Damien Hirst for Levi’s now available at Browns

Damien_hirst

Bright enough for ya? These are by artist Damien Hirst, who has just created a limited edition range of jeans and tops for Levi’s. At first glance it took us right back to the early 1990s and the new age "crusties" who inhabited that era, and that wasn’t particularly a place we wanted to go, but hey, it’s art, so what would we know?

(The one on the far left also reminds us of Hawaiian shirts. Just us?)

These items are all available at Browns, with the jeans icon retailing for £150, while the cardigan icon and hoody icon are £125 each. What do you think, readers? Your kinda thing?

6 Comments

  • November 12, 2008

    Panthera

    I actually kind of like the hoodie, the pattern is busy, but interestingly constructed, but it doesn’t look that nice together with the pants on the website.. hmm.
    Do not like the pants, and the cardigan is a bit strange, long sleeved Hawaiian shirt?

    View Comment
  • November 12, 2008

    Terry

    Somebody please save us from Damien Hirst! Next thing you know the ‘artist’ will be creating formaldehyde shark skin one piece body suits with the sharks head being the hood.

    View Comment
  • November 12, 2008

    Am

    Well you could look at it another way (and one I’m sure Mr Hirst and Levis are counting on) and that is: A very cheap way of owning a Damien Hirst.

    View Comment
  • November 12, 2008

    coconuthut

    love it! especially the tunic dress on the right this is brilliant and id def wear this say over the right jeans or leggings. not so sure at all about the hawaiin shirt though this does not appeal its just not quite right.. but the paint splat pants are super groovy 🙂

    View Comment
  • November 13, 2008

    Gina

    Just take a shirt or hoodie to your local elementary school and let the kids paint it. It couldn’t look worse. Damien Hirst is a really cruel artist, don’t support him!

    View Comment
    • October 7, 2010

      alex

      Dear Gina please don’t apply your self righteous view of life towards how others should view art.
      we have a right to express art in whatever form we choose just cuz he used animals in his art doesn’t mean hes a bad or cruel person. You might as well take that argument to Mcdonalds. Also just because your shallow view doesnt allow you to understand the message hes putting across doesn’t mean you can relate his artistic abiltiy to a child

      View Comment