Banksy - fair comment or kinda ironic, considering

2ndcoming

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

For the third time. He sells his art. See the wall paintings as billboards for his sold art.

He may sell his art now, as in installation pieces like the pickaxe phonebox thingy, but I'd imagine the most valuable ones would be the oldest, which are all plastered on walls around Bristol and London, so if you were in it for the money it would be pretty retarded to leave yourself unable to sell your most valuable pieces.

Compare it to the work of Shepherd Fairey, plastering the same image in as many places may be a more relevant form of protesting against advertising or culture jamming, but it has the flipside of immediately making "brand Fairey", which is why we've got 15 year old skaterboys going around wearing OBEY baseball caps here in Dublin, 6000 miles from Southern California.

The nature of the work is always going to have that effect, which in itself is a direct product of the fact that people are already so brainwashed by advertising that they see something cool and immediately think, "I want one, where can I get that?"

It's a bizarre form of protest if you think about it, if it's any good it's going to become that which it was protesting in the first place. Unless your cynical enough to think that was the plan all along. I don't believe that's the case.

Bipolar Joe

MistyCheese wrote: »

Why are only our girlfriends, not just feeling inadequate, but being made to feel inadequate? Because women are silly airheaded bimbos subject to manipulation by the big bad advertisers? So far out of control of their emotions that they don't necessarily feel, more they are made to feel, in the way puppets are made to "talk"?

Look up the phrase "Two Cunts in a Kitchen."

ahnowbrowncow

Who the fook is banksy? Am I alone in not knowing who it is?

Bipolar Joe

billybudd wrote: »

If your stupid enough to let a marketing company dictate how you feel, wear, think, follow etc then you deserve all you get.

Yeah, those retarded kids are so dumb, we are so much better than them.

copeyhagen

looks like banksy is gonna start targetting the billboards more

billybudd

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

1) (Because I'm too lazy to separate the quote again) Other people surround you. The fact that you don't recognise that advertising can effect everyone makes you seem kind of narcissistic. YOU can ignore it, go on you, that's genuinely great, but it seeps into the minds of children and the less aware. You didn't mention the masses, and in denying that they are influenced is depressing.

2) No, Captain Insulto, but I understand the media and the elements of control.

3) Like I said, he's a hypocrite. It might help if you didn't selectively quote that last part, though.

Since when is it narcisstic to understand advertising and its subliminal meanings? you have choices in life and you can choose to ignore contant stereotyping and selling and you can teach this to your kids.

I would like a new car, in fact a freelander 2 would be cool but hey dont really need it and there are better ways to spend €38,000 and in all reality after a few months driving it i wont really remember its something i wanted or needed only im short €38,000.

4zn76tysfajdxp

Thanks to Banksy, I drew a Hitler moustache and a c-section scar on a Wonderbra poster next to a bus stop. Take that, corporations. Then I ran off from the fuzz with ease in my Converse runners and Nike trackies.



Fuck Banksy.

Bipolar Joe

billybudd wrote: »

Since when is it narcisstic to understand advertising and its subliminal meanings? you have choices in life and you can choose to ignore contant stereotyping and selling and you can teach this to your kids.

I would like a new car, in fact a freelander 2 would be cool but hey dont really need it and there are better ways to spend €38,000 and in all reality after a few months driving it i wont really remember its something i wanted or needed only im short €38,000.

Not everyone is immune. In a civilised society we care for those that can't care for themselves.

2ndcoming

billybudd wrote: »

I would like a new car, in fact a freelander 2 would be cool but hey dont really need it and there are better ways to spend €38,000 and in all reality after a few months driving it i wont really remember its something i wanted or needed only im short €38,000.

While your superiority in your ignorance of advertising is admirable, if you think a monstrosity on every level like a Freelander is a desirable machine, and know the price, it looks like that advertising worked on you pretty well....

billybudd

2ndcoming wrote: »

While your superiority in your ignorance of advertising is admirable, if you think a monstrosity on every level like a Freelander is a desirable machine, and know the price, it looks like that advertising worked on you pretty well....

Ha, i understand advertising and yes i dont ignore it i just am not blinded by it and that really means i can ignore it.

You should google Barbie and her effect on girls.

Bipolar Joe

billybudd wrote: »

Ha, i understand advertising and yes i dont ignore it i just am not blinded by it and that really means i can ignore it.

You should google Barbie and her effect on girls.

OK, so, wait, do you agree or disagree that advertising can be damaging? You've made two pretty much polar opposite posts one after the other.

brimal

Banksy's style is a complete copy of Blek le Rat ('father of stencil graffiti')

If anyone wants to see an interesting documentary, check out Graffiti Wars - it documents the fued between stencil artists Banksy and Robbo

gara

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

1) (Because I'm too lazy to separate the quote again) Other people surround you. The fact that you don't recognise that advertising can effect everyone makes you seem kind of narcissistic. YOU can ignore it, go on you, that's genuinely great, but it seeps into the minds of children and the less aware. You didn't mention the masses, and in denying that they are influenced is depressing.

2) No, Captain Insulto, but I understand the media.

Congratulations on fundmentally missing my point for the third time. I spoke for myself and how advertising affects me, personally. At no point did I mention how it does or doesn't affect other people. And you're now assuming that I'm narcissistic because I expressed my own opinion without mentioning 'the masses' and I'm 'denying' how people are influenced?Dude that is one seriously astronomical leap.

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

Not everyone is immune. In a civilised society we care for those that can't care for themselves.

How lovely and condescending of you to protect the poor fools from the big, bad ads. I assume you think you're perfectly capable of looking after yourself in that regard though, right? Because you 'understand the media' and all...

shanec1928

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

Who the fook is banksy? Am I alone in not knowing who it is?

A graffiti artist who copied people's work and passes off as his own. Had a big war with robbo who had a old piece up 10+ years and destroyed it. Then began selling his art commercially

billybudd

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

OK, so, wait, do you agree or disagree that advertising can be damaging? You've made two pretty much polar opposite posts one after the other.

Of course its damaging! anything is damaging if you let it effect your mental health and marketing is a sinister and damaging tool of modern life from airbrushed magazine pictures of total perfection to fast food advertising in your favourite films/tv shows etc, i suppose my point is and something i would teach my children is to be aware of it and understand it and not be guided by it.

Bipolar Joe

gara wrote: »

Congratulations on fundmentally missing my point for the third time. I spoke for myself and how advertising affects me, personally. At no point did I mention how it does or doesn't affect other people. And you're now assuming that I'm narcissistic because I expressed my own opinion without mentioning 'the masses' and I'm 'denying' how people are influenced?

Dude that is one seriously astronomical leap

No, I'm saying that because you feel that advertising does not affect you, with your ability to not look at it, therefore it should stay as it is, is an incredibly selfish way to live.

Bipolar Joe

billybudd wrote: »

Of course its damaging! anything is damaging if you let it effect your mental health and marketing is a sinister and damaging tool of modern life from airbrushed magazine pictures of total perfection to fast food advertising in your favourite films/tv shows etc, i suppose my point is and something i would teach my children is to be aware of it and understand it and not be guided by it.

Unfortunately, not everyone has you for a Pop. So do we let the wolves eat the sheep or do you chase the wolves off? They're not your sheep, but they're beneficial if they have a level of understanding.

billybudd

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

Unfortunately, not everyone has you for a Pop. So do we let the wolves eat the sheep or do you chase the wolves off? They're not your sheep, but they're beneficial if they have a level of understanding.

I agree and i think its important actually for schools etc to start getting up to speed with advertising and its effects and also social media and all that it entails.

gara

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

No, I'm saying that because you feel that advertising does not affect you, with your ability to not look at it, therefore it should stay as it is, is an incredibly selfish way to live.

Where did I say it should stay as it is?

Bipolar Joe

gara wrote: »

Where did I say it should stay as it is?

Here:

gara wrote: »

Therein lies the irony -it's not for him to decide what people should or shouldn't see no more than it is for greedy corporations.

Personally, I'm a little offended that they underestimate my ability to ignore all of them

This is the part of what has devolved into an argument where you tell me that what you said doesn't mean what it means.

EDIT: You'd be brilliant in P.R, anyone else would have gotten bored by now.

gara

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

This is the part of what has devolved into an argument where you tell me that what you said doesn't mean what it means.

Are you on drugs? Yes I mentioned that I'm (pseudo) offended that Banksy/Advertisers fail to recognise how little they affect me. Now, final opportunity -where did I say advertising should stay as it is or that I don't care how it affects other people?

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

[ You'd be brilliant in P.R, anyone else would have gotten bored by now.

Thank you, I just take serious exception to people trying to put words in my mouth to suit their own self-righteous agenda

Bipolar Joe

And there's the back track and brick wall. Welcome to politics.

curlzy

Ah Gara and Bipolar Joe, can ye both not just be friends? You're both obviously tremendoustly intelligent and well informed. You could be like OMG like tots bessie friends FOREVER.*



*Not really, keep fighting, it's one of the more interesting things that's been on boards in a while.

Bipolar Joe

You can't argue with that.

EDIT: But yeah, I'm wicked clever :cool: :cool: .

Fromthetrees

Boombastic wrote: »

'They should be paying us to eat this sh1t. The secret ingredient is crime' - Superhands

The twins. The ****ing twins. Bloody love them twins.

Bodhisopha

Not overly familiar with this Banksy customer so i don't see the irony, but i pretty much agree with what he said.

wilkie2006

starbelgrade wrote: »

Only to idiots. His art says fuck all.

He also uses the same spaces & mediums as advertisers do to promote himself, so either he's trying to be ironic about his slating of advertisements or he is too stupid to realise that he's being ironic.

I'd suspect it's the latter.

He's not an artist. At least not one of any depth. Sure, he can paint, but his work does nothing, says nothing and only appeals to the likes of students who think that having a Che Guevara poster on your bedroom wall makes you seem meaningful & cool.

I don't really agree with that. I think that once a someone releases a painting, a song, a poem, or whatever into the public domain it ceases to belong to them. Its orginator's intended meaning - whether sage or trite - becomes incidental.What the piece says constantly evolves, depending on the cultural and environmental context and - more importantly - its audience. Whether Banksy's work has any depth or not doesn't matter, what does matter is that it evokes emotion in its viewers who then imbue it with their own meaning.

EDIT: Just to add, I agree with you about students/people hanging posters of Che Guevara, Banksy or whoever.

euddue

banksy really isn't that good.Over hyped topshop idolism at best.

Irish Guitarist

I've never been insulted by an advert in my life. I do like going outside without seeing walls covered in graffiti though.

MadsL

starbelgrade wrote: »

his work does nothing, says nothing

Riiight. Nothing to say huh?

http://www.banksy-prints.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/banksy-airstrike.jpg

http://www.toptenz.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/banksy-one-nation-under-cctv-2-291x399.jpg

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/12/21/1261420209596/A-new-Banksy-piece-near-t-001.jpg

KeithTS

MadsL wrote: »

Riiight. Nothing to say huh?

http://www.banksy-prints.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/banksy-airstrike.jpg

http://www.toptenz.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/banksy-one-nation-under-cctv-2-291x399.jpg

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/12/21/1261420209596/A-new-Banksy-piece-near-t-001.jpg

In all fairness, none of this is original in any way.
Yes, he has something to say, but is it meaningful and original? No it is not.

These images are less subtle than the American Idiot album, like Banksy, it's catchy and easy to understand but in no way thought provoking or original.

Ush1

I like his pieces on the West Bank Wall.

http://arts.guardian.co.uk/pictures/0,,1543331,00.html

old hippy

brimal wrote: »

Banksy's style is a complete copy of Blek le Rat ('father of stencil graffiti')

If anyone wants to see an interesting documentary, check out Graffiti Wars - it documents the fued between stencil artists Banksy and Robbo

Robbo ended up in a coma, didn't he?

brimal

old hippy wrote: »

Robbo ended up in a coma, didn't he?

Yea some unknown attackers hammered the shit out of him, not sure what happened to him after that.


The Banksy v Robbo tension really raised to another level when Banksy defaced that piece that Robbo did, which was left relatively untouched for 20+ years in London.

MadsL

KeithTS wrote: »

In all fairness, none of this is original in any way.
Yes, he has something to say, but is it meaningful and original? No it is not.

These images are less subtle than the American Idiot album, like Banksy, it's catchy and easy to understand but in no way thought provoking or original.

brimal wrote: »

Banksy's style is a complete copy of Blek le Rat ('father of stencil graffiti')

Ah, "derivative" what hipster amateur art critics say when they haven't really a clue.

All art is derivative. There is no form of art that is totally original... 'originality' is a modern art construct... a silly concession to marketing concerns.
Paul deMarrais

No man who bothers about originality will ever be original: whereas if you simply try to tell the truth, without caring twopence how often it has been told before, you will, nine times out of ten, become original without ever having noticed it.
C. S. Lewis

And since of necessity my vision is quite different from that of the next man, my painting will interpret things in an entirely different manner even though it makes use of the same elements.
Pablo Picasso

Duggys Housemate

MadsL wrote: »

Ah, "derivative" what hipster amateur art critics say when they haven't really a clue.

All art is derivative. There is no form of art that is totally original... 'originality' is a modern art construct... a silly concession to marketing concerns.
Paul deMarrais

No man who bothers about originality will ever be original: whereas if you simply try to tell the truth, without caring twopence how often it has been told before, you will, nine times out of ten, become original without ever having noticed it.
C. S. Lewis

And since of necessity my vision is quite different from that of the next man, my painting will interpret things in an entirely different manner even though it makes use of the same elements.
Pablo Picasso

All quoting is derivative.

Chuck Stone

Anyone who thinks they aren't affected by advertising is an idiot.

There. I said it.

starbelgrade

MadsL wrote: »

Riiight. Nothing to say huh?

http://www.banksy-prints.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/banksy-airstrike.jpg

http://www.toptenz.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/banksy-one-nation-under-cctv-2-291x399.jpg

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/12/21/1261420209596/A-new-Banksy-piece-near-t-001.jpg

They have about as much to say as a t-shirt with a slogan on it.

It's unoriginal & uninspired.

karma_

starbelgrade wrote: »

They have about as much to say as a t-shirt with a slogan on it.

It's unoriginal & uninspired.

You're wrong.


Not for the first time I might add.

Duggys Housemate

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Anyone who thinks they aren't affected by advertising is an idiot.

There. I said it.

Isn't that from the Kellogg's add?

Chuck Stone

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Isn't that from the Kellogg's add?

I have no idea.

Edit: Just searched to see if the term was connected with any company and it doesn't seem to be.

I'm lovin' it.

MadsL

starbelgrade wrote: »

They have about as much to say as a t-shirt with a slogan on it.

It's unoriginal & uninspired.

Care to share some of your own inspired and original artwork? Or any graffiti artwork you really think "speaks"?

I had a friend (we have lost touch) 'Pablo Fiasco' who used to stencil in the 80's (Those old enough to remember a stenciled biplane towing a banner which read "Use Condoms" around Temple Bar) he did a whole series of outlines of bodies with "Aids Kills, Use Condoms" in the centre just around the time Aids was really taking off.

The same outline style had been used in New York to highlight pedestrian deaths at intersections; was he derivative? Of course, he would be the first to admit it. Did he have something to say by remixing, naturally he did.

Dismissing any artwork as derivative is pretty lazy criticism.

RATM

cloptrop wrote: »

I totally agree with each paragraph but have no idea wherw he is going with it .
Do I have to go graffiti something .?

www.adbusters.org
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bubble_Project


And some pics
http://www.flickr.com/groups/bubble_project/pool/

Duggys Housemate

THE ADS THE ADS THEY ARE CONTROLLING MY MIND

stateofflux

i don't think banksy takes himself that seriously at all and understands irony especially after watching the 'exit through the gift shop' documentary. he is like the graffitti version of crass and chumbawamba mixed together which has more meaning than most modern art out there to me...

Duggys Housemate

MadsL wrote: »

Care to share some of your own inspired and original artwork? Or any graffiti artwork you really think "speaks"?

I had a friend (we have lost touch) 'Pablo Fiasco' who used to stencil in the 80's (Those old enough to remember a stenciled biplane towing a banner which read "Use Condoms" around Temple Bar) he did a whole series of outlines of bodies with "Aids Kills, Use Condoms" in the centre just around the time Aids was really taking off.

The same outline style had been used in New York to highlight pedestrian deaths at intersections; was he derivative? Of course, he would be the first to admit it. Did he have something to say by remixing, naturally he did.

Dismissing any artwork as derivative is pretty lazy criticism.

Pablo was advertising.

MadsL

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Pablo was advertising.

Was he getting paid?

El.duderino

From earlier a few to many posts.


I never thought Banksy went out with a bowelrr.

Duggys Housemate

MadsL wrote: »

Was he getting paid?

Doesn't matter. Is "getting paid" anti-art now? Or even anti-advertising. Lots if advertising is cost less.

starbelgrade

MadsL wrote: »

Care to share some of your own inspired and original artwork? Or any graffiti artwork you really think "speaks"?

I had a friend (we have lost touch) 'Pablo Fiasco' who used to stencil in the 80's (Those old enough to remember a stenciled biplane towing a banner which read "Use Condoms" around Temple Bar) he did a whole series of outlines of bodies with "Aids Kills, Use Condoms" in the centre just around the time Aids was really taking off.

The same outline style had been used in New York to highlight pedestrian deaths at intersections; was he derivative? Of course, he would be the first to admit it. Did he have something to say by remixing, naturally he did.

Dismissing any artwork as derivative is pretty lazy criticism.

First off, I never said that Banksy's work was derivative. I said it was unoriginal & uninspiring.

Secondly, I don't need to produce artworks to have an opinion on them. That's as ridiculous as saying that you can only have an opinion on football if you play it.

And lastly, I have yet to see any grafitti that I would consider art. Any idiot can stencil slogans about AIDS. I fucking hate slogans. Whether on walls or stuck on the inside of car windows, I find them highly irritating.

If you can call a slogan art, then what's the difference between a Banksy slogan and McDonalds "I'm loving it"? Nothing really, apart from a trademark.