Urban Art Association

ouch

someone overdosed on serious pills,it took you a long time to compose all that. My advice would be dont buy one.

yup, me too,
i think prints deconstucted the theory very well, & at the end of it all, its a very poor image.

Hello will1,

I generally do put some time and effort into drafting my posts. You can see that from my previous posts, including my earlier criticism of your bogus eBay auction and how it wasted the time of genuine bidders.

Given this is a public forum, I believe very strongly that people have the right to express themselves freely, openly and without unnecessary censorship.

[That is the reason I harp on ad nauseum about the childish and pointless censoring of the word 'WallK andy'. It is in no way an attack on how this forum is run generally, but rather an attempt to emphasise that such censorship is unjustified and, more importantly, unhelpful because it encourages a divisive "us and them" mentality between forums which does absolutely no favours for the street art scene.]

With the freedom mentioned above comes responsibility, so I try to ensure that my opinions are expressed in a balanced manner after taking into consideration the various different possible perspectives. When I don't like artwork, I consider it my duty to the artist and to others on this forum to explain why (to the extent I am able to articulate those reasons).

As referred to in my post on RacketUp's Clinton/Kim/Stalin piece, I believe there is also a responsibility that comes with being an artist. That includes the artist taking into consideration the impact his art may have, in particular the harm it could do to other artwork, artists and the causes he may support.

Thank you for your sound and wise advice. I shall no doubt follow it. However, despite my dislike of RacketUp's piece, I remain open-minded and welcome different points of view. For this reason, I am keen on hearing what RacketUp has to say about his or her work.

Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

very good

Hello rudecopper,

I should once again stress that this is not a criticism about the running of Banksy.info generally. My concern is purely about the exercise of unnecessary and unhelpful censorship.

In response to your question and in all seriousness, regardless of the circumstances, in Silky's position I would never consider censoring the word 'WallK andy'.

Firstly, I believe it is in the interest of all forum members to be encouraged to seek information and advice from as many different sources as possible. This is for their own continuing education. It also makes them less vulnerable to being defrauded by fakes on the market, or fooled by false "this piece is fake" claims made by those who wish to put off the competition. The interest of forum members is higher than and overrides the petty disputes or squabbles Silky may have had with any members of another forum.

Secondly, I would not wish to be perceived as childish. I would therefore do everything in my power to not behave in such a manner, regardless of how tempting it was. If I was the Administrator of a forum dedicated to Banksy, I would be highly embarrassed about being seen to exercise unnecessary censorship since this truly is the antithesis of what Banksy and the whole street art scene is about.

Thirdly, and as mentioned in my previous post, censoring the word 'WallK andy' is unhelpful because it encourages a divisiveness between forums which harms the street art scene. It is clear that this censorship simply spurs on the very criticisms you refer to instead of helping to smooth things over. Rather than addressing and resolving matters, censorship actually aggravates and perpetuates the problem. It is therefore completely counterproductive.

Consequently, the only people who benefit from this continuing censorship are those who see that it suits their personal agenda and is to their advantage to promote an "us and them" mentality between the forums.

It comes down to priorities. For the Administrator of Banksy.info, what should take priority? His private interests or the interests of all forum members and the street art scene? In Silky's position, all things being considered, I would chose the latter and I would see it as my responsibility to do so.

-----------------------------

Now - back to the original subject of this thread.

RacketUp - I look forward to hearing your thoughts on your Clinton/Kim/Stalin piece.

silky come off it, it is not crap and you know it, you are simply trying to be dismissive of valid points being raised. Feel free to do what you what, lock the thread, point attention elsewhere but kiki is raising valid points and you’ve lost valuable members as a result. The forum is great but there are some serious control issues such as censorship that needs to be addressed. Why is wall k a n d y banned anyway? Simply childish.

hello kiki,
do you not fully read peoples posts prior to replying?

'i agree with you in principle that it is purile to censor the WK word'

i think in your desperate attempt to occupy some percieved moral highground, you are missing the main point that nobody is that interested, look at the interest your posts on this matter generate, virtually non-existent,
everybody knows where WK is, assuming everybody knows about the aggresive nature WK has had with silky's forum, they probably sympathise, you steamroller over this point in your normal condescending manner, but there is no escaping the fact that without the provocation, there would not have been the retaliation, surely this is the origin of the 'divisiveness ' that you mention?
Once again, i would state that i am opposed to any form of censorship, but it does'nt stop me from reviewing the situation with an arbitary eye, & trying to arrive at the fairest conclusion.

Its your forum Silky and you are free to do what you want with it. All I will say is I miss the input of certain artists and former members of this site who contributed a lot and helped me and a lot of other people.

wow !

well let me explain what the image that is distressing everyone so intently means. Most of you in this thread live in the UK. Well boys, sentiment in the US about Hillary (for some) is the evil she has deeply rooted. If given the opportunity, she would (in one fair swoop) turn our free country into one of Stalin era Soviet Union, or Jong North Korea, and your country would see an influx of American immagrancy. So when I place her next to two dictators, and give her the role of the patriarch, I was trying to say that what they're doing/did is/was child-play, compared for what she has in store for us (in America). Looking in her face you can see the Uh-ohh, look out kind of expression.

Now to address some of the dis-chord by some of you. Someone said it saddens you- well, sweety sometimes art brings about feelings of sadness, longing, & dysphoria, it doesn't all have to be uplifting and fun. I wanted to make something that people made comments (like the ones here) about. The market is flooded with images now of naked chicks bending over, disney characters, remakes of warhol, and generally things that mean absolutely d**k. I would never sign my name to anything that didn't evoke strong emotion, and I think its damn time some political art with someones real emotion came out.

The images represents how I feel, thats it. Some people get the same feeling, and when they do they give me my +1, and purchase a print. For everyone else, I'll do some research and start putting goofy's face in Warhol's self portrait, maybe then I'll sell one!

I guess it all just comes down to how you look at it

Is it saying what the US would be like that with Hillary? Or is it taking the mickey of people thinking it would be like that?

I think you can just see it in whatever way suits you ;D

Jesus!


Stalin & Kim Jong-Il are puppies compared to the embodiment of evil that is Hilary Clinton?




What a fucking bitch!

I'm really glad that you explained your politics to me Racketup. So Hilary Clinton is a socialist. Heaven forbid. Next you will be telling us that she is a liberal too