Damien Hirst Slammed by British Media: “He Simply Can’t Paint”

If it were not for his prodigious fame, would Damien Hirst’s canvases be exhibited at London’s hallowed Wallace Collection? Of course not, says Tom Lubbock in The Independent. The man simply can’t paint:

A few quick questions. 1. Are these new paintings, painted by Damien Hirst himself, any good? No, not at all, they are not worth looking at. 2. So why are you writing about them at such length? Because he is very famous. 3. And why has the Wallace Collection decided to exhibit them? Because he is very famous. 4. And why did Damien Hirst even paint them in the first place? Because he is very famous.

Now let me put this at more length. Damien Hirst has painted some paintings, entirely by hand. So far he has made his name with other kinds of art: with assemblages, mainly involving dead animals and pills, and paintings, painted by other people. There have been the spot paintings, the spin paintings, paintings copied from photographs, all done by assistants. But now he has risked his fame, with some paintings done by his own hand…


Majestic is gadfly emeritus.

Latest posts by majestic (see all)

3 Comments on "Damien Hirst Slammed by British Media: “He Simply Can’t Paint”"

  1. YES!
    The man is a hack and represents everything that sucks about modern art. Artists should be judged by their technical ability first it's about time this worthless man is exposed for the talent-less schmuck he is.

    He's tried to borrow heavily from Francis Bacon in that painting of his, which is fairly amusing. Bacon's work seems arbitrarily slap-dash but really speaks to the man's mastery of mark making on closer reflection. It's not hard for me to envision Hirst thinking 'even I could do that' as the man clearly has little understanding of art that isn't cheap, easy and built by someone else in a factory downtown.

  2. The physical impossibility of something good in the mind of Damien Hirst.

Comments are closed.