-
ADD TIME NEWS
- NEWSLETTERS
Hirst's Skull Finds a Buyer

For the Love of God/Damien HIrst — Photo: Getty
Bloomberg's Linda Sandler is reporting that Damien Hirst's diamond encrusted skull has been sold to a (so far) unnamed "investment group" for the $100 million that Hirst was asking. (Sandler's story notes that The Art Newsaper reported recently that during discussions on the sale the skull — it's official title is For the Love of God — had been discounted to 38 million pounds, roughly $76.6 million at the current exchange rate. But Hirst's business manager is insisting that Hirst got his full asking price. Will the paperwork on this deal ever be made public? )
Whatever they paid, those investors have made their purchase at the very moment when the superheated art market may be headed for a cooling off period, what with the hedge fund billionaires who were some of the biggest art buyers having been some of the biggest losers in this summer's mortgage lending meltdown. Then again, investment groups generally buy for the long haul. The earliest one that I know of, La Peau de l'Ours — that's the "bear's skin" for us anglophones — started buying art by Picasso, Matisse and other then-risky moderns in 1904 for the purpose of holding it for ten years. At their auction in 1914 they scored roughly a five fold increase on their money.
A decade from now, will Hirst's skull be worth half a billion? That would require a lot of careful tending of Hirst's reputation. (You can count on that part.) And also occasional reminders to the rest of the world that the thing exists at all. That won't be easy to do if it's locked away in a vault for much of the next decade. Which may help to explain why one of the terms of sale was an obligation on the buyer to lend the skull to museums for a period of about three years.
And the skull's actual value as, well, a work of art? That doesn't get talked about much. And Hirst, who is a literally indifferent painter — his studio assistants turn out his painted works — but a reasonably canny conceptual artist, no doubt conceived the thing precisely to be the last word in pure capitalist fetish object, it's "value", including its market value, being entirely a consequence of....its market value. I get the joke. I'm also glad I'm not footing the bill.
-
1
An earlier version of Bloomberg's story said that Hirst retained an interest in the skull, because he is planning to take it on tour, and wants to reap some of the tour's income. So it's possible that the investors paid 38m UKP for the skull, just like the Art Newspaper said, but only received a 76% share in its ownership, rather than full ownership, just like the earlier Bloomberg story reported. What I want to know is: Did the dealer take his commission in cash, or did he accept a 30% (or whatever) ownership in the skull in lieu of payment...?
Most Popular »
- Palin on Oprah: Can You See the Real Me?
- Curb Watch: Seinfeld 2.0
- The Bishops' Line in the Sand
- Motorola DROID review (Verizon Wireless)
- Cell-Phone Bills: Even Economists Can't Make Sense of Them
- 'Expert' Wine Sippers Take Us All for Suckers
- Doug Hoffman Tell Glenn Beck He's Hoping for Miracle
- IA Poll: Culver Far Behind In Battle Of Govs
- Palin Was Against SNL Before She Was For It
- 20 Money-Saving iPhone Apps
- Five Things the U.S. Can Learn from China
- China: Two Die After Swine Flu H1N1 Vaccine
- Obama in Asia: Five Things the U.S. and China Agree On
- How a Bank Robber Became an Antihero in France
- Happiness Paradox: Why Are Americans So Cheery?
- Spain: Teen Masturbation Sex Ed Workshops Spark Outrage
- Manny Pacquiao vs. Cotto: Filipino Phenom Wins by TKO
- Obama China Town Hall: Select Audience, Easy Questions
- Forgotten Australians Remembered by PM Kevin Rudd
- The Meaning and Mythos of Manny Pacquiao













RSS