from New York Times
Swimming With Famous Dead Sharks
go to article

Finally, the restoration of Hirst's infamous work had gotten underway - and at the behest and expense of the collector who bought the work. As the "original" shark had deteriorated very badly due to an incorrect method used initially, the restored work would be using a replacement specimen.

Mr. Hirst acknowledges that once the shark is replaced, art historians will argue that the piece cannot be considered the same artwork. "“It'’s a big dilemma," he said. "“Artists and conservators have different opinions about what's important: the original artwork or the original intention. I come from a Conceptual art background, so I think it should be the intention. It'’s the same piece. But the jury will be out for a long time to come."’

See earlier posts here and here.