If that is the same shark piece I heard about on NPR, the art is decomposing and the guy who bought it for 18 million is a little pissed! May not be the same artist. Thanks for the pics of the art, very cool!

Is that the show that used dead cons?

I don't know. I think "they" are just stretching it. Starting to lose interest fast.

This was interesting... Awesome "en corpse".

The Saatchi Gallery (atleast the old one on the SOuthBank) is one of my favorite galleries ever. The Hirst embalmed shark and the dental office in a tanks of fresh water filled with large live fish are awe inspiring.

Hirst's model was based on an old scientific model. All he did was blow it up in size. I believe he later paid an undisclosed amount to the original, by then rather irate, creator.

here's a report:

" Plagiarism does not pay, or does it?
Raichel Le Goff

Andy Warhol replicated Campbell's soup tins but at least he loudly acknowledged the source. Jeff Koons has presented sculptures based on well known toys before too but Damien Hirst, British wunderkind and previous Turner Prize winner is the first to take a toy off the shelf, copy it precisely and call it original art.


I think I like it more now that I know it's a toy base on a toy, not art.

Charles Saatchi the British advertising tycoon has the honour of going down in history as the first 'connoisseur' to pay a reported $1.8 million for a large replica of a toy. Has anyone reproduced a 20 ft. Barbie Doll and managed to flog it for the same price? Long time an art fashion icon, Barbie escaped Hirst's midas touch. No, he wanted something more err...original. A veteran of playing elaborate jokes on the art world Hirst, leader of BritArt's brat-pack has taken the toy manufacturer Humbrol's "Anatomy Set" from its "Young Scientist" series aimed at ages 6 years and over and reproduced it in painted bronze. The million pound sculpture is an exact copy of the toy. Hirst did not even bother to change the colours. At five times natural proportions and shining in garish enamels it looks like something that was destined for the Millennium Dome. The deceit comes in not openly acknowledging that he copied Humbrol's toy. He still has not come out with a statement that even mentions the toy. Unlike Warhol who glorified the name Campbell's, Hirst has not stamped his sculpture with the brand name Humbrol. Knowing that within a few hours after the statue was unveiled to the press that someone was bound to recognize the prototype we can only surmise that Hirst the super brat considers himself so untouchable that he is at the point of making anything a valuable work of art just by the mere fact of his involvement. Sadly, he is perfectly sane in his judgement of the art world. The proof is in having Britain's foremost collector declare he had "absolutely fallen in love with it" and buy it. "