Urban Art Association

Is there a word describing someone who always takes an alternative view for the sake of arguing?

Or is it just an attention thing?

I am saying exactly what I said

Is there a word describing someone who always ignores the topic to try and Point blame on someone else?

Or is it just an attention thing?

So you going to comment on the topic or just post emojis all day! Lol

It's a cool idea, and a nifty trick, but definitely not worth thousands of dollars/pounds. Yeah if I was there I probably would've followed suit and then framed it. Gotta give the guy some credit though, that's pretty clever.

PLOT TWIST: this is bansky selling a bansky original. (Probably not but it would be funny).

Ha!!

Daddy G is holding the piece whilst Del Naja takes the photo

Hadn't actually thought of it that way.

I just assumed it was like using silly puddy or something like it to peel an image off a magazine like I used to do when I was 6.

Why would you need to fake this? The crowns will never be dry given the materials used for this part of the artwork, so if you really do think this is cool or resourceful, there is nothing to stop you doing this yourself, aside from maybe self respect/personal standards/love for art.

The crowns appear to be drawn on with oil stick. Stays waxy for ages.

Not just "practically", but actually pulling the oil pastel off the wall.

The Basquiat crowns were deliberately created in a visibly-thick, heavy manner, to stand out from the rest of the piece. They have a different texture, with an almost three-dimensional quality.

Now, why does anyone feel it's acceptable to remove layers? In the process of applying pressure and rubbing down on the crowns with paper, the oil pastel's appearance is altered. It gets flattened, minor smudging results, and the precision or definition of the art is decreased.

That's a scummy thing to do. So I'm left confused by many posts on this thread.

It isn't clear why a street piece should be treated with less respect than a gallery work by the same artist. If a freshly painted Banksy canvas were in front of me, the thought of rubbing some newspaper on it would not enter my mind. I'm therefore curious about the distinction some members are making here:

Does anyone believe the transient nature of a street painting justifies acting in a manner which accelerates its demise?

Or perhaps the problem lies in the fact that work on the street belongs to all of us — that it's often perceived as collectively (not privately) owned. Is the tragedy of the commons also applicable to street art?




Nicely summed up.

Not another

I'm bewildered by your confusion about street art pieces.

Street art graffiti should be the same as a gallery work? that is the complete opposite of the reason street art became popular and what makes it so great.

I think people think just because its street art that you can do what you like with it. SUre you can...

If someone drew a cock on something I had painted I wouldnt think its street art so its fine. I'd be think what the point in that? If someone painted over it, grazed it, cleaned it off so be it. But just defacing or ripping it off, that's not cricket.

If the banksy had been painted over, cleaned off or just damaged, fair enough.

I was disappointed to find this when I got to see one of Ernest Zacharevic's most iconic pieces, in Penang, street work or otherwise.