Peter Schjeldahl is a good writer… in his last review he explained to us why Maurizio Cattelan is NOT an artist. I know Cattelan, he is many things… good or bad he’s definitely an artist. Now, in his Hirst review he again reveals his blindest spot, an artist engaging the art market. That’s why he writes sentences like: “The pleasures of indignation tend to be spoiled, for Americans, by obvious intentions to incur it, given the native abundance of spontaneous occasions.” Peter, is a great critic, and this show has some issues, but this sentence means what? Please don’t just slam the whole YBA group, toss Rachel Whiteread a passing compliment (P.S. I totally disagree) and throw some confusing sentences at Hirst. Those artists formerly known as Young British Artists were part of what is now a meaningless categorization created by Charles Saatchi for marketing purposes. THE artist that made it all happen is Damien Hirst, so good or bad, he changed the Art World. You can’t dismiss him until you prove you understand him…