What do you think of 'Banksy'?

danlightbulb

danlightbulb

danlightbulb

Soldato
Joined
14 Jul 2005
Posts
9,068
Location
Birmingham
www.bbc.co.uk

Banksy's urban tree artwork defaced with white paint

Tall metal fencing is put up around the mural and tree after the artwork is strewn with paint.
www.bbc.co.uk

Another 'artwork' appeared in London followed promptly by being defaced.

What is the difference between this and run of the mill graffiti?

What is the difference between Banksy doing this artwork, which is applauded, and then the defacement of the said artwork, which is condemned?

Councils are quick enough to erect fencing around these artworks, even security guards I believe in some cases, yet they don't make the same effort to protect other buildings/objects from vandalism.


Double standards in my opinion.
 
VincentHanna said:
Confirmed Banksy artwork is worth a lot money and draws tourists to the area.
Click to expand...

Is it technically criminal activity, or not?

In this most recent case, it looks to be on the side of a house. Would that have increased the value of the house in question, if somehow the art could be protected sufficiently to be able to sell the house with it on?

But a buyer of a house like that would taken on a huge liability too, trying to continually protect something like that out in an exposed public place.
 
200sols said:
I thought the green stuff was the paint that was thrown over the banksy there. Looks hideous.
Click to expand...

_132970618_before_after_banksytree_640-x2-nc.png.webp
 
danlightbulb said:
www.bbc.co.uk

Banksy's urban tree artwork defaced with white paint

Tall metal fencing is put up around the mural and tree after the artwork is strewn with paint.
www.bbc.co.uk

Another 'artwork' appeared in London followed promptly by being defaced.

What is the difference between this and run of the mill graffiti?

What is the difference between Banksy doing this artwork, which is applauded, and then the defacement of the said artwork, which is condemned?

Councils are quick enough to erect fencing around these artworks, even security guards I believe in some cases, yet they don't make the same effort to protect other buildings/objects from vandalism.


Double standards in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Normal graffiti lowers the value of your house. Banksy graffiti raises the value of it massively.

I’d love him to come and deface the side of my house
 
Last edited:
Glad it got defaced as its utter graffiti and lets others see that its not ok to daub this trash on other peoples properties.

Ok, art is individual i know but, there is a place for it.

Banksy gets away with it because of his name. People have lifted him up high. He has gotten very rich because of that.
 
I'm somewhat intrigued by the people who ruin the art.

Are they just jealous people? Jealous neighbours? etc.

I don't care about Banksy, but if he wants to increase the value of my house I am all for it.
 
danlightbulb said:
www.bbc.co.uk

Banksy's urban tree artwork defaced with white paint

Tall metal fencing is put up around the mural and tree after the artwork is strewn with paint.
www.bbc.co.uk

Another 'artwork' appeared in London followed promptly by being defaced.

What is the difference between this and run of the mill graffiti?

What is the difference between Banksy doing this artwork, which is applauded, and then the defacement of the said artwork, which is condemned?

Councils are quick enough to erect fencing around these artworks, even security guards I believe in some cases, yet they don't make the same effort to protect other buildings/objects from vandalism.


Double standards in my opinion.
Click to expand...

It's turned in to a circus. Everyone is out to make a statement and it ends in chaos. A bit like the internet, really. Give the people a park and an orange box and it ends in fighting. And they wonder why freedom of speech is a bad idea.
 
VincentHanna said:
Confirmed Banksy artwork is worth a lot money and draws tourists to the area.

Other graffiti artists do not.

Simple as that really.

Why someone decided Banksy was worthy of all the fawning over though? Not really sure I can answer that.

The art World is alien to me.
Click to expand...

Same.

I've never understood the art that's simple/easy but gets all the hype.

Roof of sistine chapel? - amazing.
A banana taped to a wall? - no

Personally I think it's a world where those in it have so much money they need something to spend it on. An "artist" gets hyped up. And all of a sudden, for some reason, that "art" is valued.
 
Last edited:
danlightbulb said:
So it's ok to commit a crime if it makes you money?

Tongue in cheek but obviously it happens a lot so...
Click to expand...

Money is what can create technical loopholes in the law yea, or do you think the law gets equally applied to rich and poor? :p

Graffiti is classed as criminal damage. Damage, in the Criminal damage legislation, is described as "Where the interference amounts to an impairment of the value or usefulness of the property to the owner, then the necessary damage is established"

So increasing the value of something would certainly be an arguing point to whether any criminal damage had occurred.

Basically, it's a legal grey area that hasn't been tested in law yet between "Art" and "Graffiti" with relation to someone like Banksy who has elevated "Street art" into a mainstream art form.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom