Tribute to predecessor

Tribute to predecessor ( Bobby Chan 5/4/2011 )


In the art history, we can see millions artists, but they are different with each other. They have their language and symbols. Surely, it is because they were come from different country, different educated background, different family background and different era. The grown up environment gave artist strong characteristic, we can see artist’s soul in the artworks.

Nowadays, people advances in technology, we can easily to be in touch with the whole world, artist is easier to find his self-language, artist could easier study art history though the internet , artist should have responded to his era. You can see some of the artist in the world using his old fashion style, paint his canvas in traditional way with no meaning whereas he create something new, who had never try. Era is always changing. Technology could help us to create our self-language, which is impossible to represent in the old days, such as the “Fountain”, it could not be artwork when Duchamp had not defined it before 1917.

I Before all of this, it must have been some element which you could study from the others, though studying hard and practicing, artist should have created his characteristic, which come from your soul. The reality soul attract artist to make artwork sublimer.

Traditional and originality is not totally opposite, on the contrary, originality is based on traditional. It is hard to create totally new nowadays, whereas we could use the traditional to create new. “ Lucky for me, when I went to art school we were a generation where we didn’t have any shame about stealing other people’s idea. You call it a tribute”. Daimen Hirst said.

However, why a lot of people censured on Daimen Hirst? It is because he almost did copy to the other artists concept, ridiculously, he made financial success. It is a big shame on the other artists. Based on the famous theory from Duchamp, anything and everything can be art, Daimen Hirst’s art is art sure, but he will not get any respect from the other artists. (Ironically, I believe he does not care and he respect money more than the originators.)

For those who do not know Daimen Hirst copying concept from other artists, they may shock at his representation, but when they find out the truth, would they still salute to Daimen Hirst? Would they still consider his art is great? For me, he try to repack the old art, made question to the art scenes. Cruelly to the originators, only winner is almost sly. Take a look to art history, Duchamp could choose anything to define it, Andy Warhol choose anything to copy. Both of them opened the new method of creating art, so why could not Daimen Hirst choose any artwork to copy?

Tribute, it is very common in art world. Sherrie Levine is more into me rather than Daimen Hirst. She asked question to the old art and gave the fountain a new annotation. It is more interesting and significant than Daimen Hirst. Who would really like the copycat?