"But you didn't, did you?"

Hi all,

Today's blog entry will be devoted to two devious members of the YBA (Young British Artists): Tracey Emin, whose infamous work, My bed was already covered here, and Damien Hirst, the so-called leader of the group. Apart from discussing two pieces by each artist, I will touch upon the serious dilemma of creating remakes of certain works and the different positions these two artists take regarding this matter.

Tracey Emin - Everyone I Have Ever Slept With

One of Emin's debuting works as a member of the YBA, Everyone I Have Ever Slept With, or The Tent, gained a fair amount of media attention when it was first exhibited in the Royal Academy in London, 1997. Basically, the young artist obtained a regular tent which she decorated with the names of literally everybody she has ever slept with between 1963 and 1995. This means exactly 102 names, which were appliquéd on the inside of the tent.

Unfortunately, the piece was usually misunderstood by the audience and critics as well, since they regarded the work as a symbol of Emin's promiscuous lifestyle. However, the artist emphasized several times that the majority of the names are the names of friends, relatives, school peers, and, staying true to her unusual ways of healing with the help of art, two foetuses whom she did not give birth to. Although Emin is generally not afraid of a saucy scandal, she stated that the misapprehension of this being the list of those she was sexually involved with reduces the message and meaning of her piece.

She wanted to create a work of art which is a memorandum of the intimacy and propinquity that those people experience who sleep together. "You don't do that with someone you don't love and don't care about" - she claimed. The tent carries another significant message to the artist herself, functioning as self-assurement and reinforcement at the same time: there is a text on its floor, which goes like this: "With myself, always myself, never forgetting"

Sadly, Emin's work was destructed in a fire at the East London Momart warehouse, which destroyed two of her other works, and a great number of other pieces by her fellow artists contributing to the Saatchi-collection. Apart from the loss of contemporary pieces of art, the event was increasingly upsetting, since the public's response was mockery and laughter, and "a lack of cultural understanding," as Emin later stated.

Although rumors say that she was offered tempting amounts of money to re-create her piece, she constantly refuses to do so, usually due to her highly emotional ars poetica: "I had the inclination and inspiration 10 years ago to make that, I don't have that inspiration and inclination now ... My work is very personal, which people know, so I can't create that emotion again — it's impossible."

Damien Hirst - The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living

This most renowned work of the leading member of the YBA was created in 1991, and was exhibited in 1992 for the first time. Basically, it consists of a dissected tiger shark preserved in a vitrine full of formaldehyde. Similarly to Emin's Tent, Hirst's piece gained great publicity and it is considered an iconic example of Britart; no wonder it was nominated for the Turner Prize.

The artist's primary intention was to shock his audience. He said that he wanted to embody his idea by something that is "big enough to eat you." That's how he found the shark, which was obtained and prepared for its life frozen to eternity by an excruciatingly lengthy and delicate procedure. Hirst achieved his goal, since his work is still frequently discussed and assessed in artistic arenas. In 2007, The New York Times took the effort to write an article which digs into the deeper meaning and context of the piece, and described it the following way:

"In keeping with the piece’s title, the shark is simultaneously life and death incarnate in a way you don’t quite grasp until you see it, suspended and silent, in its tank. It gives the innately demonic urge to live a demonic, deathlike form."

Yet, similarly to Emin's Tent, the piece was doomed to dissolution. In 2006, the original shark had to be replaced with a new specimen, and Hirst acted in a fully co-operative manner. Still, he had to face the philosophical and artistic dilemma whether the result was the same piece of art or not. Although Hirst was a bit hesitant, he stated that according to his background as a conceptual artist, he is entitled to think that the intention itself is more important than the original tools and specimen.

As for the harsh criticisms that claimed that anyone can create an artwork like this, the artist retorted: "But you didn't, did you?" I think, that's a fair argument in defense of a lot of contemporary pieces of art.