Kaws • MOCAD Print Edition, by 19818914 on May 31, 2019 6:23:37 GMT 1,

May 31, 2019 5:16:16 GMT 1 nobokov said:

May 30, 2019 20:22:12 GMT 1 met said:

Thank you for the response, which I found cogent and worth exploring further.

Speculation in the art world is indeed commonplace — just like the related obsession with financial value and recent auction results for pieces by sought-after artists. The markets for Banksy, Jonas Wood and KAWS are prime examples.

Imagine being in the position of somebody unfamiliar with this forum. I can picture them hesitating about posting in a few of the threads. The feverish exchanges between owners of works by certain artists occasionally read like a mutual masturbation exercise. And with aspirant-owners also joining the scrum to partake in a bit of frottage, it is clear to see how a newcomer might end up getting rubbed the wrong way.


But it's the follow-on point you identified which is even more significant:

Among the artists frequently mentioned here, differences do exist in the range of topics discussed and in the depth of those discussions.


______________


In threads about Banksy, a wide spectrum of subject areas is often covered. Some broad-brush categories:


1.  A very small handful of forum members inevitably focus their attention on the person. It's pretty much all they seem interested in.

They typically give the impression of being trolls and/or individuals with unhealthy fixations on Banksy, including his identity and whether he's a member of the band Massive Attack*. I've previously described one such member as arguably being to the artist what Carl McCoid is to Miley Cyrus*.

It's the predictability of their comments that is so tiresome. And the frustration for me is amplified because I feel this place deserves trolls of a higher quality. Where are the intelligent, witty trolls — those who aren't boring sea lions and who aren't headcases?


2.  A greater proportion of members in large part restricts its discussions to things, and money. One senses that what truly matters to these individuals is acquiring (originals, prints, posters, stickers or whatnot) and the associated costs; selling and the proceeds to be gained; and/or the market value of pieces in their collections.

Whether in relation to Banksy or any other artist referred to on the forum, such members are easy to identify:

Click their username, and then 'View this member's recent posts.' On the first page showing their last 30 posts, over two-thirds (21+) will usually pertain to buying, selling, or current / prospective pricing — as well as directly-connected topics like:

(i) the rarity and popularity of works;

(ii) how many prints from an edition are still available at source (sometimes accompanied by giddy countdowns in real time); or

(iii) what will happen after pieces that are flooding eBay eventually make their way into so-called serious collections.

As with category 1 above, the predictability of many of the comments can be dispiriting, especially when combined with their vast numbers and chronicity.


For the avoidance of doubt, transaction- and market-related posts are not problems per se. There's no denying they can be of real interest to collectors, and a pleasure to read from time to time. [For example, I find posts of this nature by lee3 consistently engaging, because his are well-crafted and often accompanied by insights and historical context.]

Rather, the issue for me is one of degree — the near-exclusive focus on these matters by a good many.

There are fewer expressions on the forum about specific artworks than about the extent to which those pieces are sought-after. In this kind of environment, the art becomes relegated. And it risks being seen as little more than a pretext for other concerns, like wealth accumulation, status enhancement or bragging rights.

I say that's regrettable. All the more so when the resulting culture transforms art enthusiasts into small-minded dullards.


3.  One advantage with Banksy is the regularity with which he allows us to discuss events. You already mentioned his street pieces and stunts. For me, the partial shredding of a framed canvas at a Sotheby's evening sale was last year's key performance art piece.

Along with your citing of the Walled Off Hotel, I would add Better Out Than In and Dismaland — less recent yet still noteworthy, including from a project management perspective. Regarding the latter event, although never really talked about, an aspect that impressed me was the curatorial role the artist very capably took on.


4.  Linked to category 3 above are the opportunities Banksy offers us to debate and squabble about ideas or concepts that may be guiding his work. How refreshing is that?

Like you, I consider these types of exchanges to be most rewarding. Ideas elevate the discourse. And on occasion, some of the exchanges here could even be described as edifying.


______________


With respect to why there are "no discussions like that happening with Jonas Wood or KAWS", there may well have been some. However, I don't recall any being of the calibre the forum sometimes achieves in connection with Banksy. This might be down to the oeuvre of each artist, or their respective fans, or a combination of both.

On Jonas Wood and KAWS threads, one senses a dearth of diversity in the comments. They're all too often about how difficult it is to acquire pieces at source (with the exception of open editions); the artists' gallery representation and the museum collections they're now in; or how their markets have exploded in recent years.

And when investor-chat commentary like this is posted by members who obviously own works by the artists, it's enough to make a reader wince.


As for conversations about the art itself, on Jonas Wood threads, they generally seem limited to:

"Oooh, that's a nice-looking pot. Can't wait to see it framed."


On KAWS threads (at least in recent months), the extent and depth of these conversations could be summed up as:

"Oooh, bright colours. I counted 10 different colours in mine, so I'm very happy. Wish I had received an 'X' though, like that other guy on Instagram. His is worth way more than cost. It actually sucks big time that I didn't get an 'X'. But don't get me wrong; I'm still happy with mine. Especially after seeing the crappier ones on eBay and the prices they're going for."


I trust everyone will forgive me for perhaps resorting to caricatures.

It took awhile for me to figure out that this forum is just for people and their many alts to generate income and prop up investments by bringing up old topics and expressing false interest to purchase prints they already have, in order to keep the artist in the fore. Has it always been like this?

A fun observation: expressing negativity towards a print or artist, quickly smokes out those who have an interest.

This forum has always been about flipping.

May 31, 2019 5:16:16 GMT 1 nobokov said:

May 30, 2019 20:22:12 GMT 1 met said:

Thank you for the response, which I found cogent and worth exploring further.

Speculation in the art world is indeed commonplace — just like the related obsession with financial value and recent auction results for pieces by sought-after artists. The markets for Banksy, Jonas Wood and KAWS are prime examples.

Imagine being in the position of somebody unfamiliar with this forum. I can picture them hesitating about posting in a few of the threads. The feverish exchanges between owners of works by certain artists occasionally read like a mutual masturbation exercise. And with aspirant-owners also joining the scrum to partake in a bit of frottage, it is clear to see how a newcomer might end up getting rubbed the wrong way.


But it's the follow-on point you identified which is even more significant:

Among the artists frequently mentioned here, differences do exist in the range of topics discussed and in the depth of those discussions.


______________


In threads about Banksy, a wide spectrum of subject areas is often covered. Some broad-brush categories:


1.  A very small handful of forum members inevitably focus their attention on the person. It's pretty much all they seem interested in.

They typically give the impression of being trolls and/or individuals with unhealthy fixations on Banksy, including his identity and whether he's a member of the band Massive Attack*. I've previously described one such member as arguably being to the artist what Carl McCoid is to Miley Cyrus*.

It's the predictability of their comments that is so tiresome. And the frustration for me is amplified because I feel this place deserves trolls of a higher quality. Where are the intelligent, witty trolls — those who aren't boring sea lions and who aren't headcases?


2.  A greater proportion of members in large part restricts its discussions to things, and money. One senses that what truly matters to these individuals is acquiring (originals, prints, posters, stickers or whatnot) and the associated costs; selling and the proceeds to be gained; and/or the market value of pieces in their collections.

Whether in relation to Banksy or any other artist referred to on the forum, such members are easy to identify:

Click their username, and then 'View this member's recent posts.' On the first page showing their last 30 posts, over two-thirds (21+) will usually pertain to buying, selling, or current / prospective pricing — as well as directly-connected topics like:

(i) the rarity and popularity of works;

(ii) how many prints from an edition are still available at source (sometimes accompanied by giddy countdowns in real time); or

(iii) what will happen after pieces that are flooding eBay eventually make their way into so-called serious collections.

As with category 1 above, the predictability of many of the comments can be dispiriting, especially when combined with their vast numbers and chronicity.


For the avoidance of doubt, transaction- and market-related posts are not problems per se. There's no denying they can be of real interest to collectors, and a pleasure to read from time to time. [For example, I find posts of this nature by lee3 consistently engaging, because his are well-crafted and often accompanied by insights and historical context.]

Rather, the issue for me is one of degree — the near-exclusive focus on these matters by a good many.

There are fewer expressions on the forum about specific artworks than about the extent to which those pieces are sought-after. In this kind of environment, the art becomes relegated. And it risks being seen as little more than a pretext for other concerns, like wealth accumulation, status enhancement or bragging rights.

I say that's regrettable. All the more so when the resulting culture transforms art enthusiasts into small-minded dullards.


3.  One advantage with Banksy is the regularity with which he allows us to discuss events. You already mentioned his street pieces and stunts. For me, the partial shredding of a framed canvas at a Sotheby's evening sale was last year's key performance art piece.

Along with your citing of the Walled Off Hotel, I would add Better Out Than In and Dismaland — less recent yet still noteworthy, including from a project management perspective. Regarding the latter event, although never really talked about, an aspect that impressed me was the curatorial role the artist very capably took on.


4.  Linked to category 3 above are the opportunities Banksy offers us to debate and squabble about ideas or concepts that may be guiding his work. How refreshing is that?

Like you, I consider these types of exchanges to be most rewarding. Ideas elevate the discourse. And on occasion, some of the exchanges here could even be described as edifying.


______________


With respect to why there are "no discussions like that happening with Jonas Wood or KAWS", there may well have been some. However, I don't recall any being of the calibre the forum sometimes achieves in connection with Banksy. This might be down to the oeuvre of each artist, or their respective fans, or a combination of both.

On Jonas Wood and KAWS threads, one senses a dearth of diversity in the comments. They're all too often about how difficult it is to acquire pieces at source (with the exception of open editions); the artists' gallery representation and the museum collections they're now in; or how their markets have exploded in recent years.

And when investor-chat commentary like this is posted by members who obviously own works by the artists, it's enough to make a reader wince.


As for conversations about the art itself, on Jonas Wood threads, they generally seem limited to:

"Oooh, that's a nice-looking pot. Can't wait to see it framed."


On KAWS threads (at least in recent months), the extent and depth of these conversations could be summed up as:

"Oooh, bright colours. I counted 10 different colours in mine, so I'm very happy. Wish I had received an 'X' though, like that other guy on Instagram. His is worth way more than cost. It actually sucks big time that I didn't get an 'X'. But don't get me wrong; I'm still happy with mine. Especially after seeing the crappier ones on eBay and the prices they're going for."


I trust everyone will forgive me for perhaps resorting to caricatures.

It took awhile for me to figure out that this forum is just for people and their many alts to generate income and prop up investments by bringing up old topics and expressing false interest to purchase prints they already have, in order to keep the artist in the fore. Has it always been like this?

A fun observation: expressing negativity towards a print or artist, quickly smokes out those who have an interest.

This forum has always been about flipping.