What to make of Damien Hirst’s $100
million skull? It will sell, that much is clear: the buyer will
not be the person with the most money, but rather the person with the most art-world
clout. So more likely a reasonably established collector than some nouveau Chinese
or Russian billionaire in it for the insta-cachet and the bling.
Bloomberg’s Linda
Sandler is comparing the skull to the price of a Hamptons estate, of all
things, which seems a little peculiar until you recall that Tobias Meyer of
Sotheby’s once said that the price of a decent Rothko tracks quite closely the
price of a big Park Avenue apartment. Prestige art, like prestige property,
is unique, and the price dynamics can be quite similar.
Hirst’s achievement here, should not be understated. The acres of press that
this skull is receiving is testament to the fact that he has – again –
created an icon which transcends the art world and resonates in the public’s
mind like the art of no other contemporary artist. (Jeff Koons, I’d say, would
come a distant second in that competition: Hirst’s real competitors in this
space are all deceased, from Warhol and Dali all the way back through Pollock
and Picasso to Leonardo.)
My guess is that the next time the skull is on public view, it will be as part
of a major Hirst retrospective at the Tate. At that point, we’ll be better placed
to be able to judge just how well it stands up to — or surpasses — the rest
of Hirst’s art. But for the time being, it’s fun just to sit back and enjoy
the spectacle.