Banksy Mischief

travelover

travelover

Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
14,328
I was highly amused by the mysterious Banksy's trick. He hates having his artwork sold and this painting had a poison pill.


After the gavel fell Friday at Sotheby's auction house in London, Banksy's Girl with Balloon was reduced to shreds -- another apparent act in the disruptive career of the anonymous British graffiti artist. The iconic image of a girl reaching out for a red, heart-shaped balloon, sold for $1.4 million. Moments later, a shredder hidden inside the "artist's frame" started its work and the art "self-destructed," according to a news release from Sotheby's
Click to expand...


https://www.cnn.com/style/article/banksy-painting-self-destructs-auction-trnd/index.html
 
Given the publicity, people will be willing to pay far more for it shredded.
 
Don’t you think this was a stunt that everyone involved was in on? I love that the shredding mechanism was made with Exacto knife blades—brilliant.
 
It's only partially shredded.


I'm left wondering if the partial shredding was intentional or a malfunction.


Apparently there was an agent at the auction that had a remote control. That control seems certain to have a "start" button, so likely also could easily have a "stop" button.


It would have had a larger effect to have the strips flutter to the floor, which makes me think it was a malfunction. OTOH, artists have big egos, so complete destruction might have been too much to bear. More will likely be revealed.
 
The artist also posted the Picasso quote - "The urge to destroy is also a creative urge."
Click to expand...


I found another -
Every act of creation is first an act of destruction. Pablo Picasso
 
It makes Sotheby's look pretty bad, unless they were in on it.

Some days I wish I had the kind of imagination some of these artists have. This was pretty well done.
 
I took it to be some sort of magic trick where the real art wasn't destroyed. That frame was way too thick not to make anyone suspicious. I'm sure Sotheby had Xray'd it.
I remember an old trick where you'd put a dollar into a small wringer and a tenner came out the other end.
 
Who eats the $1.4m loss? Is the new owner stuck with it?
 
Popeye said:
Who eats the $1.4m loss? Is the new owner stuck with it?
Click to expand...
It was still in the care of Sotheby's. So... time to read the fine print.
 
Seems like the incident happened between the auction and when the buyer would have to pay for it. So Sotheby's would not be able to deliver the exact item bought, and either the sale would be nullified, or the buyer would accept the damaged item. At least that's how I see it.
 
He does have an agent that sells his work. This piece is worth more money now according to news stories that I've read due to the "prank".
 
Couple of things:


1. Sothby's had to have known about it. They have experts on staff that would have realized the frame was rigged due to just the weight and size of it for that artwork and disassembled and then reassembled it. The New York Times stated it was the last piece in the auction, and was strangely hung on a wall instead of displayed on the usual podium/pedestal an artwork of that size would have been accustomed to be placed upon.



2. The performance art part will only serve to increase the value of the artwork. The buyer likely will be thrilled to own a first-ever Banksy performance/art witnessed publicly at auction, and the fact that the piece was only partially destroyed makes it even more intriguing. It can still be displayed and admired and likely increase in value. Remember, there are artworks in museums made from trash and Dadaist works like toilets and telephones that are worth millions... a partially destroyed painting by a infamous artist that self destructed? That's thrills and chills to the art world.
 
FrankiesGirl said:
1. Sothby's had to have known about it. They have experts on staff that would have realized the frame was rigged due to just the weight and size of it for that artwork and disassembled and then reassembled it. The New York Times stated it was the last piece in the auction, and was strangely hung on a wall instead of displayed on the usual podium/pedestal an artwork of that size would have been accustomed to be placed upon.
Click to expand...

+1 Agreed. (see my post #9 that Sotheby's had to have Xray'd it)
 
splitwdw said:
He does have an agent that sells his work. This piece is worth more money now according to news stories that I've read due to the "prank".
Click to expand...

Right.

"Hates having his art sold" Ha!
 
JoeWras said:
I'm coming around to this thought too.
Click to expand...

Yep, see my post #4. Everyone knew what was going on except maybe some of the random bidders. They probably all signed a nondisclosure ahead of time. That crazy art world, creating the plot for a caper movie.
 
Not a huge fan of Banksy, and it might be coloring my comments, but I never understood art pricing. $1.4M for a living artists drawing makes no sense to me.
Agree Sothbys had to be in on the gag or at least suspicious. Also agree I doubt he gets too upset over being able to sell his work for millions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom