evilev4 2 years ago
who are you to say what art is about? the greatest works in history could be easily replaces. Craft is of the past and the mind has taken over in art. I am sorry that you are living in the renaissance!
lloplop 2 years ago
thats true but really sad concept.
pakk82 2 years ago
Renoir is rolling in his grave
PachkaSigaret 2 years ago
shut up
fredjhenzel 2 years ago
Now, damien hirst suspended in a tank of formaldehyde, that would be something i'd pay to see
chriscl100 2 years ago 42
@chriscl100 haha I am agree with you big time . I would love to see him in a tank .
kimiya481 1 year ago
so if hirst doesnt preserve the shark himself and physically place it in the tank, why does he get recognition for it? anyone could think of that, its just a question of having the resources. a load of bollocks, in my opinion.
rorschach18 2 years ago
Comment removed
BrunaLatini 2 years ago
@rorschach18 if you design/engineer the very first computer, but you have a technician physically build it for you, do you get recognition for it? of course.
stevensartifacts 1 year ago
# The king is in the altogether but altogether the altogether ... it's altogether the very least the King has ever worn ...#
wedrinkmountaindew 2 years ago
Impressing how these pseudo-intellectual fools that consistitute the modern society are able to take every concept that used to have a sense and drain it from any meaning to the point of making it..well, superficial. A trend, a fashion. Everybody just want to show off in an infinite, yet funny to watch, cycle of meaninglessness. Philosophy, litterature, art, music...everything is simply used as a tool to gain attention.
...and they quote oscar wilde, but just read the wikipedia article. Bravo.
sweetasthepunch 2 years ago
Sometimes you just have to put a dead shark in a bathtub and cover him with glue. I personally would rather observe a LIVING shark, but I guess this kinda of art is reserved for the Starbucks generation.
thesharkchick 2 years ago
art is anything presented as art
corubi 2 years ago 5
Bingo.
BlueOceanBelow 2 years ago 2
sick fuck
pesia 3 years ago
hirst's niggashit of art
DUXNOBISHONORIS 3 years ago
This guys a genius, he takes the absolute total ignorance of so called "art experts" today and makes ALOT of money off their stupidity. I mean seriously who would pay millions of dollars for a dead shark in a tank? Ill tell you: Absolute total idiots i.e. modern day art critics.
Burenko7 3 years ago 5
Yeah, idiots that sell the piece for twice what they paid for it a few years later, making millions. But I suppose you think it's better to shove it all in a mattress?
Obakedake 2 years ago
The biggest pile of shit I've ever seen or heard and there are pricks paying masses of money for this? why? I'll tell you why you bunch of ignorant fucks... because they're board and have nothing better to do with their useless lives and money. Hey!!! Hirst! You suck balls man... learn to paint or something... twat!
drygulched101 3 years ago
He may be a twat and a commercially driven whore, but he makes way more money than you do, and manages to convince people to pay millions for his shit. And you know what? At least he can spell properly. Can you do those things? I don't think so. Go back and cry in your little hugbox.
mickey1845 3 years ago 5
keywords: artcritics hirst duchamp
artcritics 3 years ago
Today we are going through what I describe as the artistic dark ages. Whether it be music , celebrities , sport and art. We are putting Cocacola infront Petrus! Hirst , Koons etc are just riding on investment energy. In the future time will distill the garbage and what will be left behind will be worthwhile. That shark will be binned within 50yrs. My cousin in Ireland is a taxidermist ,and he says formaldahide can preserve maxi 30yrs in a tank. In Dry 80yrs maxi.
billychub 3 years ago
The Metropolitan of Art is home to ancient treasures, classic paintings, modern masters and...for the 3 next years...of Hirst bullshit
AlcatrazPirate 3 years ago
yeah I guess the metropolitan is just stupid! right??
lloplop 2 years ago
this is a response to the pic at 1:32
IS THAT SHARK ALIVE?! if so, the "art" he has created is just animal abuse. but even if the animal was dead, it's still aload of shite
Cla900 3 years ago
what is your definition of art?
igualnimp 3 years ago 4
to be honest i don't really know. probably a painting that has a meaning to it. but sticking a shark in a glass tank is not art.
why should art involve animal cruelty?
Cla900 3 years ago
The shark was dead already. Hirst bought it from a shark hunter in Australia. The sad state of affairs today is that the concepts of art are progressing too far for the public to be able to catch up. People don't think anymore, they just want to be entertained by pretty colors. Even if you trace art back to iconography, the point of art was to get you to think, a giant fucking shark in a tank definitely gets you to think.
lazydogkeesha 3 years ago 3
Artist Eddy Saunder's "Shark" appeared 2 years before Damien Hurst's "Shark" in the same format behind ribbed sections of glass. No one paid attention. When Nicolas Serota of Pimlico / Tate Gallery London displayed Hirst's "Shark" it was bought by Saatchi & Saatchi for millions. Indeed formaldehyde is needed to preserve yet another ephemeral blurb in commercial art. Jeff Koons sold a bronzed miniature train of whiskey bottles for $4 mill. Have fun. They're laughing all the way to the bank!
deagsslook 3 years ago
He found a wierd thing found in nature and exploited it to make money. I would do the same thing. Screw working
TH0RAXXE 3 years ago 2
hahaha
timpano 3 years ago
sticking a dead shark in a tank does not make it art, anyone could do that, I have a tank with a goldfish in it, can I sell that for 50,000,000?? I am usually incredibly tolerant with conceptual art but this isnt art.
t9106 3 years ago
how about hirst does a self portrait by getting impaled and sticking himself in formaldehyde?
then when he starts decomposing we can sell the 'art' to multi-billionaire sociopaths.
sounds like a good idea to me.
fenderkid6 3 years ago 5
thats not a good idea, thats a fuckin brilliant idea!!
forStBernadette 3 years ago 3
hahaha goldly worded
Jonnymont 3 years ago
@fenderkid6 I have an idea... How about impaling yourself and sticking yourself in formaldehyde. It would be a conceptual piece on the massive amount of ignorance that manifests itself on the newly developed YouTube social interaction discussion network by people who are envious of how much money others make. Ha, ha. See, I'm funny when I talk about art on YouTube, too.
Hissyspit 1 year ago
i thought it was really cool how the had the shark up
khgeek2000 3 years ago
No respect for life. Shame on you. Tastless and cruel.
Electricchair4U 3 years ago
ramen, its retarded.
science > art
Jonnymont 3 years ago
they talk a lot of bulls**t these self important "artists" next time they will sell you a piece of poo in a carboard box for 50 million and tell you is a commentary on society and reflection on values bla blah a la mierda con Hirst
yiyo2008monte 3 years ago
where do you get a shark from ? I want to make a million bucks too!
jammymum 3 years ago
the curator likes th shark because th lender is an uber-rich collector whom he wishes to cultivate --artistically th work is bankrupt --th curator is a sophist and a fraud
BARBARO154 3 years ago
This work does not make me think about my own mortality. I only think of the beautiful shark (now two) that was used to make this piece.
dksculpture 3 years ago
you're all laughing at him yet he's got a 200mil fortune...idiots
javra41 3 years ago
ok i agree its shit (honest)
MIDJOBZ 3 years ago
boring but good?
MIDJOBZ 3 years ago
it must be nice to have enough money to do big projects like putting a shark in glass.I think most artists who have some training with 100 thousand bucks can do something that others will notice especially when you pay someone to do it for you..long live painting!
THELIGHTMONSTERS 3 years ago 3
...was it real?
belltowerphantom 3 years ago
es una locura,definitivamente no es art
pittoreuy 3 years ago
joke
gitsirius 3 years ago
YOU ARE INVITED TO A PARTY OF ART HATERS. The audacity to begin this pandering little piece of reportage with an image of the Greek Kouros (An ALPHA WORK OF CREATION!) then to say that anything Damian Hirst does is art, just proves the world is suffering from a severe case of perceptive myopia. ArtCop
artcopNYC 3 years ago 4
you are a jackass,
art is subjective
just cause you don't like it doesn't mean it's not art
d983394 3 years ago 5
Thats weird
TheMadTony 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
ur weird
aDoreMi07 4 years ago
hahaha
hortvisual 4 years ago
lol
grbomr 4 years ago