Tuesday, February 19, 2013

How can you put a price on the revolution?

Here's an interesting article about Banksy, calling him an "overrated purveyor of art-lite." And by interesting, I mean stupid. It's interesting how stupid this article truly is when you analyze it for even a remote second, if you know anything at all about Banksy.

Banksy is an artist who only exists in the eye of the public. This is literally true. There is no one called Banksy – it is, famously, the pseudonym of an artist who wishes to remain anonymous.
Sounds to me, then, that the artist has no interest in being a famed, rich artist at all. So what do we do, then, but analyze how weak the artist's fame and cost value of his/her works are? Would the article writer be dumb enough to do that? You betcha! Talking about how the art is only art when it's being talked about, unlike other art (ahem, irony alert!), the author then says:
Banksy is not an artist in that authentic way . . . Banksy, as an artist, stops existing when there is no news about him.
So I guess Banksy is a hell of an artist right now, huh?

Right now he is a story once again, because a "mural" by him (street art and graffiti no longer suffice to describe his pricey works) has been removed from a wall and put up for auction. Next week the story will be forgotten, and so will Banksy – until the next time he becomes a headline.
Pricey? Do you think Banksy put the price on the art? Banksy (hereby referred to as "he" even though "he" is anonymous) simply placed the art on the wall. Others took it down and sold it for pricey amounts. So even if you consider art as valuable by price, apparently Banksy is successful there as well. Why? Because Banksy IS talked about. But somehow that disappears for this author when it's not being discussed (which it IS being discussed, right now, by YOU!)

Banksy's art has no life as art, no aesthetic or even anti-aesthetic effect, no content beyond the trite, no personality. It is just a brand: effective in marketing terms, occasionally pithy as propaganda, but with nothing to fill the heart and mind.

 It is art. It has life. You just admitted that you breathe life into it by discussing it. Banksy's aesthetic is known by anybody who knows Banksy's art. It is mimicked and loved by many, so that when you see this aesthetic, you know it's either Banksy or inspired by Banksy. THAT is its personality, as revolutionary. By the way, all Banksy cares aboutu is that revolution (which you called "propaganda") and the point of art IS to make that kind of point. Here the point is rich in layers, because not only is it capturing the zeitgeist, but it also is showing how people are so fucking stupid that they miss the point when they worry about money over purpose:

I want art that is physically and intellectually and emotionally real . . .  Great art burns in the imagination; Banksy fizzes mildly in some other, less important part of the mind. 
Just because you forget it... doesn't mean it fizzes. After all, it sold, didn't it? Want something emotionally real, well look no further, you dipshit. You are the very thing "he" is painting against. He captured you perfectly.