Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Banksy could be forced to reveal his indentity

He is so shit, isn’t he?
Why do people lose their minds over work that a GCSE art teacher would mark down as truistic and vapid?
He’s had his moments but telling the Guardian your little animal stencils were about bringing joy to everyone blah blah - give me a break. These seem very bland. Guess he’s getting old.
 
From that article
While Banksy’s new menagerie has been springing up, the rescue boat the artist funds has been working to help endangered asylum seekers to reach safety. The M V Louise Michel, a high-speed lifeboat, patrols migrant routes in the Mediterranean.
Hmmm, I didn't know he did this. Gone up in my estimation. Plus I actually do think the art he does is interesting and (not financially, fuck that) valuable.
 
Does anyone else suspect he's stealing/defacing his own artwork to keep in the public eye? the beeb always breathlessly reports such incidents.
 
Does anyone else suspect he's stealing/defacing his own artwork to keep in the public eye? the beeb always breathlessly reports such incidents.
He obviously knows by now the stories each placement generates. The publicity each will get.
So you’d think he’d only place works where charities or something would benefit.
Yet he doesn’t.

So despite his supposed ‘social messages’ embedded in his art and his ‘secret’ identity… he’s just a money grubbing, attention seeking whore like many other cunts.
 
He obviously knows by now the stories each placement generates. The publicity each will get.
So you’d think he’d only place works where charities or something would benefit.
Yet he doesn’t.

So despite his supposed ‘social messages’ embedded in his art and his ‘secret’ identity… he’s just a money grubbing, attention seeking whore like many other cunts.


But Turner, ground breaking and arguably the only truly world class British plastic artist made a fucking fortune not just from sales of his work but more from licencing prints. He was a multimillionaire in today’s money.
 
But Turner, ground breaking and arguably the only truly world class British plastic artist made a fucking fortune not just from sales of his work but more from licencing prints. He was a multimillionaire in today’s money.
The critics didn’t like him so he sort of rebelled by going ‘pop’.

Whereas for all his rebellion Wanky really does court the art scene.
 
He obviously knows by now the stories each placement generates. The publicity each will get.
So you’d think he’d only place works where charities or something would benefit.
Yet he doesn’t.

So despite his supposed ‘social messages’ embedded in his art and his ‘secret’ identity… he’s just a money grubbing, attention seeking whore like many other cunts.


Banksy Raised Over $40 Million for Charity Throughout his Career

Money grubbing indeed. How much should he have given to charity?

There's a Gromit phrase that comes to mind here ...
 



Money grubbing indeed. How much should he have given to charity?

There's a Gromit phrase that comes to mind here ...
And yet he could be choosing to do this all the time…

 
Right winger: why isn't left winger giving money to charity?
Response: He is, fucking shitloads as it happens
Right winger: why isn't he doing it all the time? And he's only doing it to avoid tax
Response: Fuck off Gromit.
Only problem with that is I’m an Eat the Rich socialist and Banksy is Rich with a capital R.
Watch Black Mirror episode Hang the DJ to understand Banksy. He the ‘acceptable rebel’ dancing for his masters.

I support abolishing charity tax breaks and replacing them with wealth taxes. Followed by the government actually doing its job properly with that cash so there is no need for charities… which are invariably run by a posho who couldn’t get a real job so their family have pulled a few strings and got them to head a charity. Syphoning resource with unnecessary overhead.

Very right wing of me.
 
I support abolishing charity tax breaks and replacing them with wealth taxes. Followed by the government actually doing its job properly with that cash so there is no need for charities… which are invariably run by a posho who couldn’t get a real job so their family have pulled a few strings and got them to head a charity. Syphoning resource with unnecessary overhead.
Why complain that he doesn't give to charities then? A bit strange complaining that he doesn't give to charities but when you find that he does give to charities complaining that's the sign of a money grubbing c***, too.

Just from that article: 16+ million to University Hospital Southampton (UHS). Plus homeless charities in Bristol. Plus the Jungle refugee camp in Calais to build refugee shelters. Plus Help Refugees charity. I don't know those charities but I hope you've got proof that they're run by poshoes who couldn’t get a real job so their family have pulled a few strings and got them to head a charity.
 
Last edited:
I like many of the works of Banksy.

I can’t draw/paint, and admire the skill of people who can.

However, the works of Banksy are not the product of great skill. Many people could easily produce similar work. Such works should not be worth large amounts of money.

It was reported that London Zoo was planning to put a protective Perspex screen over a recent work by Bansky. To do so would, in my opinion, be a stupid move. It makes sense to put a screen over paintings that are the product of great and rare skill, such as Van Gogh’s Sunflowers, but Banksy’s graffiti is street art. If it begins to fade with time, then the artist, or indeed someone else who is capable, can touch it up.

The claim that recent works of Banksy appeared in London without the knowledge of anyone else is very dubious. You can paint something on a shop in densely-populated part of London without the owner’s permission, with no-one else knowing that you are doing it?
 
Back
Top Bottom