I don't care much for most graffiti, though some is pretty good but just in the wrong place.
I do like Banksy stuff, I have some prints (copies of course!) om my office walls. In case you've missed it, it seems he's done a set around London this week.
Unfortunately some people seem to be if a mind to steal or deface it. I suppose it fits with the anti social and unpleasant behaviour to be seen everywhere on a daily basis these days but it would be nice if people just respected property and left things for others to enjoy, even if they are not keen themselves. I suppose some gets stolen in the expectation of making a quick buck too...
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c20l71yyxp1o
and today's discovery
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9358vpz8zwo
Last edited by: smokie on Sun 11 Aug 24 at 12:25
|
|
Graffiti is vandalism whoever does it and whether you like it or not. Vandalising vandalism has a certain irony to it.
|
|
Mr Meldrew? Is that you Mr Meldrew?
|
>> Mr Meldrew? Is that you Mr Meldrew?
>>
Well if he is that's two Mr Meldrews here.
I have never seen a Banksy I thought was worth looking at anyway.
|
|
One of the current “thefts” looks suspiciously like a stunt. He has form with the self-shredding one. I know that they are based on stencils but this week’s offerings look cruder in their execution than previously.
|
Most graffiti is a talentless, ugly, self indulgent daub, painted or drawn illegally. It stimulates neither the senses nor emotions.
But what differentiates art from graffiti?
Imagine for one moment that Michelangelo had painted his frescos on a spare bit of Roman wall rather than the Sistine Chapel, or Leonardo da Vinci had painted the The Last Supper on the outside rather than inside of the convent of Santa Maria.
As graffiti they would have been scrubbed clean or trashed - a loss to humanity irrespective of political or religious views.
I would put Banksy's artistic talents in the same league - but as thoughtful and provocative works, often in context with their surroundings they rank far above the average graffiti artist output and are worthy of preservation.
|
But what differentiates art from graffiti?
I don’t know and I don’t care. If someone paint on my walls or public property without permission I want them charged with vandalism even if they claim to be Leanardo da b***** Vinci
|
>> Vandalising vandalism
>> has a certain irony to it.
Except of course it was theft, so it doesn't.
|
|
Since the owner of these “works of art “had abandoned them it’s hardly theft is it? if I pick up some rubbish in the street I don’t think that counts as theft.
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Sun 11 Aug 24 at 16:19
|
I quite like Banksy, I see his works as a light hearted critique of today's world. It's not detailed or beautiful in the way a Rodin or Michael Angelo but I think it is art, if somewhat simplistic.
I would be happy for him to paint on my front wall. His works can sell of a fortune.
Some graffiti has been put together so quickly, it's astonishing: www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/roger-lloyd-pack-dead-graffiti-train-3041478
We have some urban art, which has been paid for by someone, probably us, which has smartened up tatty concrete structures and are rather cool. Some examples on a local website here: www.1066online.co.uk/gallery/hastings-art/street-art
Of course beauty is in the eye of the beholder. (I wish I could produce the simplest piece of art.)
|
I like Banksy's art - with the latest one that must have taken some time to do, unlike the stencil ones, and being in the City must have been seen on numerous CCTV's surely?
|
During our recent visit to Montreal, the now annual "Muralfest" was in progress.
I think CGN might have exploded ;-)
Some/much of the "art" was stunning.
tinyurl.com/muralfest
|
|
The Fish stencilled on the glass police box, is very clever, very well thought out and looks like art to me.
|
>> The Fish stencilled on the glass police box, is very clever, very well thought out
>> and looks like art to me.
>>
Yep. Would love to know how he did it without being caught - and to use the police-box - very funny.
|
I think many of you are missing the point. If someone wants to paint a picture of a giant Kingfisher on someone’s house, asks the owners permission and seeks appropriate planning permission if necessary then that’s perfectly fine,
If someone thinks they have the right to paint whatever they want wherever they want without permission because they claim to be an artist then that is unacceptable.
It has nothing to do with the quality or otherwise of the painting.
|
>> If someone thinks they have the right to paint whatever they want wherever they want
>> without permission because they claim to be an artist then that is unacceptable.
Sure, the owner of the vandalised property/item can raise a complaint with the police. Anyone done that yet? errr Nah.
Edit, in fact one local council has protected it
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 11 Aug 24 at 21:37
|
>> Since the owner of these “works of art “had abandoned them it’s hardly theft is
>> it? if I pick up some rubbish in the street I don’t think that counts
>> as theft.
It was on private property, it didn't belong to those wot had it away, so yes it was theft.
>if I pick up some rubbish in the street I don’t think that counts
>> as theft.
If you take it home with you, with the intention of keeping it and permanently depriving the owner, yes I could well be theft.
Do you often pick up rubbish and take it home with you to keep?
|
Something like the Kingfisher, posted by Zero above, was painted with permission in full sight and is therefore a mural. It's also art, but not all murals are.
Graffiti is done when no one is watching and might be art.
But that's a very simplistic definition as shown, I think, by the Graffiti Tunnel in London:
www.londonxlondon.com/leake-street-tunnel-london/
I don't regard Banksy as a great artist and I don't think he would either. I see him as a master of humourous statements on politics, life and art.
|
I like the birds above the chippy and I can't see the owner complaining, as I suspect it's brought them more trade.
The photo of the character legging it with the satellite dish? It covers their face, but those leg tatoos?
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c623qjpgew4o
Clever, very clever. . The Rhino on the dumped car was also genius, This series that has appeared in the last 9 days has delighted many people.
Except Victor from Norwich of course.
|
To quote from Zero's linked BBC report:
"A London Zoo spokesperson said it was "absolutely brilliant" and said the work would be preserved."
Loved the Rhino too.
Banksy's work helps the community....I can't believe this is nearly 10 years old already: www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2014/aug/26/banksy-artwork-windfall-bristol-youth-club
Last edited by: zippy on Tue 13 Aug 24 at 11:42
|
>> To quote from Zero's linked BBC report:
>>
>> "A London Zoo spokesperson said it was "absolutely brilliant" and said the work would be
>> preserved."
Ah now thats the tricky conundrum, and an example of well thought out and open to interpretation the work and the message is. It could be construed as criticism of keeping animals in captivity.
|
|
Also the fish and chip shop one was clever.
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5yd66w769zo
Is the guy with the spray can guilty of vandalism or was he making an artistic statement?
|
Banksy and anti social behaviour - CGNorwich
