Live data from Hacker News

An artwork by Banksy shredded itself after selling for $1.3M at Sotheby’s

artsy.net

201–210 of 301 posts

Re: An artwork by Banksy shredded itself after selling for $1.3M at Sotheby’s

#201
Part of me feels like this stunt is clever because the nature of the performance improves the value of the work. So it's self-destructive in the technical sense of the term but it was designed in such a way to essentially transform the piece. While shocking in the moment, as the pictures of the scene show, the work has three separate qualities: the original significance of the piece, the new meaning it attains after partial shredding, and its role in the historical documentation of the scene that played out. A bunch of moneyed folk at an auction recoiling in horror - either because of the money they initially thought was wasted, or more charitably because they genuinely cared about the work. What would your own assumption there tell you?

However, in my mind I also imagined something entirely different. What would it say for a similar work of art to self destruct at a very glacial pace, and the only way to prevent degradation was to pay attention to it? What would it say about the nature of art and wealth if the owner did not notice the piece had destroyed itself until it was too late, presumably because they bought it and left it in storage or on a wall they never looked at? This is what plenty of art will already do over the course of centuries, without maintenance or restoration, so I'm thinking about something more accelerated and deliberate.

And on an extra level, I have started to wonder how such a piece could be represented through programming. The website that rots, pixel by pixel, when it isn't viewed; or the application that subtly corrupts itself over time.

Re: An artwork by Banksy shredded itself after selling for $1.3M at Sotheby’s

#203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What gives you the right to decide what other people do with their stuff? How would you feel if someone came along and said "I don't think two orders of magnitude is a reasonable level of wealth inequality, so I'm taking everything you own to give it to poor Africans"? Imagine two people both making $100k/year. One saves/invests half their income, the other saves 0%. In 20 years, one has a million dollars of savings,…

What gives people the right to own “stuff” in the first place? We live in society. If people aren’t happy with the rules, they can go live in a cave and burn their millions for warmth.

>What gives people the right to own “stuff” in the first place? We live in society. If people aren’t happy with the rules, they can go live in a cave and burn their millions for warmth.

If you're an American, then the society you live in has a constitution it's agreed to follow that stipulates people have private property, and the state doesn't have the right to arbitrarily seize it.

That aside, regardless of what society you live in, the last century demonstrated pretty clearly that taking rich people's stuff and banishing/killing/imprisoning them ends up making everyone in the society poorer, see for instance the communist revolutions in Russia and China. Because you destroy the incentive to invest, and to take the risks of starting a business. You also take money from the people who've demonstrated the best ability to invest it, and give it to people who've demonstrated minimal ability to invest or create value, resulting in a massive reduction in productive investment being made.

Re: An artwork by Banksy shredded itself after selling for $1.3M at Sotheby’s

#204

I wonder why nobody mentioned Agrippa (A Book of the Dead) by William Gibson. It was a poem on floppy disc that was programmed to encrypt itself after a single use. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrippa_(A_Book_of_the_Dead)

That was my first thought too. I remember the attention it got. And of course it was not so ephemeral, as people ensured the poem was captured, since in that case people knew it advance it would self-destruct.

It's an interesting poem, and one that probably was read far more because it was published the way it did than if it had been published the normal way. While I enjoyed poetry, it is the first and only time I've rushed to read a newly published lyrical work.

It's beautifully constructed in that it is about the distinction between memory and reproduction, and where the poem represents a reproduction of Gibsons own memories, the self-destruction served to make the book itself an event and creation of memories about the reproduction of the poem even in many cases in people who never got around to reading it, but just read about it.

It's also interesting because one of Gibsons own comments about it is about how we tend to remember the past in light of the present, not the way it actually was, and thinking about how I remember the work, I realise I have memories of text fading, but 1) my memories don't match how it was presented, 2) I never saw the original anyway.

I have distinct images of reading it in light blue on darker blue, but I would have read it on my Amiga. Those are not the Workbench colours, and the offline readers I used did not use that colour scheme - it's more likely that I'm confusing it with reading texts shared on floppy on my C64, years before. So our memories of Agrippa are themselves now an example of the theme of the poem itself.

Ironically, it is a cooperative project with Dennis Ashbaugh who designed the book as an art piece, and came up with the concept of the self-destruction, but whose part of the work has remained the lesser known part of the "package" despite (or because) not being the part to self-destruct.

Re: An artwork by Banksy shredded itself after selling for $1.3M at Sotheby’s

#205
post #201

Part of me feels like this stunt is clever because the nature of the performance improves the value of the work. So it's self-destructive in the technical sense of the term but it was designed in such a way to essentially transform the piece. While shocking in the moment, as the pictures of the scene show, the work has three separate qualities: the original significance of the piece, the new meaning it attains after…

Not exactly what you're getting at but the artist Thijs Rijkers did a series of pieces similar to this, called Suicide Machines: https://vimeo.com/56871178

Re: An artwork by Banksy shredded itself after selling for $1.3M at Sotheby’s

#206
post #201

Part of me feels like this stunt is clever because the nature of the performance improves the value of the work. So it's self-destructive in the technical sense of the term but it was designed in such a way to essentially transform the piece. While shocking in the moment, as the pictures of the scene show, the work has three separate qualities: the original significance of the piece, the new meaning it attains after…

“The website that rots, pixel by pixel, when it isn't viewed; or the application that subtly corrupts itself over time.”

Just publish in a slightly obscure file format on physical media, and this is taken care of. Nobody will be able to access your art work in 20-40 years.

Re: An artwork by Banksy shredded itself after selling for $1.3M at Sotheby’s

#207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely, but that has nothing to do with the financial system. Actually the current financial system is the only known system able to create fortunes big enough that someone is able to donate anything; and the system enables it, contrary to others that are designed only with citizens in mind. Another problem is that other systems are designed, the one we have now is more or less natural - people will always trade…

>the current financial system is the only known system able to create fortunes big enough that someone is able to donate anything You mean the current financial system where concentrated wealth yields concentrated power to effect change? And almost everyone is born into a situation where their wealth & power is insignificant compared to the rare individual who has been the beneficiary of the feature where rapidly or…

Sorry but right now I don't have time for full reply. Consider that many problems you listed are caused by regulation (that supports corporations and their interests), not the financial system itself. The same system is used elsewhere with better results.

Re: An artwork by Banksy shredded itself after selling for $1.3M at Sotheby’s

#208
post #124

This is just so impressive to me. That this was set in motion in 2006 with the engineering and frame design and executed perfectly 12 years later is just so magnificent I’m almost tearing up. The way the it was shredded and stopping halfway allows the piece to still be hung, and in my mind, this massively increases the notoriety and value of the piece. To prank Sotheby’s like this at the moment that the auctioneers g…

Video: https://twitter.com/zoelouisesmithx/status/10485771217429831...

How would a bunch of X-Acto blades laying parallel with the canvas be able to cleanly cut it into strips? It seems more likely that the frame contained a pre-cut version that it just rolled out.
Post reply on HN