Compo

Graffiti

Recommended Posts

It's had a sheet of Perspexex added this afternoon?

Could it be a real Banksy? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang fire it's been defaced :Shock:

 

0_Banksy-grafitti.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That woman watching could well be the destroyer of a very nice piece of artwork that had brightened up a dull brick wall, judging by the sleeves of her jacket it seems she likes a bit of graffiti.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Miss Lizzie Marple :biggrin:

 

Here's an earlier work me & my old man did with 3 tins of paint from Focus Do It All, we took it in turns holding the ladder, still got the brushes in turps in a old mug.  

 

EkW2N_SWAAAeY9N?format=jpg&name=small

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done RR, did you do that in the dark?!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nottingham does not deserve :( 

 

Ekdupm7XgAAdbs-?format=jpg&name=small

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In an earlier post, it said a sheet of Perspex had been put over the original graffiti picture.   Does that mean it can be cleaned off?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..or put a fresh sheet on. You can see the perspex and the fixings if you zoom in. It's typical of the rabble that lives in this city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Raises the question that's been asked before, is art, or defacement of someones property? Is  the black spray paint any less 'art' than the stencil of the girl?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And why has nobody removed that scrapped cycle frame? Or is that considered art too?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Banksy has confirmed on Instagram that it’s his work and that’s great.  
Beekay, It’s assumed that the wrecked bike is part of it, the girl is hula-hooping with a bike tyre ...... not far from the old Raleigh factory too.   
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Confirmed by Banksy as one of his / hers, according to the BBC news.

 

Trouble is if no-one, or only a select few, know who Banksy is then how do we know it was the real Banksy that's confirmed it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He only ever confirms his work on his Instagram Stuart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is it that the 21st century has bred so many small minded, destructive creatures? I hesitate to call them people - they are more of a sub-human species in my books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't these destroyers of art work nothing better to do. What's the thrill of defacing something pleasurable to look at.

When we first started to see , even plants and tables etc outside bars and restaurants we thought ," they won't last long, someone is bound to pinch them or deface them"  After 50 yrs coming and going I must admit that our younger generation have a lot of respect for properties and buildings. At least in this area. The behavior of the younger ones has changed so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, nonnaB said:

destroyers of art work

 

But is it? who decides if it's 'art' and worth thousands or vandalism and worth punishment? Not all art is chocolate box pretty, Jackson Pollock springs to mind with his multicoloured paint splashes, Munch and his 'Scream' - worth millions but looks like a seven year old painted it. Mondrian, simple geometric shapes yet again worth a fortune. Tracy Emin's bed  and the most famous of all Picasso - do any of them really deserve the pretentious claptrap heaped on them?

If someone can spray paint a stencil of a girl on someones wall and get away with it, a yob must be equaly entitled to make his mark and claim it's a social comment on the human condition. Let's not forget when Bansky started he too was a yob who spray painted walls after a spell in prison.

Be interesting in court how they would decide one is art and one is not...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Debatable I suppose. If you like it , it's art. If you don't it's rubbish. I like both kinds of art IF I can understand it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Willow wilson said:

The artist puts into their work that which they feel. The observer takes away that which they need.

A cliche that takes us no closer to the answer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Brew said:

Be interesting in court how they would decide one is art and one is not...

 I doubt that art is a consideration for the court.  The question would be whether it was criminal damage.  If the owner of the wall did not give someone permission to paint it and if the painter committed the act with intent, knowing that they didn't have permission, I'd say the owner of the wall wins and the painter is probably ordered to pay compensation to have it cleaned off (it helps if someone admits to painting but a little tricky if you can't find them).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brew said:

 

 a yob must be equaly entitled to make his mark and claim it's a social comment on the human condition.

Indeed, and in its basic form and even by an untrained artist. Introduce money and status into it and the art element is a shared  consideration. But a skilful experienced artist has a way with their chosen medium and an experience of the various facets of the human condition and is able to reach into the observer's world. This would raise its value in some quarters. A child's ventures into visuals is treasured by few but the child must have imagined something and the parent saw something unique and meaningful even as it was being created, at least i did in my experiences. 

What is art? A physical form of communication from one (abstract) mind to another at best but probably slightly more effective than spoken words for some things. What's it worth. Nominally the worth is suggested by expert artists.

 It's real worth what you can get at auction.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We popped by the Banksy this afternoon, on the way to one or two car showrooms ....... mmmm, time for me to get interested/involved in new car decisions, my husband has been doing the groundwork for a few weeks so I think a decision will be imminent.  
Anyway, we never got out of the car, there were so many people hanging about near the Banksy that there was a policeman on duty controlling the crowd!! 
Didn’t buy a car either. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Art is surely just a personal opinion and judgement. Nobody is right or wrong. I like Banksy's material and think he's clever and original, but I don't understand why people will pay millions for Van Gogh or Cezanne or Matisse or Picasso. I don't rate them at all.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Brew said:

If someone can spray paint a stencil of a girl on someones wall and get away with it, a yob must be equaly entitled to make his mark and claim it's a social comment on the human condition.

 

Equally entitled to make his mark as a social comment but not to deface the work of another. That's the difference between art and vandalism. The yob/yobess who defaced the picture is not entitled to do this - his/her mark should be alongside if it is to be a comment and not to be considered wanton destruction.

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, no-one is allowed to make his mark as a social comment on another person's property without permission - that is criminal damage.

 

Whether graffiti is art or vandalism is entirely subjective, depends on one's point of view but most will regard it as the latter. In this specific case, as Banksy is an artist whose work fetches high prices, the owner of the wall would probably be much more likely to consider themselves extremely fortunate rather than take umbrage  .... their wall has suddenly increased considerably in value!

 

Anyone who subsequently damages the now more valuable wall is guilty of an even greater level of criminal damage. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...