What is it about teenagers that makes adults wanna scream at them and shake them and strap them down to a chair until they’re grown out of their hormonal roller coaster? We’ve all been there ourselves and it is often difficult to remember what we felt like when we were 15 or 16 but most of us just roll their eyes at teenage behaviour or maybe feel the urge to tell them off.
Some teenagers, though, are so out of line that they become criminals and have to be fined if not even jailed. But where is the line between annoying but harmless pranks and criminal behaviour?
Who decides what is criminal and what not. Theft is theft, isn’t it?
What if the theft is meant as a prank and to demonstrate the absurdities of life… or ART!?
Well, the result is a very angry Damien Hirst who is now in a vicious feud with a teenage artist over a box of pencils. Yes, a box of pencils and an admittedly creative collage of Hirst’s For the Love of God diamond skull.
If you haven’t read about it yet: 17-year-old graffiti artist Cartrain has used pictures of the diamond skull in collages and offered them for sale online in 2008. Hirst reported him to the Design and Artists Copyright Society and a string of legal letters were sent to Cartrain’s art dealer.
In July this year Cartrain then went to the TATE into Hirst’s installation ‘Pharmacy’ and removed, as some sort of revenge, a “rare” pack of Faber Castell Mongol 482 pencils that were part of of the sculpture. He then created a “wanted”-style poster that read:
“For the safe return of Damien Hirst’s pencils I would like my artworks back that DACS and Hirst took off me in November. It’s not a large demand… Hirst has until the end of this month to resolve this or on 31 July the pencils will be sharpened. He has been warned.”
Hirst took this as a serious threat and, together with the TATE, has pressed charges against Cartrain who was arrested by the Art and Antiques squad from New Scotland Yard and had to appear in court on Fri 11 September 2009.
Now, I really am in a bit of a dilemma here: reading about this story makes me laugh and growl at the same time. Teenagers can be annoying and a theft is a theft but on the other hand I don’t, and I repeat, I do not like Damien Hirst and this whole thing shows me once more that he is a humourless and greedy person. Every artist at any time had to put up with plagiarism but other than Hirst many artists in the past saw both sides of the medal… plagiarism can also be some sort of appreciation and admiration for the artist’s work and if anything at all is also propaganda.
In Hirst’s case, however, it isn’t even plagiarism but ‘further development’ and interpretation of his artwork. I can’t help but think
“Shouldn’t he be flattered or at least amused by the reactions his works are causing?”
“Wouldn’t it be cleverer to have moved forward after the collages appeared online and get in touch with the kid?”
“He could have used the occasion to get involved in supporting young artists and for once, just for once, could have made positive headlines in the news!!!!!”
But Hirst’s behaviour doesn’t appear to be better than that of a teenager. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth seems to be his motto. How pathetic!!! Hirst’s should have stood above it all but instead demonstrated once more that he is a grabby fraud who doesn’t care about art or the artist community. Artists usually create art to provoke some sort of reaction but Hirst has now proven that he only creates art to make money. And it is clear that he can’t think ahead to realise that every sort of interpretation of his art by others is also publicity for his own art.
How dumb, how very very dumb of him!
images: Rex Features
