Discussion
Kawasicki said:
Do some people not realise this was a dig at racists? Seriously?
People are dim.The piece almost needed to be buffed over for it to be completed though - actually censoring it says as much as the commentary in the work itself.
As for the vandalism/not vandalism point - of course its vandalism. He painted on somebody elses property without their knowledge or permission. It is was a kid writing something, then there would be no question. It happens that a % of the world enjoys this form of vandalism, in some cases making it retrospectively allowed; but at the time of painting, its vandalsm - pure and simple. And this is from someone who collects street/urban art!
irocfan said:
I'll agree a 'Banksy' may well be worth an insane amount of money (emphasis on insane) but IMO he's just a glorified vandal
Actually his street works are rarely admitted to and its impossible to get any authentication for one. He produces canvases which sell for an incredible amount of money (still often behind Warhol though) and has produced many prints, again which sell from between £3,000 to £30,0000. Neither of these are vadalism clearly - and he produces many more of these than illegal street pieces.Maxf said:
irocfan said:
I'll agree a 'Banksy' may well be worth an insane amount of money (emphasis on insane) but IMO he's just a glorified vandal
Actually his street works are rarely admitted to and its impossible to get any authentication for one. He produces canvases which sell for an incredible amount of money (still often behind Warhol though) and has produced many prints, again which sell from between £3,000 to £30,0000. Neither of these are vadalism clearly - and he produces many more of these than illegal street pieces.Yertis said:
Trouble with Banks is that he gives vandalism a good name.
He doesn't do that. People who can't tell the difference between good and bad graffiti do that.In my opinion Banksy's work is great and he is also a terrible role model for crap graffiti artists. The two aren't contradictory.
Is his work vandalism? Yes, but his is a rare form of vandalism that enhances the thing being vandalised. We are capable of distinguishing between the two, so why don't we choose to do that?
Edited by ATG on Friday 3rd October 10:46
Seven pages of s
te about 'is it vandalism'.Jesus christ, talk about missing the point!
The dimwit council thought it was racist, and completely missed the point and fact that the joke is on those who are anti immigration because of their racists views (you can although be anti-immigration or want it reduced for reasons that have nothing to do with race, but that's another arguement).
Pigeons - vermin really. Flying rats.
Pigeons - don't tend to eat worms. The lazy fkers eat whatever ste they can, seeds, bread, leftovers etc..
Pigeons - don't catch insects to eat
Swallows - don't eat worms so no loss to the pigeons
Swallows - born and bred in the UK, migrate to Africa to avoid the cold in winter - they are indigenous to the UK!!
Swallows and pigeons - have nothing to do with each other in normal circumstances - the behaviour of one has nothing to do with the other!
What stupid plonker in the council actually thought this was racist? Is this the level we have dropped to? What hope do we have...
te about 'is it vandalism'.Jesus christ, talk about missing the point!The dimwit council thought it was racist, and completely missed the point and fact that the joke is on those who are anti immigration because of their racists views (you can although be anti-immigration or want it reduced for reasons that have nothing to do with race, but that's another arguement).
Pigeons - vermin really. Flying rats.
Pigeons - don't tend to eat worms. The lazy f
kers eat whatever ste they can, seeds, bread, leftovers etc..Pigeons - don't catch insects to eat
Swallows - don't eat worms so no loss to the pigeons
Swallows - born and bred in the UK, migrate to Africa to avoid the cold in winter - they are indigenous to the UK!!
Swallows and pigeons - have nothing to do with each other in normal circumstances - the behaviour of one has nothing to do with the other!
What stupid plonker in the council actually thought this was racist? Is this the level we have dropped to? What hope do we have...
Impasse said:
Martin4x4 said:
Thank you, a response based on reason.
However, I think even a widely construed interpretation must still rely of the semantics of the word and can not stretch to cover this example.
If we apply common sense then any reasonble man must consider the up lift in value negates any loss.
The costs incurred in removing the unwanted and uninvited graffiti and restoring the wall to its previous whitewashed/plain brick state still have to be borne by the wall owner. If my wall were to receive this attention why should I be out of pocket just because some art student couldn't be bothered to use a piece of hardboard?However, I think even a widely construed interpretation must still rely of the semantics of the word and can not stretch to cover this example.
If we apply common sense then any reasonble man must consider the up lift in value negates any loss.
TLDR; You are an idiot if you think that having Banksy on the wall would make 'you' out of pocket. If you are not a kipper, you should be one.
league67 said:
Are you an actual idiot? If there was a Banksy on your wall, you wouldn't be out of pocket. You would get people to carefully remove it and sell it, and the cost of rendering the above mentioned wall would be substantially less than the sale price, based on history. You, and I'd assume that you are UKIP supporter offended by the message, are either exceptionally stupid, or zealot who can't see the opportunity.
TLDR; You are an idiot if you think that having Banksy on the wall would make 'you' out of pocket. If you are not a kipper, you should be one.
An idiot can be defined as someone who refuses to understand what they have read, due to their own narrow minded view of their world. The political message contained in these drawings are of little consequence to me as you'd find more insightful commentary on the folder of 16 year old student. TLDR; You are an idiot if you think that having Banksy on the wall would make 'you' out of pocket. If you are not a kipper, you should be one.
However, the upheaval involved in your planned removal of part of my wall would outweigh any financial benefit to me. Therefore I would be out of pocket on a level greater than mere money.
It's my wall. Leave it alone and don't impose your will on it or on me. Your dictatorship style utopia isn't welcome here.
league67 said:
Are you an actual idiot? If there was a Banksy on your wall, you wouldn't be out of pocket. You would get people to carefully remove it and sell it, and the cost of rendering the above mentioned wall would be substantially less than the sale price, based on history. You, and I'd assume that you are UKIP supporter offended by the message, are either exceptionally stupid, or zealot who can't see the opportunity.
TLDR; You are an idiot if you think that having Banksy on the wall would make 'you' out of pocket. If you are not a kipper, you should be one.
So if someone stapled a £50 note to your head, you would be ok with that as you would be financially better off than before.TLDR; You are an idiot if you think that having Banksy on the wall would make 'you' out of pocket. If you are not a kipper, you should be one.
Oh and what if it is a fake Banksy and not worth the paint that was used?
I'd love to see the record of the complaints saying it was racist. I bet there were loads of them.
Anyway it's a shame as I liked it, and it's an opportunity missed for the council to either leave it and take advantage or to flog it off and spend it on more social inclusiveness studies. Or something like that.
Anyway it's a shame as I liked it, and it's an opportunity missed for the council to either leave it and take advantage or to flog it off and spend it on more social inclusiveness studies. Or something like that.
Looks to me like Council employees missed the obvious dig at racists!
In terms of vandalism - thats tricky. In Chelteham this summer Banksy did a piece on the gable wall of a house. The house was worth £300k but the owner had an offer of £1m with the Banksy in place. So the use of the property was not fetterred and there is no loss in terms of costs of removal of the piece unless it needed £701k worth of cleaning.
In terms of vandalism - thats tricky. In Chelteham this summer Banksy did a piece on the gable wall of a house. The house was worth £300k but the owner had an offer of £1m with the Banksy in place. So the use of the property was not fetterred and there is no loss in terms of costs of removal of the piece unless it needed £701k worth of cleaning.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff