And visit http://banksy.co.uk/ and to follow Banksy's October NYC tour,
you can go to this interactive map: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/10/interactive-map-banksy-tour-of-nyc.html?mid=twitter_nymag or keep updated here: http://animalnewyork.com/
Don't you love it?
6 comments:
Hello to all in the "English Room"!
What do you make of the mayor of New York calling Bansky's work vandalism? Do you agree to some extent?
Just this morning, I learned about the wildly popular temporary street-art project "Tour 13" in Paris...
As both exhibits have drawn enormous crowds, I think a comparison is very fitting and brings about some interesting perspectives/questions. I know it made me think about this kind of art differently!
All my best,
Erin in New York
Speaking of satirical art, maybe you'll like this collective of artists: http://www.maentis.com/
Cécile
Thanks for sharing, Cécile!
Erin
You're welcome, Erin! Their art is similar to Banksy's graffitis.
Vandalism involves a form of nuisance. I don't think Banksy's work hurts anyone but Reality. I think he turns cities into a free and gigantic museum. This map is a brillant idea! (and I don't even bring up the fact that I feel like a Goonie looking for treasure chests!)
Cécile
Hi again, Cécile!
I appreciate your perspective. In the spirit of debate, I'll raise this issue:
Bansky doesn't own the spaces he uses as a blank canvas. So how dearly do we (or should we) value private property?
We might ask oursrselves if this form of expression is a right. What if everyone who had an opinion about our society did the same thing? Where do we draw the line between self-expression and disrespect for the property of other people?
The counterargument may be that the paintings add value and beauty; they are improvements, not damage.
Unfortunately, due to Bansky's celebrity status, people are drawn to his work to destroy and/or steal it as much as to admire it. Fights and scuffles have broken out on the streets as other "taggers" try to ruin his art. Bansky has moved on; he is not left to manage the nasty aftermath. It is the property owner who must often face a difficult (and sometimes dangerous) situation.
Can we still say that it's not a "nuisance"? In his obscurity, doesn't Bansky flee "reality" -- the real (if ugly) reactions of real people?
At least he's making us think about it! :)
All best wishes,
E.
Hi again :)
Your questions are really pertinent!
My point of view is mainly influenced by my interest in Banksy's art and messages. I like his way of thinking and his artwork in general so it's easier for me to accept his "artistic invasion" than others, but you're absolutely right! Everybody has a voice and if someone wanted to draw something I don't like or don't support on my building's facade, I would probably not welcome it the same way.
Actually if everybody drew everywhere, the world would look like a Pollock painting! The real question is: Are we ready to become epileptic? Do our eyes deserve this experiment?
The other day, I burnt my own eyes by drawing a pool full of M&Ms. The message was strong: "let's eat more colorful food", it was my own drawing, and yet I didn't approve it. If I had made it on a building instead of a small piece of paper, a whole population would be blind by now!
More seriously, I didn't count the collateral consequences. I always forget that people are good at destroying/stealing everything. Indeed, in this case this is clearly a nuisance! The ""funny"" thing (double quotation marks are necessary) is that troublemakers maintain Banksy's content without knowing it. We can say: "Isn't Banksy one too?"... Probably, but I prefer people who fight with spray paint cans instead of guns.
I'm not sure to have good answers but you definitively have good questions! :)
I'm early, but: Merry Christmas! :)
Cécile
Post a Comment