Damien Hirst and the Formaldehyde Animal Sculptures
A Deep Dive into Art, Controversy, and the Question of Mortality
Damien Hirst, one of the most influential and polarizing figures in contemporary art, has never shied away from controversy. A central feature of his artistic legacy is his use of real animals preserved in formaldehyde tanks. These works blur the line between life and death, art and science, awe and revulsion. With a career that spans decades, Hirst’s formaldehyde sculptures have elicited admiration, outrage, philosophical contemplation, and ethical debate. This story post explores the history, themes, controversies, and sheer scale of Hirst’s use of animals in formaldehyde, attempting to unpack the significance of these haunting, glass-encased creations.
The Origin of the Concept: Art, Science, and Death
Damien Hirst rose to fame in the early 1990s as a central figure in the Young British Artists (YBA) movement, a group known for their shock tactics, entrepreneurial spirit, and conceptual art. Hirst’s early fascination with death, decay, and medical science found the perfect vehicle in formaldehyde-preserved animals.
Formaldehyde, a chemical used in embalming and biological preservation, allowed Hirst to create sculptures that captured death in suspended animation. Rather than painting death metaphorically, Hirst literally presented it, an animal mid-motion, mid-life, frozen forever. These works became icons of contemporary art, redefining sculpture and sparking debate about the limits of artistic expression.
What Animals Are in Formaldehyde Damien Hirst?
Hirst has used a wide array of animals in his formaldehyde works. These include:
Sharks
Cows
Calves
Sheep
Pigs
Goats
Doves and birds
Butterflies (in other works)
Fish
The most iconic is unquestionably the shark. Titled The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living (1991), this work features a 13-foot tiger shark suspended in a large tank of formaldehyde. The sheer scale, the gaping jaws, and the lifelike presence of the shark stunned viewers. It became a defining image of 1990s British art.
Other notable works include:
Mother and Child (Divided) (1993): a cow and calf, each split in half and displayed in four vitrines.
Away from the Flock (1994): a solitary sheep floating in a tank.
Some Comfort Gained from the Acceptance of the Inherent Lies in Everything (1996): a tank with a pair of doves.
These pieces mix clinical dissection with spiritual and philosophical reflection, showcasing both the animal’s raw biology and its symbolic resonance.
What Animal Did Damien Hirst Use That Was Controversial?
While all of Hirst’s formaldehyde works stirred discussion, the most controversial animal he used was the shark in The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living. Critics questioned the ethics of killing a majestic and rare creature solely for art. The original shark was caught off the coast of Queensland, Australia, and was already dead when it was acquired. However, debates still raged about the moral implications.
Another controversial piece, Mother and Child (Divided), featured the dissection of a cow and her calf, split lengthwise and displayed so viewers could walk between the halves. The visceral nature of the display, bloody tissue, visible organs, an almost surgical exposure of life, prompted strong reactions. Animal rights groups protested, and many viewers reported feeling physically ill or spiritually disturbed.
What Is the Most Controversial Work by Damien Hirst?
While many works compete for the title, The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living remains Hirst’s most controversial and iconic piece.
When it debuted, the image of a full-sized shark in a tank stunned the art world. The title itself hints at Hirst’s central philosophical inquiry: can the human mind truly comprehend death? Can we face mortality without recoiling?
The controversy stemmed from multiple sources:
Ethical issues: The killing of a wild animal for art.
Material extravagance: The original piece cost over £50,000 to make, and later sold for $8 million to collector Steve Cohen.
Conceptual audacity: Many critics questioned whether it was “art” at all, or simply taxidermy in a glass box.
Decay and decomposition: The original shark eventually deteriorated, leading Hirst to replace it with a second shark in 2006. This sparked a debate about authenticity. Was the second version still the same artwork?
For supporters, the work was genius, a modern memento mori forcing viewers to confront the inevitability of death. For detractors, it was a grotesque spectacle fueled by sensationalism and money.
How Many Animals Did Damien Hirst Use?
It is difficult to provide a precise number of animals Hirst has used in his formaldehyde series, but hundreds of animals have appeared in various works over the decades. Some rough estimates and insights:
Over 100 sheep have been used in his various tank installations.
Dozens of cows and calves have appeared in large-scale works.
At least two sharks were used, one in the original version of The Physical Impossibility… and one replacement.
Numerous fish, birds, and smaller animals appear in works like Isolated Elements Swimming in the Same Direction for the Purpose of Understanding (1991), which includes multiple preserved fish.
Hirst has been unrepentant about the use of animals, arguing that his goal is to spark discussion about life and death, not to court controversy. However, animal rights organizations like PETA have condemned the practice as exploitative and inhumane.
What Animals Did Damien Hirst Put in a Tank?
Damien Hirst’s glass vitrines filled with formaldehyde became his artistic signature. The list of animals he has placed in tanks includes:
Tiger sharks (e.g., The Physical Impossibility of Death…)
Sheep (e.g., Away from the Flock)
Cows and calves (e.g., Mother and Child (Divided))
Goats (e.g., The Prodigal Son)
Birds and doves (e.g., Some Comfort Gained…)
Pigs (less common, but featured in some versions and installations)
Multiple fish (e.g., Isolated Elements Swimming…)
Each animal was selected not just for its visual impact but for its symbolic meaning:
The shark represents fear, death, and the unknown.
The sheep often symbolize innocence and sacrifice.
The cow and calf evoke motherhood, vulnerability, and religious allegory (Hirst often refers to Christian iconography).
Birds and doves reference peace, spirit, and the soul.
Why Did Damien Hirst Use Animals in His Art?
To understand Hirst’s intentions, it’s necessary to recognize the conceptual framework of his art. He has frequently stated that his work is about death, the fragility of life, and our attempts to understand the unknown.
Formaldehyde allowed him to preserve death as a static object. Unlike paintings or photographs, these sculptures are real, physical remnants of life. They confront the viewer with the undeniable fact of mortality in the most literal way possible.
In Hirst’s own words:
“I wanted to make art that made people frightened. Art that confronted people with the things they try to forget.”
The clinical, museum-like presentation of these works, often in pristine vitrines, with titles referencing philosophy, religion, and medical science, adds to their eerie ambiguity. They could be seen as altars, experiments, relics, or specimens.
The Public Response: Awe and Outrage
Public and critical responses to Hirst’s formaldehyde animals have always been divided.
Supporters hail him as a visionary who redefined modern sculpture. They argue that Hirst tapped into a primal fear and created a new language for death in art. They see his work as a descendant of religious iconography, medieval reliquaries, and anatomical studies.
Critics, on the other hand, accuse him of exploitation, sensationalism, and superficiality. They argue that his art substitutes shock for substance, and that his use of real animals is unethical and unnecessarily provocative.
Still, few artists have generated as much discussion, and Hirst’s works remain among the most recognizable and influential of the 20th and 21st centuries.
Cultural Impact
Damien Hirst’s formaldehyde sculptures have become more than art; they are part of pop culture, philosophy, and the wider conversation about death in modern society. His works reside in major collections, including the Tate Modern and private collectors like Charles Saatchi and Steve Cohen.
They also influenced generations of artists who blur the boundaries between biology, sculpture, and existential inquiry.
From museum halls to critical essays, Hirst’s preserved animals continue to provoke, inspire, and divide. Whether one views them as profound meditations or grotesque spectacles, their power to stimulate thought is undeniable.
Art on the Edge of Life and Death
Damien Hirst’s formaldehyde animal sculptures remain some of the most important, and divisive, artworks of the last fifty years. By suspending life in death, Hirst forces viewers to confront the inescapable: the finality of mortality, the fragility of existence, and the strange beauty of what remains.
Whether standing before the lifeless gaze of a shark or walking between the bifurcated halves of a cow and calf, the viewer is immersed in a space where art becomes a mirror to the soul’s deepest questions.
In the end, Hirst’s work reminds us that art is not always comfortable, or even beautiful, but it is always a conversation. And in that conversation between artist, viewer, and the eternal unknown, Hirst has made his mark like few others in the modern world.
