Interested in art or not, you’d have to have been encasing your head in two large woks while going “la-la-la-la-la, I-can’t-hear-you” for the past few weeks to have escaped the hype surrounding Damien Hirst’s latest artwork For the Love of God, unveiled for his solo show “Beyond Belief” at the White Cube.
This platinum cast of a human skull is encrusted with 8,601 VVS to flawless pavé-set diamonds, weighing a total of 1,106.18 carats. Valued at £50 million ($100 million), it is the most expensive work of contemporary art ever made. Musical magpie George Michael was even reported to be interested in buying it and was given a private viewing.
Three weeks later, artist John LeKay told the Times that he has been producing similar jewel-encrusted skulls since 1993 and that the diamond skull is not the first of his artworks that Hirst has taken inspiration from.
In the latest development, earlier this month the skull was seen in a pile of rubbish bags outside the gallery at 3:30am.
What happened? Did John LeKay infiltrate the gallery as a janitor and exact his revenge?
Unfortunately not. The prank was pulled off by an artist known only as “Laura”, who spend one month and used 6522 Swarovski crystals to make the replica skull.
Laura, ahem, “John”, we know it’s you. You’re not fooling anyone.
Peter Miller
2007-07-20
Could we please just stop giving free publicity to garbage like the Hirst oeuvre?
Ashley Rawlings
2007-07-20
In what way do you think Hirst’s work is garbage?
To talk in literal terms, it’s a platinum skull encrusted diamonds that cost £14m to make: not what you would usually find in people’s rubbish bins.
If you mean the work is garbage in terms of its artistic/conceptual value, then I’d be interested to hear why, and also what you think of “Laura’s” garbage statement.
NAKAOCHIAI
2007-07-23
nicely put Ashley! Thanks for the heads up (hehee) on the skull…
psyche and ego
2007-12-12
Hmm, interesting, thought provokind, provocative.
Load of wank.
Ashley Rawlings
2007-12-12
Which? Hirst’s original art work, the reaction to it, or both?
nimiy
2008-01-14
the problem with this work is that it’s simply not convincing for what it claims to be. I think damien hirst made a mistake of trying to be provocative and at the same time politically correct which turned his work into the most expensive fake ever.
he should simply be sincere and this work would be fabulous. why couldn’t he just say, hey, I am a damn rich and famous artist and I can afford to do anything I want to art.
I mean after you consider that the idea was not even his, that the work was not even made by him but some jewelry store or whatever and that the concept behind the work was like on a primary school level (life, death, love, god???) kind of thinking then all that remains is the fame and money of damien hirst.
damien, you should rather buy me. seriously…
http://www.showitwithmoney.com/