Damien Hirst’s acclaimed 1991 shark in a tank work “The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living” had to be redone in 2006. The work was deteriorating badly because the artist did not use a sufficient amount of formaldehyde. When billionaire Stephen Cohen loaned the work to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, conservators advised him the work should be restored. Hence, Hirst had to clean out the tank , get another shark , saw that shark in half, and make sure that this one was more properly pickled.
Hirst’s shark in a tank work is an example of how artists’ experimenting with materials can make contemporary art impermanent. These artist either purposefully use ephemeral materials for aesthetics or simply because they are less expensive to use. But, a contemporary work of art may look like old works in a short period of time.
When someone purchases these impermanent works, who is responsible when their condition starts to decline? Should the artist restore the work as a goodwill gesture? Or, is the buyer responsible to paying for conservational service?
What do you think?
Published by Clarke Art Consulting © 2009
