With these lines, Damien Hirst shows that a clear-thinking philosopher he 
ain't:

"I think anything done super-well is art. And it could be a great meal, or 
it could be a great meeting."

I don't mean I disagree with his judgment about the kinds of things that 
can "BE" "art".   I disagree with the mind that apparently sees no difference 
between merely CALLING something "art", and asserting a chimerical ontic 
existence-status. 



Read more: 
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2105436,00.html#ixzz1wkPg6sS1

Reply via email to