Debate Club – Friday 4th November

By Oliver L (Year 13)

Topic: “This house considers Damien Hirst’s preserved shark to be art”

Last week debate club discussed the features which define art and what role art plays in our society through the example of Damien Hirst’s The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living. To those with a broad definition of art, the insinuation that the Hirst’s piece might conceivably not be considered art may be met with a degree of incredulity, however the choice of topic title allowed us to focus on a unique and controversial example.

Opening for the proposition, Thomas N argued that Hirst’s shark adequately fits the dictionary definition of art as it was a visual piece which required creativity and imagination to create. The opposition countered this sentiment, with William A and Toby M questioning the ethics and creativity of a work which is reliant on the killing of endangered species. Adam H furthered this argument, positing that the definition presented by Thomas was vague and could count too many things as art. Instead, he suggested that art should be defined by whether it fits artistic conventions. Gabe H, Aryan R and Thomas of the proposition gave rebuttal to this, arguing that there is no necessity for art to be ethical and that in a subjective world, the fact the preserved shark has become iconic means it can be considered art because of its popularity and significance.

As always, the debate was close. However, the opposition were declared the victors for their more varied use of argument and William was awarded star debater.