Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Banksy - fair comment or kinda ironic, considering
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
As for my ability to read, perhaps I should be questioning yours, after all you appear to be under the impression that what Banksy is saying is hypocritical when it's demonstrably not.
Question away. Bear in mind though, I never said I was able to read.
And he is a hypocrite. "Their advertising is bad, my sloganeering is fine" seems rather hypocritical to me.I think the distinction that Banksy / Adbusters / Naomi Klein make is that when we watch TV or listen to radio we accept that advertising is there to pay for the content which we recieve for free. If we don't like it we can turn off or not turn on at all, i.e. we have a choice
But when we walk out on the street to be confronted by billboards we have no choice - we get no content for free, all we get is advertising for companies. Banksys (and others) point is that it is these ads we have no say in - they interrupt your eyeline whereever you are- the street, the roadways, etc. So for him disrupting the status quo is fair game.
Advertising in public in Ireland isn't all that bad. But when you go to the States it is just ubquitous and driving through the whole country feels like you are constantly being advertised at- there are gigantic billboards every few hundred metres along the roadsides- it is just constant and relentless. Bankys point is that this is public space and it is being used for private gain.
Of course there is always the argument that you can set up your own political party, spend 50 years at campaigning to get 51% of people to agree that it would be much better to dedicate that billboard space to artists but he wants to see things change yesterday so he does what he does.
I'd agree with his point of view- at no point did I consent for Coca Cola to advertise at me in the street but they do it every day everywhere. Some politician who wasn't acting in the public interest made those decisions before I was even born and now they are impossible to reverse because street advertising is a multi-billion business.
Think about Dublin Bikes- JCD Decaux got 40 odd billboards on a 15 year contract which have an annual rent roll of €20m x 15 years = €300 million of advertising revenue. In return the citizens of Dublin got 400 free bikes. How much do 400 bikes cost ? Certainly no where near €300 million quid. But if you're a corrupt Dublin city councillor then you sell it to the citizens as a great deal.
I agree 100% with anti-public advertising stances. I saw a piece in a doc on Sao Paulo in Brazil where public advertising has been illegal since 2006. No billboards, no ads on taxis. Nothing. Place looked a lot cleaner, less cluttered. The people seemed perfectly fine with it and even the businesses were doing better. They had to work harder to please the customer because they relied on word of mouth so that worked out well for everybody. All's well that ends well.
My issue is with defacement of public property. I don't think anyone should do it. Just like I don't think the evil, fire-breathing multinationals should advertise on bus stops, graffiti "artists" shouldn't draw on those same bus stops. Both look like shite. It also looks like ****e when someone draws a pair of tits on an underwear ad or a pair of balls on David Beckham's chin. Makes it look like you're living in some sort of slum. Where I live (not Ireland) graffiti is a particularly bad problem. Bus stops, bins, 100 year old park benches are covered with that shite and to me it's no different from Banksy forcing his "art" on the people of Bristol. Do it on your own wall, ffs.
Heh. Bit of an unhinged rant there. You know what I mean though.
0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
Anybody who can't see the difference between what an artist does and what a clever marketer shits out is a either a fool, in marketing themselves or their cynicism has killed any belief in artistic altruism. Not everyone out there broadcasting statements, artistic or otherwise, is doing it because they want attention; Edward Bernays and his ilk found out how to hack the populace's brains by impregnating every advert with appeal to the most basic of humanity's desires, those with clear enough eyes see the need for reaction against this.
Our society is in crisis economically and culturally(incase you haven't noticed) and people like Banksy are a reaction to the fakery of the consumer capitalist world being built up around us(whether he and the rest of his kind know it or not is irrelevant, though I'd be on the side of them knowing). They art is always reactionary, provocative and usually a remix pop culture, mimicking and showing just how silly and boring the ideas and fantasies being suggested to us by those who would keep us gobbling swill at the trough really are.
0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Harper Incalculable Drunkard wrote: »I agree 100% with anti-public advertising stances. I saw a piece in a doc on Sao Paulo in Brazil where public advertising has been illegal since 2006. No billboards, no ads on taxis. Nothing. Place looked a lot cleaner, less cluttered. The people seemed perfectly fine with it and even the businesses were doing better. They had to work harder to please the customer because they relied on word of mouth so that worked out well for everybody. All's well that ends well.
My issue is with defacement of public property. I don't think anyone should do it. Just like I don't think the evil, fire-breathing multinationals should advertise on bus stops, graffiti "artists" shouldn't draw on those same bus stops. Both look like shite. It also looks like ****e when someone draws a pair of tits on an underwear ad or a pair of balls on David Beckham's chin. Makes it look like you're living in some sort of slum. Where I live (not Ireland) graffiti is a particularly bad problem. Bus stops, bins, 100 year old park benches are covered with that shite and to me it's no different from Banksy forcing his "art" on the people of Bristol. Do it on your own wall, ffs.
Heh. Bit of an unhinged rant there. You know what I mean though.
Yeah I hear ya, the streets would look a lot nicer if both corporate advertising and graffitti were not there- a hell of a lot nicer. I just can't stand tagging, those graffitti heads who compete against each other to write their name or moniker in as many places as possible around a citys streets, on trains, disused buildings, etc. It is disgusting and adds nothing.
And you are right- Banksy is a hypocrite for defacing public property and justifying it on the basis that corporations do it legally.
But I suppose that the ironic thing about Banksy and others is that when they started doing what they do if they had of approached an art gallery about having an exhibition they would have been told to take a run and jump. Nowadays mainstream art galleries are queuing up to host exhibitions by these guys- as artists they have come full circle from the streets they started on- Banksy himself is in the top 5 highest earning (living) artists in the UK- his works makes millions at auctions. Shepard Fairy (who did the Barack Obama 'Hope' mock up) is one of the highest paid in the US.
Harper Incalculable Drunkard I'm not sure if you have seen the documentary which Banksy appears in called 'Exit Through the Gift Shop'- it is packed with irony as the basis of it is a slightly mad French guy who follows street artists at night filming their work. The gas thing is as time goes on he himself decides to become a street artist even though he can't draw whatsoever. He employs over 100 graphic designers and does a ton a self publicty all around LA, calling himself 'Mr.Brainwash' The LA art set swallow the hype hook, line and sinker and in his opening exhibition he sells somewhere in the region of $2 million worth of 'art' which is all actually done by other people he employed. It really puts the whole street art thing into perspective and Banksy himself just can't stop sniggering at the irony of it all !
Anyway yeah I'd agree that it would be better if the streets were 110% ad and graffitti free. But given we all know that is never going to happen I would much rather look at a pictures like in the link below that make a statement where the artist tries to make you see an alternative perspective or even just for shock value alone than the atypical corporate messages of Vodafone, Pepsi, L'Oreal et al.
http://www.holytaco.com/25-coolest-banksy-graffiti/0 -
Advertisement
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYB0VW5x8fI
Advertisement