• Notice regarding image hosts and attachments. See here.

Art or Graffiti?

Permabanned
Joined
15 Sep 2006
Posts
4,642
Location
Somewhere in York
A council wants to take down a mural by street artist Banksy but admits the work "has value in the right location".
Westminster Council, which has voted to remove the 23ft high piece entitled One Nation Under CCTV from a wall in Newman Street, London, said it did not want to see the art destroyed, but was trying to take a stand against graffiti.
The mural depicts a red-hooded figure painting the words "ONE NATION UNDER CCTV" on the wall, while a US-style police officer holding a camera and a brown dog look on.
banksy_64482a.jpg



"We simply want it removed from this wall and the owner is perfectly entitled to remove it and sell it if they wish.
"I take the view that this is graffiti and if you condone this then what is the difference between this and all the other graffiti you see scrawled across the city?
"If you condone this then you condone graffiti all over London."
Westminster Council said it was considering removing another Banksy mural to help fund council services.
The slogan "What are you looking at?" appeared overnight opposite a CCTV camera in an underpass at Marble Arch.
"We are currently considering what to do with another Banksy in an underpass at Marble Arch," Mr Davies said.
"One option would be to remove it and sell it and invest that money into council services."
Source - http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...ouncil-wants-banksy-mural-removed-972376.html

Personally i think its complete ******** to call this graffiti. And to also say that these paintings encourage crime and a "general atmosphere of neglect and social decay" is absurd.

What do you think?
 
All grafiti is, is art in the wrong location. Everything that is created with some degree of skill is art, just where that art ends up will determine if it is wanted or not.
 
It can be both. But if you don't have permission, it is graffiti and can be removed if the owner wants to.
 
I didn't realise people sold 'Graffiti' if thats what they want to believe this is. Who buys grafitti? people buy art, which is exactly what this is.
 
It's unsolicited, so it's graffiti.

It could be a seven billion pound painting by a reincarnated van gogh... if it's unsolicited and on someone else's property, it's graffiti.
 
I live in Bristol so see plenty of his work, in fact I walk past 3 pieces on my way to work and they look great.

However, graffiti or not; for Banksy I think this one is a bit of an eye sore and can see why they would want to get rid.
 
Last edited:
It's graffiti because it isn't wanted by the owners of the property it is on. You can argue it is art because there is skill in the execution although I don't buy into the arguement(excuse the pun) that just because you can sell something makes it art, that just makes it a saleable commodity.

As to the "general atmosphere of neglect and social decay which in turn encourages crime", I'd view it as a simple point of principle, if you allow works by Banksy simply because he is famous or because you think it has artistic merit then you've probably also got to allow other graffiti.
 
if there was not permission from the owner of the wall then it is vandalism and graffiti and should lead to prosecution
 
Its more art than graffiti, when i think of graffiti its more of the random tagging of hard to identify words and big bright colors or dave loves helen on a bus stop. its definately vandalism though, i think the problem is when you have an army of wannabe banksy's painting everything in sight even if they are good at what they do.

Edit:

I guess its all art and my opinion of dave loves helen is the same as the guy who cut a horse in half and banksy is the graffiti equivalent of the mona lisa...or something lol
 
Last edited:
Like others have said, if he did it on someone's property, without permission, its vandalism. Whether it is art or not is not a factor.
 
Back
Top Bottom