Cory Cavin recently blogged about Damien Hirst's new art work entitled For the Love of God (you can find the link on the left). I had read a little about the piece, which consists of a diamond encrusted skull, but I didn't really think about it too much since I generally don't like conceptual art. Still, I was struck by the comments on Cory's blog that all expressed a large dose of skepticism about the work, and brought up an interesting question about the meaning of art. Are Hirst's skull, or shark, or dots really high-quality art--or even art at all?

I'll offer my take on art and artists through a sports analogy. Damien Hirst is like an athlete who plays extreme sports. Extreme sports, like base jumping for example, often have no rules, no institutionalized system to govern who is qualified to play or not, very few objective measures of winning or losing, etc. Extreme sports stars base their fame on performance, image-making, intentionally doing what no one else has dared to do, pushing the edges of possibility. Damien Hirst does this with his art.

A base jumper may be very fit and highly trained, but no one would suggest that he could compete on the court with Lebron James or even a UNC walk-on for that matter. In fact, given the time and money, many of us probably could make the same jumps with about as much style as any veteran base jumper. But even if we could do what the base jumper does, we haven't, and we don't. Therefore, it is right to admire that guy for a different set of reasons than we admire stars like Tiger Woods, Lebron James, or Derek Jeter. We should admire that base jumper for daring and creativity, a disregard for the establishment, a constant drive to conquer the next step, and the ability to embody emotions hidden within us (like fear, uncertainty, or our need for excitement).

As for me (and I think most other people too), I prefer the traditional sports and I enjoy following/viewing sports stars who have made it within the sports establishment. Likewise, I prefer traditional art based on somewhat universal ideas of beauty and form. Still, Damien Hirst's work is a worthy form of art as well, and it fills an important role in our culture that we should embrace.

For another interesting angle on the debate about concept art (not unlike the bedazzler comment on Cory's blog), check out this article about a response to Hirst's famous shark installment. Is there a difference between the base jumper and the guy who slips and falls off a cliff?