Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I’m the Accidental Owner of a Banksy

nymag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 180 posts

Re: I’m the Accidental Owner of a Banksy

#61

Post by brenschluss »

iamben wrote: post #7

Mayor Bloomberg's reaction is interesting - I'm curious to know when a person transitions from vandal to artist. I don't think anyone could argue that Banksy hasn't cemented a place in the 'history of art' and the books our children read that cover this period will feature his work. In the UK a lot of people are genuinely gutted when a Banksy gets removed or covered - like something (a gift?) has been removed from th…

> But at the end of the day, it's still graffiti, still vandalism

It's not vandalism if the owners of the buildings are happy to have the piece.

If I scrub a brick wall clean, is it vandalism? No.

If I glue a solid pound of gold to a brick wall and the building owner takes it, is it vandalism? No.

If I have a work painted on my property that draws crowds and will probably have a "market value" of a lot of money, and I'd rather have the work have been painted than not exist, is it vandalism? No.

If I'd be happy or even would actively desire to have a Banksy piece painted on my property, is it vandalism when it does happen? No.

Re: I’m the Accidental Owner of a Banksy

#62

Post by voltagex_ »

mcantelon wrote: post #48
michaelwww wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your language exhibits a bias that says: a) Banksy is a culture hacker b) Banksy is outside mainstream culture c) Banksy is a successful hacker. All of that is arguable, but one thing we can say for sure is Banksy is interesting because people are interested in Banksy - famous for being famous like Paris Hilton.

I assert A, B, and C, yes. Banksy managed to simultaneously profit from, and socially comment globally using, a street medium. Paris Hilton was born with the looks and means needed to make connections and she worked from that, gaining notoriety through her lack of inhibition. I can see the comparison in that their trajectories were both unconventional to some degree, but beyond that, not much simularity. If you haven…

Another really good one to watch is "Bomb It" on Netflix/iTunes. The sequel is out soon.

Re: I’m the Accidental Owner of a Banksy

#63

Post by ojbyrne »

harryh wrote: post #43
iamben wrote: post #7

Mayor Bloomberg's reaction is interesting - I'm curious to know when a person transitions from vandal to artist. I don't think anyone could argue that Banksy hasn't cemented a place in the 'history of art' and the books our children read that cover this period will feature his work. In the UK a lot of people are genuinely gutted when a Banksy gets removed or covered - like something (a gift?) has been removed from th…

Mayor Bloomberg's reaction is obvious. If he says the city condones Banksy's work then he's going to immediately get asked "Who's job is it to decide which graffiti is art and which will get you arrested?" He's got 10,000 more important things to deal with so he just says it's vandalism and will be treated as such and then moves on to the rest of his day.

I found this interesting to compare/contrast:

"For $41 million — what Citibank paid to sponsor the program for five years — our city bikes became Citi Bikes. To make certain you don’t forget this fact, a Citi Bike sign hangs in front of the handlebars, Citi Bike is printed twice on the frame, and a Citi Bike billboard drapes the rear wheel on both sides. The font is the familiar Citibank font and the Citibank signature decoration floats over the “t.” There is no way to see a Citi Bike without thinking Citibank. The 6,000 bikes so far rolled out, of a possible 10,000, and their signs are a Day-Glo cobalt blue that you see on banks. Nobody wears this color. Nobody paints his or her apartment this color. This blue is bank blue."

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/20/opinion/sunday/color-me-bl...?

Re: I’m the Accidental Owner of a Banksy

#64

Post by ojbyrne »

JamesArgo wrote: post #36
theoh wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, most art critics don't take Banksy seriously, so I wouldn't count on him having a place in the history books any more than a novelty musician like Weird Al, for example. In fact that comparison makes Banksy sound more important than he is. David Blaine, maybe? http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/20...

It’s funny he contrasted Banksy with Pollack. I’ve always thought of Pollack (and many other modern artists) as a sort of charming guy who figured out that the art industry is a weird product of status games and so decided to create positional goods with the least amount of effort possible.

I'm reasonably sure that critics weren't exactly enamored of Pollock during his lifetime.

Re: I’m the Accidental Owner of a Banksy

#65

Post by iamben »

justinpombrio wrote: post #54
iamben wrote: post #7

Mayor Bloomberg's reaction is interesting - I'm curious to know when a person transitions from vandal to artist. I don't think anyone could argue that Banksy hasn't cemented a place in the 'history of art' and the books our children read that cover this period will feature his work. In the UK a lot of people are genuinely gutted when a Banksy gets removed or covered - like something (a gift?) has been removed from th…

> I'm curious to know when a person transitions from vandal to artist. Asking for a transition point makes the assumption that they are mutually exclusive. But Banksy is by any reasonable definitions both a vandal and an artist. Hence Bloomberg is simultaneously cleaning up vandalism and destroying art. Whether you think this is a good thing depends on how you weigh these two aspects. Personally, I think it just make…

I agree with you completely. But there's a mindset needed from most people before they make the jump from 'vandal' to 'artist' - or vandal artist! There are a lot of graffiti artists doing fantastic pieces - but it'll always be seen as vandalism.

With Banksy a lot of people (certainly in the UK) don't even think of the vandalism, they jump straight to artist - something they probably wouldn't do for a lot of other graffiti. Why so? Publicity? Celebrity sales? The fact the piece has immediate value?

Re: I’m the Accidental Owner of a Banksy

#66

Post by qq66 »

brenschluss wrote: post #61
iamben wrote: post #7

Mayor Bloomberg's reaction is interesting - I'm curious to know when a person transitions from vandal to artist. I don't think anyone could argue that Banksy hasn't cemented a place in the 'history of art' and the books our children read that cover this period will feature his work. In the UK a lot of people are genuinely gutted when a Banksy gets removed or covered - like something (a gift?) has been removed from th…

> But at the end of the day, it's still graffiti, still vandalism It's not vandalism if the owners of the buildings are happy to have the piece. If I scrub a brick wall clean, is it vandalism? No. If I glue a solid pound of gold to a brick wall and the building owner takes it, is it vandalism? No. If I have a work painted on my property that draws crowds and will probably have a "market value" of a lot of money, and…

If the building is in public view, local ordinances may require certain displays (obscene displays, tobacco advertisements, etc) to be covered.

Re: I’m the Accidental Owner of a Banksy

#67

Post by rolandukor »

brenschluss wrote: post #61
iamben wrote: post #7

Mayor Bloomberg's reaction is interesting - I'm curious to know when a person transitions from vandal to artist. I don't think anyone could argue that Banksy hasn't cemented a place in the 'history of art' and the books our children read that cover this period will feature his work. In the UK a lot of people are genuinely gutted when a Banksy gets removed or covered - like something (a gift?) has been removed from th…

> But at the end of the day, it's still graffiti, still vandalism It's not vandalism if the owners of the buildings are happy to have the piece. If I scrub a brick wall clean, is it vandalism? No. If I glue a solid pound of gold to a brick wall and the building owner takes it, is it vandalism? No. If I have a work painted on my property that draws crowds and will probably have a "market value" of a lot of money, and…

yes, but you cannot assume that 'the owners' are all happy. Some may be but some may not be. I probably wont be. For those who are happy, fine; but for those who aren't, I would struggle to see how that wont be characterised as vandalism.

Re: I’m the Accidental Owner of a Banksy

#68

Post by jevinskie »

radley wrote: post #32
saurik wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't vandalism be an artistic medium? I don't see any reason why someone can't be labeled both "vandal" and "artist". (edit: re-reading my sentence an hour later, I think even better wording might be "an outlet for artistic expression" rather than "an artistic medium".)

It's only vandalism to those who want to control the city yet not participate.

Maybe the opinion of the property owner(s) is the most important when you determine whether it is vandalism or not.

Re: I’m the Accidental Owner of a Banksy

#69

Post by brady747 »

theoh wrote: post #20
iamben wrote: post #7

Mayor Bloomberg's reaction is interesting - I'm curious to know when a person transitions from vandal to artist. I don't think anyone could argue that Banksy hasn't cemented a place in the 'history of art' and the books our children read that cover this period will feature his work. In the UK a lot of people are genuinely gutted when a Banksy gets removed or covered - like something (a gift?) has been removed from th…

Well, most art critics don't take Banksy seriously, so I wouldn't count on him having a place in the history books any more than a novelty musician like Weird Al, for example. In fact that comparison makes Banksy sound more important than he is. David Blaine, maybe? http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/20...

I'm guessing critics are often historically wrong about the importance of various artists. How are you determining most of them don't take his work as value additive? Why do you accept their opinion as valuable?

Also, for reference, My wife is an Art History Professor at a highly respected liberal arts college and she takes Banksy seriously.... though she would not want to be called a critic.

Disclosure: owner of a Mr. Brainwash original

Re: I’m the Accidental Owner of a Banksy

#70

Post by lvs »

Millennium wrote: post #17
iamben wrote: post #7

Mayor Bloomberg's reaction is interesting - I'm curious to know when a person transitions from vandal to artist. I don't think anyone could argue that Banksy hasn't cemented a place in the 'history of art' and the books our children read that cover this period will feature his work. In the UK a lot of people are genuinely gutted when a Banksy gets removed or covered - like something (a gift?) has been removed from th…

> I'm curious to know when a person transitions from vandal to artist. When they start asking for permission before painting other people's stuff.

That's a bit stuffy. I'd be honored to have Banksy paint my stuff without permission.
Post reply on HN