Rebecca Allison
Wednesday September 11, 2002 The Guardian
The artist Damien Hirst said last night he believed the terrorists responsible for the September 11 attacks “need congratulating” because they achieved “something which nobody would ever have thought possible” on an artistic level.
Hirst, who is no stranger to controversy, said many people would “shy away” from looking at the event as art but he believed the World Trade Centre attack was “kind of like an artwork in its own right”.
In an interview, Hirst told BBC News Online: “The thing about 9/11 is that it’s kind of an artwork in its own right. It was wicked, but it was devised in this way for this kind of impact. It was devised visually.”
Describing the image of the hijacked planes crashing into the twin towers as “visually stunning”, he added: "You’ve got to hand it to them on some level because they’ve achieved something which nobody would have ever have thought possible, especially to a country as big as America.
“So on one level they kind of need congratulating, which a lot of people shy away from, which is a very dangerous thing.”
Referring to how the event changed perceptions, he added: “I think our visual language has been changed by what happened on September 11: an aeroplane becomes a weapon - and if they fly close to buildings people start panicking. Our visual language is constantly changing in this way and I think as an artist you’re constantly on the lookout for things like that.”
Hirst also said any military action to stop more terrorist acts would be a mistake: “I think the thing to do is to stand up and say hang on a minute - this is people, these are bodies, these are lives. The surest way to make it happen again is to go and start throwing stones at somebody.”
Here you have the worst that art schools can create: the sort of self-involved twit who’s craving for attention leads him to offend everyone, then shrug innocently and ask “what?”
His type is the reason I don’t hang my B.F.A. on my wall.
well. ain’t no such thing as bad press, either way its a smart move for him.
But I think the OP puts a lot in perspective. I mean, there is no real war here, there is no real threat, just change happening the way it always does.
By that definition, me standing up and punching my girlfriend in the mouth during dinner with her parents is also art.
I deplore the generalization of artists into culture critics. It’s done nothing but free a lot of people to make ignorant observations in public forums with no defense except “you just don’t understand art.”
Sorry about that last post. I hit submit accidentally, and the hamsters (no doubt just to annoy me) decided against all expectation to process the reply instantly before I could hit stop.
I’ll try again.
Damien Hirst is undoubtedly a twit of the highest order. A clever twit nonetheless.
His “9/11 as art” thought is not original. This article attributes the idea to Karlheinz Stockhausen.
Of course, art is such a vague term that attempting to argue whether or not 9/11 can be validly described as such is a waste of bandwidth.
But certainly it seems to me that if, at bottom, art is some sort of public communication using symbolism as opposed to direct speech, then 9/11 fits.
Flying planes into the Pentagon and WTC was never going to win any specific strategic goals (in the sense that Pearl Harbour did).
The (presumably intended) effect was to communicate an attitude towards the US by attacking some highly visible symbolic targets.
Using the term “art” for 9/11 is hardly sufficient or appropriate, but it does provoke an interesting line of thought.
I ran across another Guardian column (by Simon Hattenstone), claiming that what KarlHeinz von ToneDeaf really said was that the WTC bombing was “Lucifer’s greatest work of art”.
Logical Phallacy: “I mean, there is no real war here, there is no real threat, just change happening the way it always does”.
Jack: The question is not as much where I live now, as it is how I got here, and how my parents got to where they are…and how we all manage to keep living nicely in a functioning productive society.
god does not play dice with the universe…and wars are not the irrational testosterone contests the media makes them out to be.
What I was saying was that wars are a natural part of our culture. It ain’t pretty, but somebodies gotta do it. Damned if I know why, but its perfectly normal and part and parcel of all that is ‘good’ and ‘evil’.
And the BBC has a story today that Hirst has apologized for his Sept. 11th comments. But he says “I in no way condone terrorism of any kind and I deeply regret any offence caused by the misrepresentation of my thoughts and feelings.” With a statement like "“So on one level they need congratulating, which a lot of people shy away from, which is a very dangerous thing” I hope he’s saying that he was the one doing the misrepresenting.
Then there’s this lady, who’d I’d like to “performance art” upside the head.
Logical Phallacy -
“art is a form of expression generally created to invoke emotion in its observers whilst making a statement about the world in which we live.”
So is punching someone in the face but I would hardly call that art.
Lets see…I consider the international group (their name escapes me for the moment) who go around finding ‘unethical’ celebrities and throwing pies in their faces, artists.
I think that it can be useful to consider any situation art. Like if you freeze any person punching someone else in the face, and look at the situation from different perspectives, it would make interesting and useful art, yes.
perhaps someone should make a documentary on the first punch of fist fights, to show the different things that make ppl snap.
Heh, I think this was just the musings of an artist, I’ve had musings of the sort, and there are all sorts of people ready to slap you down for saying something unpopular. I wish I could fellate myself as well as many of the people who feel the NEED to slap down someone for saying something so benign as a comparison between 9/11 and art. For years artists have compared themselves to terrorists, now it’s just putting the other shoe on. <shrugs> Being offended is an ingrained part of our culture, if you aren’t offended then there must be something wrong you boy!
And Logical Phallacy is correct, there is no real war here.
When I am president I will launch “The War on Abstract Concepts”
I consider 9/11 art b/c it was a original ‘hack’. I am a big fan of finding cool ways to fuck with systems. Not great with computers, so let me use an offline example of what I consider a fun hack.
well actually just throught of better segue: Coyote (did he have a name?) and road runner! I don’t know how I couldn’t have come up with it sooner, its perfect. I used to love watching the two characters try to scheme in creative ways in order to get what they want. See, it was never about who outsmarted who, but rather how they managed to do it.
I do not consider the murder of 3000 in and of itself anything but mean. But to carry it out with such ingenuity is art! Watching america crumble from the comfort of your home thousands of miles away.
I have no doubt that some people believe that murderous terrorist acts designed to have maximum emotional and visual impact deserve the label ‘art’. Damien Hirst is one of them. I also think there are some who confuse the actual perpetration of such acts with the recording, replay and subsequent artistic interpretation of events.
In summary, it is very difficult to argue one way or the other because each individual’s perception of what does and doesn’t constitute art is different. However, it does beg the question as to why some people would actually want to encompass acts of atrocity within their definition of art. For me it stretches the definition so far that it really becomes a meaningless term.