|
The Damien Hirst retrospective at Tate Modern feels a little like stepping into the world’s most aesthetically sophisticated morgue. Or pharmacy. Or aquarium. Or possibly all three. Hirst has always been a master of the aesthetic double-take; that unsettling moment when you realise you are admiring something you would normally avoid touching, inhaling, or being in the same postcode as. Tate Modern, ever patient with artists who enjoy provoking mild existential crises, gives him the full architectural stage.
The chronology unfolds like a case study in 1990s British bravado. Early vitrines containing immaculate, stainless-steel medical cabinets present themselves with the serene confidence of establishments that believe they can fix your life. Their neatly arranged pills and surgical tools gleam with the authority of institutions that historically have not deserved such trust. It is Minimalism with a pharmacy degree; a combination that is quietly hilarious once you notice it. Then come the animals. The shark (suspended in formaldehyde with the gravitas of an Old Testament parable) still dominates the room, its open mouth captured in perpetual threat. Nearby, bisected cows and sheep rest in translucent tanks like unwitting co-authors of a very precise treatise on mortality. What is striking, all these years later, is how calm the works have become. Shock recedes; their strange dignity emerges. The vitrines no longer scream provocation; they whisper taxonomy. The butterfly works shimmer with a kind of uneasy seduction. At a distance, the kaleidoscopic wings read like stained glass windows for a secular cathedral; up close, you are confronted with the fact that beauty here is built from bodies. Hirst has always understood the theological vocabulary of display (resurrection, relics, ritual) and he borrows it shamelessly, perhaps accurately noting that contemporary audiences respond more faithfully to colour gradients than scripture. The dot paintings, presented en masse, perform an unexpected trick: they become less about repetition and more about the industrial comedy of an artist who outsourced an entire worldview to geometry and assistants. Their charm lies in their absurd seriousness, a reminder that systems break down not despite precision, but because of it. Tate Modern’s vastness suits Hirst. The Turbine Hall’s industrial authority reframes the work as something closer to institutional critique than sensationalism. The retrospective reveals what was always true beneath the Young British Artist theatrics: Hirst is less a provocateur than a classicist of death. His materials (glass, steel, insects, animals, pharmaceuticals) are curated with the emotional control of someone cataloguing the human condition rather than trying to shock it. Leaving the exhibition, one feels that peculiar combination of sterility and awe Hirst excels at inducing. It’s the sensation of having visited a temple devoted to the paradox that life is both miraculous and, inconveniently, finite. And that, in Hirst’s hands, beauty and horror share remarkably similar lighting.
0 Comments
The Turbine Hall at Tate Modern is the only place in London where art routinely behaves like geology, weather, infrastructure and divine intervention - sometimes all at once. Seeing some of its commissions in chronological order is like watching the evolution of a species whose sole survival strategy is “grow larger and confuse the public.”
For me, the story begins with Louise Bourgeois’ Maman (2000), the first great arachnid matriarch of contemporary art. Installed as Tate Modern opened, she transformed the hall into a psychoanalytic terrarium. Eight legs, a brood-sac of marble eggs, and a height that made even adults regress to their toddler selves. Maman set the precedent that Turbine Hall artworks are not viewed; they are survived. Then Anish Kapoor’s Marsyas (2002–03) arrived, stretching 150 metres of red PVC across the space like an esophagus designed by a Renaissance mathematician. Walking beneath it triggered a range of emotions, from awe to the faint suspicion that you were being slowly digested. It was big, bold and vaguely biological- everything the early 2000s wanted in a sculpture. Olafur Eliasson’s The Weather Project (2003–04) promptly changed the climate. A glowing artificial sun and a mirrored ceiling caused Londoners to lie on the floor in a state of collective, phototherapeutic rapture. For a brief moment, strangers formed spontaneous sun-worshipping communities, proving that the British can relax (provided someone installs a star indoors). By contrast, Doris Salcedo’s Shibboleth (2007–08) did not fill the hall but cracked it open. A long, widening fissure ran down the floor, elegantly symbolising borders and divisions while also prompting an unforgettable new genre of visitor behaviour: conceptual tiptoeing. It remains the only artwork to turn health-and-safety officers into unwilling performance artists. Ai Weiwei’s Sunflower Seeds (2010–11) blanketed the hall with one hundred million hand-painted porcelain seeds; a work that looked benign until you realised you were standing atop an ocean of human labour. I bent down to examine a seed, performing what I told myself was “microscopic art-historical analysis” but was, in fact, beachcombing in a museum. Finally, Tino Sehgal’s These Associations (2012) replaced objects with people. Performers wove through the hall in arcs of conversation and sudden sprints, unsettling the comfortable distinction between viewer and viewed. It felt like being absorbed into a sociological experiment, albeit one with excellent casting choices. Viewed chronologically, these installations form a personal anthology of awe, humour and occasional spatial disorientation. In the Turbine Hall, art is not something you observe from a distance, it is something that happens to you. |