It seems as though the rumors circulating that Hirst had purchased the $100 million diamond-studded skull himself are partially true. According to an article by the Associated Press, Sara Macdonald (spokeswoman for White Cube gallery in London) revealed that Hirst “retained a stake in the work” and would sell his stake when the piece is sold by the investor group in a few years.
According to Reuters UK, Macdonald also added that Hirst’s reason for retaining a stake in the work was so that he could “oversee a global tour of the work that is currently being planned”.
Time/CNN blogger Richard Lacayo raises the question of the skull’s value as artwork in 10 years. “…[W]ill [it] be worth half a billion?”, he asks. The art market has yet to see if it will suffer as a result of the declining financial markets, but Lacayo seems to be onto something when he says that Hirst has to guard his reputation closely the next few years.
The museum tour for the skull is logical. As Lacayo says, Hirst needs to remind the world that it was made, rather than having a collector lock it away in a vault for all of eternity. Hirst’s stake in he sale ensures that people remember and see it. If Hirst has this much control over the piece even after the sale, how big is his stake anyway?
$100 Million is A Lot of Bones for Skull Work [AP via MSNBC]
Hirst’s Skull Sells for 50 Mln Pounds [Reuters UK]
Hirst’s Skull Finds A Buyer [Richard Lacayo for Time/CNN]
