Wtf? "Better Out Than In" is a stupid title. Please restore the original title, "Banksy sells original artwork for $60; valued at $750k". It's meaningful.
/me wishes mod edits were logged with their username so they can be held accountable for stupid title edits like this.
explanation for the overzealous mods: better out than in is the title of banksy's residency in new york, not of this specific piece. you've changed an accurate title to an inaccurate one.
This is just flatly untrue here, and arguable on other networks. I get tired of the idea that each single individual is owed direct say in the features and behaviors of networks on the Internet. I think it's the same sentiment that makes users trash apps that are crashing ONLY for them, even when the owners of said apps reach out to explain the problem.
If your are all interested in Banksy I'd urge you to watch a film that he accidentally was forced to make about Street Art and himself, well let's say because the original Director...well you will see. It's called Exit Through The Gift Shop, I watched on Netflix.
"I've always been a fan of Banksy's work. Especially the work he did at the dividing wall on both sides in the West Bank and Israel."
And this is why I roll my eyes a little when people deride Banksy (not necessarily on HN - rather in face to face discussions) as boring artistically, politically, or as some kind of a sell-out.
His works use the environment they're placed in to great effect (e.g. Bethlehem), use props (higher risk, more planning required, more interest generated) and are messages rather than trademarks (e.g. King Robbo).
And when someone drops the tired line that he copies others like Blek Le Rat; when you've had a go at making a stencil you quickly realise that you're limited by the medium (stencils can convey only so much detail), thus similarities arise. It's the message that's important, not the piece itself.
According to _Banging Your Head Against a Brick Wall_ he came up with the idea of using stencils when he was hiding from the police and saw stencilled letters sprayed on the bottom of a truck.
>If your are all interested in Banksy I'd urge you to watch a film that he accidentally was forced to make about Street Art and himself...
Maybe. That's the beauty of the movie. While he and the filmmakers insist it's a "real" movie, it could easily have been a hoax. Which belies a deeper meaning.
This is the beauty of the performative documentary. It transcends the limitations of using film to document and as a use for truth. It works at a more ambiguous level and forces the audience to question rather than just learn, in this case the questions could be about the value of art, perception, and marketing.
exit is a great film, i think it paints banksy as an ass, the five minutes of 'life, remote control' was mind blowing, even despite the derision with which it is presented, and to think banksy watched that and thought, 'i have make my own movie because this is trash and i can make a good movie' seems like a narcissistic dick move,
plus the anonymity made sense when it was illegal... but now it plays like a gimmick when people tear down walls of buildings to sell of work attributed to banksy, or the banksy collective,
i agree, though for me, without his west bank work i would completely write the guy off
it is called, Graffiti Wars, and is about Robbo the UKs original tag celebrity, also has a segment about blek le rat who, depending on your loyalties, banksy is an inferior derivative of or who is banksy's muse or mentor or inspiration
Thanks for the video.
I feel a little conflicted on my feelings towards Banksy.
But I'm not really that invested in him or anyone else. It's just human behaviour I guess.
I'm not sure how to feel about Banksy and his war with Robbo. I feel for Robbo, that dude just had the worst luck.(I have the issue to).
I find that much more amazing because you can hear how amazing Joshua Bell is as you walk by. You wouldn't hear it and say "that guy must be faking". It's common for NYC street vendors to sell art that is a copy of a more famous work, and there's no way to tell by looking.
Is it more amazing? I doubt I could tell the difference between an amazing violinist and a competent one.
That may change given even an hour comparing between some great players and those that aren't as good at some time in my life, but I've never had that hour.
There is no way to tell the difference in a subway station, even for an instrument as loud as a violin. Moreover, no one goes to the subway to listen to music.
If you're into this kind of music, you could tell, sure. He begin playing one of the hardest to master solo violin pieces of the repertoire. If I saw someone playing Bach's Chaconne on the street, I'd stop right away. There's no way street musicians would be able to play it like he did. Well, about a thousand people passed by, and seven stopped to listen. 0.7% of the sample isn't that bad. Plus, he made 50 bucks in less than an hour.
Yeah that's the qualm I've always had with that 'experiment' in a subway you're on your way to do something else, usually on a time crunch. Add on the noise and the fact that most people couldn't tell an amazing concert level performer from a simply good performer and the result is foregone.
I'm not saying I would have stopped, because I don't often, but I could tell. I have neighbors who are very into this sort of thing and from the few hours of exposure I've gotten through them, I would have known immediately that this was no average performance.
Also a violin as expensive as the one he was playing sounds pretty great in any environment.
I would like to know where this $750K number is coming from. Generally Banksy originals of this kind are priced closer to low five-figures, but if someone has inside knowledge here please share.
I collect street art as my hobby and Banksy originals are much, much higher than low 5 figures for an original. Usually it's that amount of money for a print edition run of 150/200.
That said it is a supply/demand game and these aren't as intricate or interesting as his other pieces.
They might be pieces collectors have seen before, but on the other hand they're crucial parts of a one off performance piece, and I'd bet that adds value for collectors.
Wow if his stand was near MOMA I probably walked right by it yesterday without noticing... I usually just ignore vendors around the park because 99% of the stuff being sold in that area is mass produced crap that has no value but to extract money from tourists.
Well, also...he's messing with the people who value his stuff at ridiculous prices, but can't pick it out of a lineup.
This is great not because it was anonymous (that was just a requirement -- if it weren't, he'd have been swamped by idiots), but because it illustrates the fundamental absurdity of the art "scene". It's a nice bit of mockery.
If you listen to his audio commentaries (most of his pieces in http://www.banksyny.com/ have a commentary on the page), he pokes fun at himself and at pretentious commentaries that often accompany art pieces.
It's a cool experiment but not altogether surprising right? The provenance of a piece of artwork, and other rare goods, is arguably more important than the art itself. Especially in the case of artwork which is easily reproducible and copied.
If you think that's idiotic then ask yourself if you were given the opportunity to buy the first original Apple 1 or an exact replica, how much more would you be willing to pay over the replica? If the amount is greater than zero, then you're admitting that you're really buying an experience and set of emotional states in addition to a physical good.
"If the amount is greater than zero, then you're admitting that you're really buying an experience and set of emotional states in addition to a physical good."
Absolutely, and I think that's the message being conveyed by Banksy. In a similar project he erected pieces in undisclosed locations throughout the English countryside - their existence only documented in pictures on his website. That way money is removed from the equation while the message remains.
I feel like no matter what you are doing, you are buying experience and emotional states. The point is the cause of these particular emotional states is kind of silly.
I think, and I am not an expert by far, that this just shows what the market value of those art pieces are when removed from their context. You won't pay more than $30-60 for it unless you are told otherwise by someone of authority - an art critic or a market of affluent and competing buyers motivated by various reasons. There is also the fact that he did it in NY, where $60 is acceptable to many buyers. The sales would have been diffirent in rural Alabama or New Delhi.
and the best part: he doesn't make any mention of identifying characteristics of the "100% authentic" pieces he was selling. He's just given every banksy rip-off a huge boost in credibility, and destroyed the resale market for his own work.
Authenticating the provenance of Banksy stuff has always been a tough ask. The only way to definitively verify if streetart is genuine is to wait for it appear on his website, but for prints/canvases etc. he runs his own verification service [0].
Everyone who bought a piece is featured in that video. If you're going to buy one of these, you should probably make sure it's from one of those people.
I love it. This is like the Sci Fi novel (Heinlein I think, Lazarus Long) where I learnt that for the bank which issues the money, money really is just paper.
This is from The Tale of The Adopted Daughter, which appears in Time Enough for Love. It's a really beautiful piece and the ending gets me every single time.
This is by no means a quantitative study, but I live in the U.S. (in a fly-over state, none the less), have very little connection to the arts and every friend I can think of, off the top of my head, knows who banksy is.
It's obviously a pretty self-selected population, and I mean, I haven't formally surveyed all of my friends, but there you have it, for what it's worth.
I like Banksy, but there's no way my mom knows who he is, which is the important thing. There are more "my moms" in the U.S. than there are "your friends", in other words.
That's true, and like I said, none of this is a quantitative assessment.
I think phrasing is that way is misleading, though, there are more "my friends" than "my mom" even though they each have a "my mom."
I would wager that the sum total of all twenty and thirty somethings that know of banksy is pretty substantial. That said, it's definitely not a household name. I'm just wondering if 98% is a great guestimate.
It's all wild speculation, though and kind of immaterial
Actually my parents sent me an email last week with links to Banksy's work :) (also, they are French, not American, so it's not a very useful test regardless)
Like most things, just getting people to talk about him will raise his profile. Being mentioned on national TV and the network news doesn't hurt either.
That said, I must confess my ignorance as I'm unaware of why Banksy is relevant. I don't mean high level ignorance, as I have googled around and I get the general idea of his works and some of the social issues his works relate to. What I mean is I'm unaware of how he became relevant in pop culture. Does anyone here know?
Banksy's wikipedia article[1] doesn't particularly spell it out. Did his first works show up in a particularly public area in response to a poignant event and the British media noticed it? Did his work catch on organically?
I suggest you just get one of his books and look at the art for a while. He's been doing his thing for a long time and has built up a following. I've been a fan for years.
Banksy is relevant because most gallery art is crap. Take that as your starting point. If you don't understand that, without having to research it, you won't get Banksy.
Banksy is not relevant to 'pop' culture, he was famous as an underground artist. Pop culture consumes anything (like the internet) that has social currency, regardless of whether or not it is relevant to pop culture per se.
I'm a fan of Banksy's work. But a huge part of it's appeal at this point goes beyond a visceral response to the piece and gets wrapped up in social currency. "Come see my stencil art" doesn't really pull like "you see my new Banksy?"
That's actually not even a statement about Bansky, in truth, it's about the way the art world has evolved in general.
It's interesting to compare this to the Joshua Bell (live) 'performance' cited in @mjn's comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6544810) considering that Banksy generally makes stencil art. I suppose the performance here was not about the art products at all.
That's revenue. Those large canvases he's selling his 'spray art' on aren't exactly cheap, especially for the larger ones. Also you're going to be paying NYC prices for your food and transportation. But yeah overall, he didn't do too badly.
I don't care about Banksy either and don't feel to despondent having known it was right there, its the kind of crap I'd just walk past every other day of the week. The question does beg though why the hell this is on the front page of HN (and how much was actually sold? I'm guessing not a lot!). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LP5-AjCCNw
I dumped a lot more than that at Comiccon on people with actual talent (non derivative works). Banksy is a very strange thing that I really don't understand at all however I'm glad for him that he knows how to capitalize. Is the mindless kowtowing to rat stencils really just a tip of the hat to those without talent but a distinct political advantage? I can understand how some people would be into that, given the industry we're in.
Banksy is probably here because he's sort of a mystery, it seems that no one knows his true identity even after like 20 years.
Most of his work is illegally painted or pasted onto public walls and he hasn't been caught yet.
This "installment" is ironic because his art was sold on the cheap as if it were knock offs, like basically everything else sold on NY streets.
His style isn't entirely original but if it seems tired it's probably from seeing his imitators. Searching ebay for Banksy and excluding his books turns up 100,000 results, all of which appear to be ripoffs, bootlegs and tag spam.
The point is he was selling his own work as if they were cheap knockoffs, this certainly was not capitalizing on his fame. If he wanted to auction his art at a much higher price he could have. I think this is more like a performance art, think of the selling "knockoffs" that are actually originals and worth far more than $60 as a performance.
/me wishes mod edits were logged with their username so they can be held accountable for stupid title edits like this.