Sad state...
Street graffiti goes corporate. So when is the IPO set for? I have a mental image of a street artist surrounded by guys in suits... the lawyer, the PR guy, some staff... he's painting and they're having a meeting.
Banksy puts down spray can, goes corporate in banksy.com cybersquat brouhaha
Street artist Banksy has gone corporate, using a trademark of his name to try to win control of the Banksy.com domain. A formal complaint has been sent to domain arbitrator WIPO by Banksy’s “authentication” company Pest Control Office, which now, it seems, has moved into trademark enforcement. WIPO will decide in case D2014- …
-
-
-
Thursday 16th October 2014 20:35 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Sad state...
> Banksy is
While I consider myself a mere dilettante when it comes to contemporary art, I think your point is extremely unfair. What Banksy has done is breathe some fresh air into the contemporary art scene which ironically in a way, had become extremely academic (in its contextual sense). He's done that by borrowing and building upon elements created or popularised by other artists (many of which appear or are mentioned in Exit Through The Gift Shop) and giving them a concrete content, usually humorous at first sight but with quite tragical undertones. Perhaps his most notable achievement (aside from his unusual mix of performance, installation, and graphical art) is that his work hardly ever needs any explanation. Indeed, I have never seen an artist statement from Banksy, unlike the nonsense written up by (and often, for) your run-of-the-mill contemporaries.
But perhaps you would care to enlighten us on your vision of this particular artist?
-
Thursday 16th October 2014 21:07 GMT AceRimmer
@AC Re: Sad state...
Wot other AC said
Just to add the personal touch:
I lost all respect for Banksy when he made the opening titles for the Simpsons insinuating that the production of the cartoon was done in some Far East sweatshop. I thought that was quite an insulting pointless cheap stab. The Simpsons production team is (or at least was back then) from one of South Korea's most prestigious animation studios.
and to further quote Blek le rat
"When I see Banksy making a man with a child or Banksy making rats, of course I see immediately where he takes the idea. I do feel angry. When you're an artist you use your own techniques. It's difficult to find a technique and style in art so when you have a style and you see someone else is taking it and reproducing it, you don't like that. I'm not sure about his integrity. Maybe he has to show his face now and show what kind of guy he is."
-
-
Thursday 16th October 2014 20:42 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Sad state...
>Banksy is as and always has been as corporate as they get. Totally unoriginal, "intelligent" art for idiots
In support of what Ace Rimmer says, Banksy himself has not only cited the Parisian-based Blek le Rat as an influence, but has said that every time he has what he thinks is a good idea, he discovers that Blek has already done it. Banksy is corporate too, though calling people idiots is unnecessary.
The Banksy paper back books* were sold in Bristol in the early 2000s - that can be confirmed. What a bloke down the pub told me is that he's had a couple of Arts Council grants since the late nineties.
The fun with Banksy was that everywhere you went in the South West 'back in the day' - be it the Ashton Court festival, a walk from the Cat and Wheel to the Farm public house by the scenic route, or Glastonbury, he had left his mark. These days he's fairly often in the mainstream media, as a token anti-establishment figure who's good for filling a quarter page. That he upsets local councils, or gives them an opportunity to display their stupidity, only serves to endear him to the older middle classes.
In 2009 I was shown around Damien Hirst's London offices, and there was a large Banksy canvas (amongst those by other artists) on the wall - Mr Hirst now playing the role Saatchi occupied before him. Hirst, as the first living dollar billionaire artist could be said to be pretty corporate.
* these Banksy books were parodied by the booklet includceed in the Nathan Barley DVD box. The Nathan Barley series was prophetic about the the rise of hipsters/dickheads, but the warning went unheeded.
-
Thursday 16th October 2014 22:50 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Sad state...
Hi AC. Thank you for your insight
> Banksy is corporate too
What do you mean by "being corporate"?
Generally speaking, an artist is a professional who needs a public (someone who paints/writes/composes for himself is not an artist, talented as he may be, but a hobbyist). Finding, cultivating and growing that public can and often takes more than half of the artist's productive time, at least until he becomes established or recognised enough, and he ends up with a particularly good manager or gallerist. It is really no different than a company trying to sell whatever product their produce, so in that sense, yes of course, any successful artist will be "corporate" by definition.
If we are talking about making money out of their art... well, God forbid! :-) Now, it would be tempting to say that the valuation of an artist's opera is a form of recognition--but that would be false. If we were to discuss the art market we would be here until next week, but suffice to say that it's subject to the same laws and forces as any other market, and those are largely neither objective nor rational. However, as any company that doesn't have a death wish strives to use markets to their advantage (this does not mean getting the highest valuations), so do skilful artists.
My experience on the above comes from having supported (morally and materially) both younger entrepreneurs and artists (I am currently coaching one of the latter) and the processes are much the same, but somehow the public often get this idea that artists are people who make stuff for you to enjoy out of the goodness of their hearts and they're beyond material needs and Earthly temptations. Some monks might be artists, but not all artists are monks!!!
But once again, thank you for the discussion.
-
Friday 17th October 2014 11:41 GMT Jagged
Re: Sad state...
"What do you mean by being corporate?"
I have no problem with an artist being corporate, except of course, when they make a big deal about being anti-establishment.
I live in Bristol and have been familiar with the guy's work from well before he was famous, he was ever happy to crap on someone's wall but less than happy at some tagger who bombed his work. Hypocrite.
-
-
-
Friday 17th October 2014 06:40 GMT Voland's right hand
Re: Sad state...
Quote: Totally unoriginal, "intelligent" art for idiots
Care answering which placard are you holding? "Migrants not Welcome", "Go Back to Africa" or "Keep off Our Worms".
Looking at it, it was original, it was intelligent social commentary and it did hit the local xenophobes very hard. Hard enough for them to remove it in less than half a day.
-
-
Friday 17th October 2014 10:05 GMT AceRimmer
Re: Sad state...
"Quote: Totally unoriginal, "intelligent" art for idiots
Care answering which placard are you holding? "Migrants not Welcome", "Go Back to Africa" or "Keep off Our Worms"."
Amazing, you've just managed to equate having a low opinion of Banksy with being racist and anti immigration.
I'll leave the argument at that
-
-
-
Thursday 16th October 2014 20:02 GMT BongoJoe
Re: Sad state...
Street graffiti goes corporate. So when is the IPO set for? I have a mental image of a street artist surrounded by guys in suits... the lawyer, the PR guy, some staff... he's painting and they're having a meeting.
And in that meeting they're discussing Banky being laid off and the graffiti operations outsourced to India.
-
-
-
Friday 17th October 2014 16:09 GMT Jason Bloomberg
Criminal damage and vandalism that's worth a few tens of grand, perhaps more. I imagine there are plenty wishing Banksy would drop by and paint something on their façade.
It is a terrible tragedy that some great art has been destroyed simply because it has been considered mere graffiti or vandalism, but I guess that is a risk of the trade and choice of means of expression.
I would love it if Bansky 'scrawled' on my wall though I am not sure I could afford the cost of keeping it as public art and stopping thieving bastards from taking my rendering away while I wasn't looking.
-
-
Saturday 18th October 2014 20:42 GMT jukejoint
"Generally speaking, an artist is a professional who needs a public (someone who paints/writes/composes for himself is not an artist, talented as he may be, but a hobbyist)."
hahaha! I get it! Just add $$$! - bang, you are a true artist.
With this mindset I imagine you have a line forming near your home or office, or possibly you scout for the best human investments. What a mensch!
Anyone who believes your statement wants some clarification about the nature of art. All of us need enough to get by. Some of us are content with 'enough'. Because enough is all one needs to continue what one must do, whether or not one is in love with the marketplace, however attractive its subjectivity and irrationality seem to those who would like to cordon off their financial interests from the aforementioned hobbyists. A hobbyist is obviously a term of derogation and means: I can't ramp up revenues from this unpredictable curiosity.
Well, 'generally speaking' (your caveat, as is the statement about "monks") we can see that imagination and deep thinking are in short supply. Viva la whatever symbol of exchange you worship.
-
Monday 20th October 2014 15:36 GMT Anonymous Coward
> hahaha! I get it! Just add $$$! - bang, you are a true artist.
Hmmm... My previous comment, which you have quoted, talks about the need for a public (it's public display and dissemination--at least in intention--of your work what separates the artist from the hobbyist, for the purposes of the discussion at hand).
Within that context you seem to have immediately equated public with money. So I regret to say that sadly no, you did not get it at all.
-
Biting the hand that feeds IT
