Following on form my earlier post about Banksy's exhibition in Bristol, I missed a major point which debates street artists becoming actual artists, in doing so do they devalue their work in a bid to respond to consumer demand. A similar defacing incident happend in New York a few years ago as a street artist moved from street to exhibition.Banksy's exhibition opened on Friday and in the above case, 24hours later, graffiti appeared over the top of an original. In Bristol, one of his more famous works of art on a sexual health clinic receives the same attention. Depicting a woman's lover hanging out the window as her husband returns home, a paintball shooting defaced the image. Ironic that a graffiti artist is being defaced with more graffiti. Origionally when the painting was found, 97% of residents around Bristol voted to keep it, now, after his exhibition, is it only other street artists that are cross, or residents too?
I used to write in London and competition can be pretty fierce. You had to be really careful about what you wrote and importantly who you wrote over. A writer I knew had his work gone over by scrawl so I did a big piece over it. He didn't know he had already been gone over but within the week I had ten of my major pieces lined. I can completely understand why a lot of writers would see Banksy as a sell out. I don't think he could ever return to street art after all the money he's making off the exhibitions. Any one else got any thoughts? Would be interesting to see what other people think. Great post.
ReplyDelete