I don’t think that most people object to graffiti, in and of itself. I think that what most people object to is the typical content of graffiti. Most often, it’s just someone’s name written in big letters, which is tacky at best, or a bunch of obscenities, or gang markings. But when it’s a picture, of reasonably decent quality, well, a lot of folks would pay to have that put up. And whether or not one agrees that Banksy is a “great artist”, he does produce works of decent quality.
Obviously, you’ve had to clean that shit off anything you own.
Yes, I think a LOT of people object to graffiti. It’s destructive, hard to remove, offensive involves offensive language or images, and placed without permission. In some places it involves gangs marking “their” territory, basically someone else is laying claim to YOUR property.
It can cost upwards of £250 to pressure wash a Banksy.
Typically, you would be correct. However what Banksy does and what Keith Haring or Jean-Michel Basquiat did was to create real art.
Did you read the rest of my post, Broomstick? I listed those as reasons why ordinarily people do object to graffiti. But those reasons aren’t relevant to the graffiti that Banksy specifically creates, and so there’s much less objection to his work than there is to a typical graffiti artist’s.
Is Banksy actually doing random graffiti anymore, though? I’d argue that even if his roots were in graffiti he isn’t a “graffiti artist” anymore.
On top of which - the people who owned the buildings and other things he “tagged” were not always appreciative of the “gift”. Again, getting that sort of thing removed is expensive, and something not possible without damage. Yes, sometimes the wall or whatever Banksy painted on was removed - who paid for that?
Frankly, if someone painted the side of my house without permission I’d be pretty damn pissed even if it was considered good artwork. I applaud the imagery - he is good - but I absolutely deplore the manner in which it is “deployed”.
I think his art is valuable enough that someone could offer to remove the wall that he had tagged and make money by selling the piece. (Anyone remember a Partridge Family episode in which an eccentric Russian artist paints the family’s garage door, but it turns out to a risque painting of a woman? The family ends up giving the garage door to a museum, I think in exchange for a new garage door.)
I used to walk past this huge Banksy quite a lot in central London as it was close to a photography shop I used to frequent. It was painted over, but it really did draw attention to the CCTV camera in a country that probably has more CCTV cameras per person than anywhere else:
It’s valuable enough now for that, maybe. But it wasn’t always so. There must necessarily have been some works he made before he made a name for himself, and it’s likely that some of those property owners weren’t happy with it, despite the lack of the usual graffiti causes of offense. If any of those property owners had taken the matter to the police, and if Banksy had been caught, it would have been perfectly appropriate to fine him or impose other criminal sanction on him, as would be usual for any other graffiti artist.
Heck, it’s still possible that there are some property owners who would still object to his work on their property, even with how valuable it is, and he could still be held liable for such work. It would probably be irrational for a property owner to be upset now, with how much it’s worth, but the law doesn’t require people to be rational: It’s still their property, and they still get to decide what’s on it.
That said, I’m also unsure whether Banksy still engages in graffiti.
When someone threw paint at some of Banksy’s graffiti in Bristol, the council paid to have it cleaned up. The paint thrown, that is, to restore the original graffiti.
I did go to the Banksy exhibition in Bristol at the museum. It was pretty good, some bits were genuinely thought-provoking, and a lot of it was funny. I will say that I don’t think I’ve ever seen such a diverse audience for an exhibition. Locals who wouldn’t usually be seen dead in a museum showed up, along with little old ladies, Serious Critics, groups of teenagers… Even my Mum drove down from the other end of the country for it, and I don’t remember her ever going to an art exhibition before aside from the little ones her friends do for fundraisers.
Having said that, I do think this piece is unusually dull. I don’t expect it to be dazzlingly original, but images very like that are really everywhere in the UK right now. He may as well have done a badly drawn rainbow and scrawled ‘NHS’ under it (this has become the ubiquitous window decoration in any house in the UK in which a child resides right now). In fact, I’d find that more interesting, at least it’d have humour.
Now, maybe, but when he first got started it was just considered damage, pure and simple. It didn’t become valuable until he became famous.
I would highly recommend the documentary Saving Banksy, which examines some of the issues involved when graffiti becomes regarded as extremely valuable art. A number of Banksy’s "victims’ have removed his works from their buildings and sold them for large amounts of money. This is objected to by some critics as fundamentally changing the context of the works. (The medium in fact no longer being the message.)
Many of Banksy’s works have been removed to be sold or inadvertently or deliberately defaced or destroyed.
I haven’t seen that documentary but I did see Exit Through The Gift Shop (which was only in part about him).
Even when he started, it probably wasn’t just considered damage. Doubtless, at least some of the property owners considered his work to be an improvement over a blank wall, and so did not object. There may even have been some who, prior to Banksy’s work, were considering paying someone to paint a mural on their wall, and were pleased that they ended up getting something for free.
It was all about him in that it was his giant piss take.
Just a quick update/resolution to this story:
While it sold for way more than its estimated price, I do think it will rise in value as there cannot be many framed Banksy paintings (that don’t shred themselves), and this one was more unique than most.
Well, that was quite the underestimate, whoever it was.
I generally like Banksy’s art, and the gift was a great gesture, but “Y’know, the REAL superheroes are firefighters/nurses/cops/veterans/your mom” is a really, really tired cliche.
Along with David Gilmour’s guitars.
And very good news for both those charities.