How is it his fault? He's done nothing but antagonize and mock the "art world," and it just loves the abuse. He's been co-opted as an official court jester only because the alternatives are to ignore him (costly) or discredit him (improbable).
The most cynical view of his work would be that it is just a set of counter-signals that serve to demonstrate his superiority while knocking the ladder away behind him, as anyone who imitated him would quickly select out. Lots of artists and musicians behave badly to show they are so good that people will even tolerate their latest outrage. Hand, neck and face tattoos seem to be the current fashionable follower trap.
It's arguably the same dynamic behind programmers who affect rebel and working class values and ideals. As if to say, "I'm so talented I don't need to demonstrate alignment to the people who keep me in the style to which I've become accustomed."
I like Banksy's work a lot, and I don't think even he is this cynical, mainly because he does still risk arrest and jail for vandalism, but he's created something with a life of its own of which he is no longer in control. In that way as an artist, he could very much be seen to have succeeded.
Way back in the day when nobody had heard of Banksy I thought his stenciling was so original and unique. One of the first websites of his I remember him showing how to create stencils, some backstories on his art and how he got them done, etc. It was really cool to have such an inside track with a then very underground scene and artist doing something really original I had never seen.
Fast forward 15 years and everything he stood against, everything he mocked, he has now become a part of. The recent Sotheby's shredder stunt is only the most recent example. He took an expensive piece of his own art, and increased the value ten fold by doing what he did.
I used to love the guy, now he's just another money grubbing scum who can't seem to get enough of the spotlight.
> now he's just another money grubbing scum who can't seem to get enough of the spotlight.
You clearly have much more of a direct personal experience / knowledge of Banksy's history than I do, but I feel as though he's using the spotlight in order to make a point about how money-hungry the modern art world has become. Yes, you could take the cynical side and assume he really is just doing these 'exposure-stunts' as a way to make more money, but I'd like to believe he still stands for his anti-establishment message.
As an aside, I thought much of his art (especially vandalism) doesn't actually belong to him, and he doesn't see the proceeds.
That’s an odd criticism. The person has completely and totally shunned personal recognition and fame. The temptation to “take off the mask” and bask in the glory has to be totally overwhelming.
That’s the most interesting part about all this and the thing that makes me believe the Robert Del Naja theory.
I spent a lot of my life around people that are famous or trying to be, it’s an incredible drug. The fact that he’s able to resist it is notable.
You don't think it was the intended effect to make it more expensive?
There's a pretty compelling theory that the original wasn't destroyed at all, that the frame is an old magic trick, you roll the painting out of view, and spit a torn up half out the bottom. Did you see the photo Banksy posted of the x-acto blades ? It really is rather nonsensical... [0]
Then again, maybe he's playing the long game once people figure out the whole charade is Banksy selling out, the price of his work crashes, thus restoring its purity as self-expression.
Art is about smuggling wealth. Influence on pricing, is about cashing out.
Tomorrow if sotheby's put a giant turd on sale and declares it worth millions, people looking to launder will buy it, knowing that when they need to cash out, sotheby's will come to the rescue.
> The difference now is that the variables that determine art’s monetary value are no longer seen as dicey. Instead, they’re understood as art itself.
"The new job of art is to sit on the wall and get more expensive." - Robert Hughes (1982, The Shock of The New)
How is it his fault? He's done nothing but antagonize and mock the "art world," and it just loves the abuse. He's been co-opted as an official court jester only because the alternatives are to ignore him (costly) or discredit him (improbable).
The most cynical view of his work would be that it is just a set of counter-signals that serve to demonstrate his superiority while knocking the ladder away behind him, as anyone who imitated him would quickly select out. Lots of artists and musicians behave badly to show they are so good that people will even tolerate their latest outrage. Hand, neck and face tattoos seem to be the current fashionable follower trap.
It's arguably the same dynamic behind programmers who affect rebel and working class values and ideals. As if to say, "I'm so talented I don't need to demonstrate alignment to the people who keep me in the style to which I've become accustomed."
I like Banksy's work a lot, and I don't think even he is this cynical, mainly because he does still risk arrest and jail for vandalism, but he's created something with a life of its own of which he is no longer in control. In that way as an artist, he could very much be seen to have succeeded.
> "Banksy is the Thomas Kinkade of his generation."
Oof, that'll leave a mark.
Way back in the day when nobody had heard of Banksy I thought his stenciling was so original and unique. One of the first websites of his I remember him showing how to create stencils, some backstories on his art and how he got them done, etc. It was really cool to have such an inside track with a then very underground scene and artist doing something really original I had never seen.
Fast forward 15 years and everything he stood against, everything he mocked, he has now become a part of. The recent Sotheby's shredder stunt is only the most recent example. He took an expensive piece of his own art, and increased the value ten fold by doing what he did.
I used to love the guy, now he's just another money grubbing scum who can't seem to get enough of the spotlight.
> now he's just another money grubbing scum who can't seem to get enough of the spotlight.
You clearly have much more of a direct personal experience / knowledge of Banksy's history than I do, but I feel as though he's using the spotlight in order to make a point about how money-hungry the modern art world has become. Yes, you could take the cynical side and assume he really is just doing these 'exposure-stunts' as a way to make more money, but I'd like to believe he still stands for his anti-establishment message.
As an aside, I thought much of his art (especially vandalism) doesn't actually belong to him, and he doesn't see the proceeds.
> As an aside, I thought much of his art (especially vandalism) doesn't actually belong to him, and he doesn't see the proceeds.
Actually his pieces regularly go up for auction and rake in hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Here's a short list of just the most expensive ones to date:
https://www.widewalls.ch/10-most-expensive-banksy-artworks-a...
That’s an odd criticism. The person has completely and totally shunned personal recognition and fame. The temptation to “take off the mask” and bask in the glory has to be totally overwhelming.
That’s the most interesting part about all this and the thing that makes me believe the Robert Del Naja theory.
I spent a lot of my life around people that are famous or trying to be, it’s an incredible drug. The fact that he’s able to resist it is notable.
It looks like it backfired on him. I don't think it was the intended effect.
You don't think it was the intended effect to make it more expensive?
There's a pretty compelling theory that the original wasn't destroyed at all, that the frame is an old magic trick, you roll the painting out of view, and spit a torn up half out the bottom. Did you see the photo Banksy posted of the x-acto blades ? It really is rather nonsensical... [0]
Then again, maybe he's playing the long game once people figure out the whole charade is Banksy selling out, the price of his work crashes, thus restoring its purity as self-expression.
[0] https://www.boredpanda.com/banksy-painting-girl-with-balloon...
So the the amorphous "commercial" blob Banksy despises won this round
Art is about smuggling wealth. Influence on pricing, is about cashing out.
Tomorrow if sotheby's put a giant turd on sale and declares it worth millions, people looking to launder will buy it, knowing that when they need to cash out, sotheby's will come to the rescue.
Wake up.