“This is now part of art history in its shredded state and we’d estimate Banksy has added at a minimum 50% to its value, possibly as high as being worth £2m plus.” - MyArtBroker.com
An artwork by Banksy shredded itself after selling for $1.3M at Sotheby’s
241–250 of 301 posts
Re: An artwork by Banksy shredded itself after selling for $1.3M at Sotheby’s
#242Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The spray painted work of the girl with a red balloon, acquired directly from the artist, came in what the catalogue called “the artist’s frame”—a frame that was oddly thick for such a small work of street art. I doubt the frame was from 2006. And even if, the batteries in it could be inserted/changed prior the auction.
There are lithium batteries which can last up to 40 years, for example Tadiran.
How long can they power a radio though?
Re: An artwork by Banksy shredded itself after selling for $1.3M at Sotheby’s
#243Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please tell me which other ingenious and clever marketing stunts Banksy, the anti-capitalist artist who refuses to allow his work or even prints (with rare exceptions) to be sold is known for?
For an "anti-capitalist", he sure has a lot of books for sale on Amazon.
forsooth, the yeoman protests the carucage, and yet uses his plough of oak from the king's very forest!
Re: An artwork by Banksy shredded itself after selling for $1.3M at Sotheby’s
#244This 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…
I think it's a set-up. The portion of the artwork with the head at top seems disjointed from the rest of the shredded portion (the original picture has normal human proportions). So, it seems at least, that there may be two works of art. One which remains unshredded and one which was already shredded (and was released by some mech). Whatever powered the light, likely powered the release mechanism for the shredded and…
The "disjointedness" is probably due to the artwork being fed back and forth between some rollers. You can see a significant kink at the bottom of the shredded portion, probably due to it being stored pre-fed into the rollers. The rest of the shredded portion lies flat, suggesting that it has been stored flat -- and may be the original piece.
I find it curious, though, that the piece was made with such a significant lower margin hidden by the frame. It certainly suggests it was created for this stunt.
Re: An artwork by Banksy shredded itself after selling for $1.3M at Sotheby’s
#245Part 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.
It'll make it eventually unusable, yeah, but that's not a public spectacle anymore. It feels more along the lines of shoving a painting into a cardboard box in a damp basement where nobody goes and letting it rot.
Re: An artwork by Banksy shredded itself after selling for $1.3M at Sotheby’s
#246There probably was no shredding at the auction - there are likely two images in the frame, one pre-shredded to a certain point. Look at the color of the "shredded" print. It's not the same - it's darker, probably didn't age as well 'cause it was cheaper paper. Not to mention that using two images is vastly simpler mechanically and economically than actually shredding it. You just have to roll up half of one image whi…
The change in color likely has to do with the lighting. When it's removed from the wall you can see the square of light placed on the frame. https://youtu.be/5-RFj1Slcws?t=22
Re: An artwork by Banksy shredded itself after selling for $1.3M at Sotheby’s
#247Sadly what happened to a Banksy in Detroit maybe gave him the idea. An artist group 'extricated' the work from the ruins of the Packard auto plant. The new owner of the building who was planning to use the Banksy as a centerpiece for a retail center was not pleased. They promised to not sell it, then they did. http://beltmag.com/the-fight-over-graffiti-banksy-in-detroit...
In Germany, there is a second part of copyright law. The actual copyright can be sold as usual, but the Urheberpersönlichkeitsrecht (creator's personal right) cannot. It gives the creator the right to forbid public presentations of his work that misrepresent his artistic vision. The architect of Berlin Main Station (Norman Foster, if I'm not mistaken) used this law to (successfully) sue Deutsche Bahn (the German nati…
These are known generally as moral rights[1]
Re: An artwork by Banksy shredded itself after selling for $1.3M at Sotheby’s
#248Part 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…
Check out the DisintegrationLoops by William Basinski
This is such an amazing piece. I second this and am very surprised to see it pop up on HN. Way cool! :)
Re: An artwork by Banksy shredded itself after selling for $1.3M at Sotheby’s
#249Part 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…
I think this one is quite interesting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5q-BH-tvxEg
A motor connected to a series of reduction gears, with the last part of the chain encased in concrete.
Re: An artwork by Banksy shredded itself after selling for $1.3M at Sotheby’s
#250Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Not referring to this specific exhibit but other pieces by a similar artist. Thousands of people can create this kind of paintings for cheap. Art was never about difficulty of reproduction. Once an artwork has been done any hack with 2-3 years of art school can create a great imitation, and with some more talent, even do a Rembrandt or whatever. There are entire cities in China who live by making copies of famous o…
"Art was never about difficulty of reproduction." While it's true that a skilled forger can effectively copy an old master painting, it's a pretty rare skill to have at a really high level. "Painting factory" copies from China are kitsch and definitely lack nuances that matter in the original. But the skill of making a facsimile (a copper engraving of a painting for an edition of prints, for example) is something tha…
>While it's true that a skilled forger can effectively copy an old master painting, it's a pretty rare skill to have at a really high level.
Not that rare. It also depends on the artist. More artists that are not pre-19th century masters are fairly easy to replicate, while their work still sells for millions.
>"Painting factory" copies from China are kitsch and definitely lack nuances that matter in the original.
That's just because of the speed involved. If they took their time on a single work, the quality would be much higher. And kitch is an aesthetic term, doesn't refer to the quality of the reproduction as such (a reproduction is kitch by definition, even if perfect).
>What I'm getting at is the idea that the processes of reproduction are a part of the way art is made and circulated.
That's true. That doesn't mean that a perfect replica by a master copier would ever get the same price as a coveted original.