Pattycakes
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,379
Likes โข 423
June 2007
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by Pattycakes on Oct 6, 2018 17:36:09 GMT 1, Look at Ollie Barker as he's hammering down the lot, he can't help smiling, if anyone out there doesn't realise that Sotheby's was in on this prank then they are morons. I think you will find you are being the moron I was referring to a rather well known Banksy work which also features the interior of an auction house but clearly you didn't get the reference.
Look at Ollie Barker as he's hammering down the lot, he can't help smiling, if anyone out there doesn't realise that Sotheby's was in on this prank then they are morons. I think you will find you are being the moron I was referring to a rather well known Banksy work which also features the interior of an auction house but clearly you didn't get the reference.
|
|
gtf
New Member
Posts โข 359
Likes โข 24
November 2007
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by gtf on Oct 6, 2018 17:45:44 GMT 1, My bet is the painting was not shredded but rolled back up into the frame. A separate canvas/print that had been shredded in advance was then lowered out of the bottom of the frame simultaneously.
The blades shown in the video are not aligned in a way to cut the canvas so either an additional/different mechanism was installed after the video or it was never intended to shred the painting. Cutting canvas is not as easy as cutting paper! Banksy has previous with electro-mechanical devices so I could be totally wrong
Great stunt and lots of people talking about! Most read story on the BBC website.
My bet is the painting was not shredded but rolled back up into the frame. A separate canvas/print that had been shredded in advance was then lowered out of the bottom of the frame simultaneously. The blades shown in the video are not aligned in a way to cut the canvas so either an additional/different mechanism was installed after the video or it was never intended to shred the painting. Cutting canvas is not as easy as cutting paper! Banksy has previous with electro-mechanical devices so I could be totally wrong Great stunt and lots of people talking about! Most read story on the BBC website.
|
|
chevyav53
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,356
Likes โข 1,134
August 2017
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by chevyav53 on Oct 6, 2018 17:56:19 GMT 1, Ahh capitalist Banksy at it again. Increasing his media attention and in turn his artโs value. Man is a true genius. Definitely in cahoots with the auction house.
Ahh capitalist Banksy at it again. Increasing his media attention and in turn his artโs value. Man is a true genius. Definitely in cahoots with the auction house.
|
|
iamzero
Full Member
Posts โข 9,190
Likes โข 8,545
May 2011
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by iamzero on Oct 6, 2018 18:03:27 GMT 1, Iโm not buying that story. I thought the catalogue said the piece was from 2006? That would mean the battery in the frame wouldโve had to still have power in it after 12 years? wow you are another level of dumb you put a new battery in just before it goes into the auction house
Thatโs very rude you know... you could hurt someoneโs feelings if you carry on throwing out insults like a p*ick. Are you suggesting Banksy had access to this canvas all those years after selling it so he could change the battery? And perhaps while he was in the frame he may have also changed the angle of the blades?
Iโm not buying that story. I thought the catalogue said the piece was from 2006? That would mean the battery in the frame wouldโve had to still have power in it after 12 years? wow you are another level of dumb you put a new battery in just before it goes into the auction house Thatโs very rude you know... you could hurt someoneโs feelings if you carry on throwing out insults like a p*ick. Are you suggesting Banksy had access to this canvas all those years after selling it so he could change the battery? And perhaps while he was in the frame he may have also changed the angle of the blades?
|
|
Pysgod
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,677
Likes โข 1,347
December 2016
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by Pysgod on Oct 6, 2018 19:18:40 GMT 1, The title of the piece still tickles me
Going going gone !
The title of the piece still tickles me
Going going gone !
|
|
irl1
Full Member
Posts โข 9,274
Likes โข 9,381
December 2017
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by irl1 on Oct 6, 2018 19:48:11 GMT 1, A source at Sothebyโs, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said that the Banksy camp had insisted on securing an unusually high number of seats for the sale. Some onlookers reported seeing one of these people with a device in his hand after the shredding happened, and that he was detained by security as he tried to leave.
(Oh, and one more: the Banksy stunt was an inside job, "Nate Freeman is Artsyโs Senior Reporter.")
www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-jenny-saville-expensive-living-female-artist-673-million-sothebys-sale?utm_medium=email&utm_source=14672197-newsletter-editorial-daily-10-06-18&utm_campaign=editorial&utm_content=st-T
|
|
|
naughtyshorty
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,242
Likes โข 423
February 2010
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by naughtyshorty on Oct 6, 2018 20:47:36 GMT 1, The catelogue said the image was done in 2006 but we all know Banksy can be a little off with the dates, so no surprise there. There was no date provided re the frame, so it could have been made last week. Obviously the frame made on the video and the one shown in the auction room may have been different. Regardless of when either bit was made, they could have been altered just before the auction. Catelogue identified that the work and frame came directly from the artist.
The catelogue said the image was done in 2006 but we all know Banksy can be a little off with the dates, so no surprise there. There was no date provided re the frame, so it could have been made last week. Obviously the frame made on the video and the one shown in the auction room may have been different. Regardless of when either bit was made, they could have been altered just before the auction. Catelogue identified that the work and frame came directly from the artist.
|
|
iamzero
Full Member
Posts โข 9,190
Likes โข 8,545
May 2011
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by iamzero on Oct 6, 2018 20:53:31 GMT 1, Confirming it was made for the stunt. Genius.
Confirming it was made for the stunt. Genius.
|
|
kevincd
New Member
Posts โข 69
Likes โข 31
August 2018
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by kevincd on Oct 6, 2018 21:09:24 GMT 1, Act of this kind makes a person get mentioned even years later in the future, even he doesn't really need this to be remembered.
Act of this kind makes a person get mentioned even years later in the future, even he doesn't really need this to be remembered.
|
|
irl1
Full Member
Posts โข 9,274
Likes โข 9,381
December 2017
|
|
|
Arty Farty 15
New Member
Posts โข 683
Likes โข 1,116
January 2018
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by Arty Farty 15 on Oct 6, 2018 21:56:50 GMT 1, LOL
โPut this up for auction but as soon as the hammer went down it shredded itselfโ
ebay.us/vCs9Vy
LOL โPut this up for auction but as soon as the hammer went down it shredded itselfโ ebay.us/vCs9Vy
|
|
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by covertshadowops on Oct 6, 2018 21:57:25 GMT 1, those pigeons are Cattelan. Doh!
those pigeons are Cattelan. Doh!
|
|
Deleted
Posts โข 0
Likes โข
January 1970
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by Deleted on Oct 7, 2018 9:22:50 GMT 1, Act of this kind makes a person get mentioned even years later in the future, even he doesn't really need this to be remembered.
This particular piece was dedicated to jo. I can only imagine jo brooks. She seems fine with all this and her painting getting shredded โyears laterโ, as sheโs still promoting banksy on IG.
Act of this kind makes a person get mentioned even years later in the future, even he doesn't really need this to be remembered. This particular piece was dedicated to jo. I can only imagine jo brooks. She seems fine with all this and her painting getting shredded โyears laterโ, as sheโs still promoting banksy on IG.
|
|
irl1
Full Member
Posts โข 9,274
Likes โข 9,381
December 2017
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by irl1 on Oct 7, 2018 15:49:42 GMT 1, If Sotheby's were not involved in this they need to sack the whole security team.
If Sotheby's were not involved in this they need to sack the whole security team.
|
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,782
Likes โข 6,706
June 2009
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by met on Oct 7, 2018 19:29:30 GMT 1, [...] Note as well the differences in facial expression โ and therefore the mood evoked by each piece. In the 2006 canvas, the girl comes across as irritated. In the print, she looks melancholic or perhaps ambivalent, which I believe offers greater interest. The irritated facial expression gave it a completely different feel, in light of the stunt it makes sense now
We could make a similar argument about the image generally.
The painting showed the girl being a few years older than her earlier depiction in the screenprint. This is apparent by her more mature facial features and body-shape proportions in the painting, including a visible neck.
With advancing years, typically comes greater knowledge and wisdom. But also a loss of innocence that can be accompanied by degrees of cynicism or world-weariness.
I would not go so far as to suggest the work could be a semi self-portrait of the artist. However, one of the themes possibly alluded to by the girl's identical circumstances at an older age โ "Plus รงa change, plus c'est la mรชme chose" โ sits rather well in the context of a contemporary art evening sale at a high-end auction house.
[...] Note as well the differences in facial expression โ and therefore the mood evoked by each piece. In the 2006 canvas, the girl comes across as irritated. In the print, she looks melancholic or perhaps ambivalent, which I believe offers greater interest. The irritated facial expression gave it a completely different feel, in light of the stunt it makes sense now We could make a similar argument about the image generally. The painting showed the girl being a few years older than her earlier depiction in the screenprint. This is apparent by her more mature facial features and body-shape proportions in the painting, including a visible neck. With advancing years, typically comes greater knowledge and wisdom. But also a loss of innocence that can be accompanied by degrees of cynicism or world-weariness. I would not go so far as to suggest the work could be a semi self-portrait of the artist. However, one of the themes possibly alluded to by the girl's identical circumstances at an older age โ "Plus รงa change, plus c'est la mรชme chose" โ sits rather well in the context of a contemporary art evening sale at a high-end auction house.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,782
Likes โข 6,706
June 2009
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by met on Oct 7, 2018 19:45:13 GMT 1, I have entered canvases into primary auction houses with dated, signed professional condition appraisals from conservators approved by the auction house. They then donโt need to open the back of a framed canvas and just appraise it โin frameโ. So it is not beyond doubt that Sothebyโs was in on it. I agree, and the fact that it was described as in artists frame would mean it could have been looked at as a whole piece. Also, would this be now looked at as something different from a painting, such as a sculpture?
Initially, I considered the work to be one where the sale was agreed (at the fall of the auction hammer) prior to most viewers โ including perhaps the buyer โ even realising the artist had not yet completed it.
And, indeed, what was previously just seen as a painting suddenly turned into a sculpture, when the significance of the lot description "in artist's frame" became clear.
__________
Since then, with the benefit of further reflection, I would now classify this as comparable to a photo by Vanessa Beecroft or a video by Francis Alรฟs:
The shredded canvas and frame are not so much the artwork itself but rather part of its documentation โ the artwork proper being a broader (and much more interesting) performance piece.
I have entered canvases into primary auction houses with dated, signed professional condition appraisals from conservators approved by the auction house. They then donโt need to open the back of a framed canvas and just appraise it โin frameโ. So it is not beyond doubt that Sothebyโs was in on it. I agree, and the fact that it was described as in artists frame would mean it could have been looked at as a whole piece. Also, would this be now looked at as something different from a painting, such as a sculpture?Initially, I considered the work to be one where the sale was agreed (at the fall of the auction hammer) prior to most viewers โ including perhaps the buyer โ even realising the artist had not yet completed it. And, indeed, what was previously just seen as a painting suddenly turned into a sculpture, when the significance of the lot description "in artist's frame" became clear. __________ Since then, with the benefit of further reflection, I would now classify this as comparable to a photo by Vanessa Beecroft or a video by Francis Alรฟs: The shredded canvas and frame are not so much the artwork itself but rather part of its documentation โ the artwork proper being a broader (and much more interesting) performance piece.
|
|
moron
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,711
Likes โข 1,051
September 2017
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by moron on Oct 7, 2018 21:08:38 GMT 1, Does the message behind this whole โstuntโ honestly get ruined just because a couple people may have been in on it? I find that sad to believe that Banksy commentary from this piece about art, investors, speculators, disposability, control and power all get lost on you just because some people may have โbeen in on itโ. What a shame. For what itโs worth, I doubt they were given how he likes to approach his stunts, but who knows. I'd much prefer him to comment on the investors and speculators by releasing some new editions For new works available to buy just contact his agent Pest Control.
Does the message behind this whole โstuntโ honestly get ruined just because a couple people may have been in on it? I find that sad to believe that Banksy commentary from this piece about art, investors, speculators, disposability, control and power all get lost on you just because some people may have โbeen in on itโ. What a shame. For what itโs worth, I doubt they were given how he likes to approach his stunts, but who knows. I'd much prefer him to comment on the investors and speculators by releasing some new editions For new works available to buy just contact his agent Pest Control.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,782
Likes โข 6,706
June 2009
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by met on Oct 10, 2018 22:56:47 GMT 1, Something was up from the get go for me. For a start, it was clearly a recent painting and not from 2006 or whatever the blurb stated - he simply didn't do canvases with this kind of classic image (especially Girl With Balloon's) with that much detail (as pointed out by Met) 12 years ago. Add to this the listing stated that it was dedicated on the rear, specifically to anyone who asked to none other than Jo Brookes. Sotheby's were clearly in on it all along - like a shredder built into a canvas is going to go unnoticed?! - and that for me completely ruins the entire stunt.
Prior to 5 October's auction, the twice-mentioned 2006 date in Sotheby's lot description had in fact left me a bit stumped. Especially given the originals of Girl With Balloon for sale in 2006 โ like the diptych edition, metal panel series, and massive canvas at Barely Legal. All of these featured the earlier, less-detailed versions of both girl and balloon.
This older style was still used in 2010, for the spraypaint on masonite piece gifted to Dennis Hopper during his divorce proceedings (as shown here). Another original, with a kitschy landscape background (shown here), was added to Banksy's website in 2012.
And it wasn't before the Love Hurts print in 2012 that I first noticed Banksy's heart-shaped balloons switch from a rubber look to having more of a foil or mylar appearance in their design, reflections and shading.
Still, in my head there remained a possibility the artist might have experimented with more sophisticated styles in 2006, yet without at that time releasing his revised imagery of Girl With Balloon to the public.
So it was only after the canvas shredding last Friday that I realised the references to "Executed in 2006" and "Acquired directly from the artist by the present owner in 2006" had been disinformation.
__________
The 2006 date in the auction lot description now seems more interesting.
From the artist's perspective, lying can to some degree be brushed off as theatrical misdirection. This is commonly part of the toolkit for a number of professions, including those of impresario and magician.
And while lies or misleading video footage may just be self-serving (e.g. for myth-making purposes), they can also enhance the impact of a showman's performance for audiences:
Are you not entertained? Are You Not Entertained? Is this not why you are here?
From Sotheby's perspective, the situation is more delicate. It might not have expressly known the cited year was false. But given its expertise, there's a credible argument that Sotheby's should have known 2006 was incorrect.
Legally, I wouldn't imagine there's an issue. The auction house has plausible deniability. A claim can be made that it was reasonable to rely on details given by the consignor, which were presumably corroborated by Pest Control's certificate of authenticity.
Sotheby's is however exposed to greater risk from a public perception and reputation standpoint. Among some onlookers, there's doubt regarding its assertions of good-faith innocence. This may include suspicion it knew or had reason to believe the lot-description date of 2006 was inaccurate โ meaning an ethical line was crossed if false information was published under such circumstances (to the extent "auction house" and "integrity" are not a contradiction in terms).
__________
Addressing a separate point you raised, I agree that one or more individuals at Sotheby's were probably aware something was up. For condition-report purposes, even a superficial examination would have revealed the slot opening at the base of the frame. That said, what I'm uncertain about is whether Sotheby's knew precisely what would happen, or when.
If there was an inside-job element, I fully understand the stunt being ruined for you. Compromises to conceptual purity are always regrettable. In this instance, they would include any artifice in connection with the identity of the consignor or winning bidder.
While compromises (if indeed made) need to be considered when assessing the stunt's value as an artistic work, it doesn't seem right to stop there. My view is they should also be weighed up against the end results combined. Against success levels reached for all of the artist's presumed objectives.
And when considering what Banksy actually achieved on this occasion, it's rather glorious โ at least in terms of self-promotion, media coverage, and generally getting people excited and chattering. The overall spectacle has been magnificent.
__________
Now, what we've been shown could very well be an illusion, or partial illusion. But it's one I find amusing enough to embrace. As an audience member, I'm willing to indulge in a temporary suspension of disbelief. Purely for entertainment's sake.
Something was up from the get go for me. For a start, it was clearly a recent painting and not from 2006 or whatever the blurb stated - he simply didn't do canvases with this kind of classic image (especially Girl With Balloon's) with that much detail (as pointed out by Met) 12 years ago. Add to this the listing stated that it was dedicated on the rear, specifically to anyone who asked to none other than Jo Brookes. Sotheby's were clearly in on it all along - like a shredder built into a canvas is going to go unnoticed?! - and that for me completely ruins the entire stunt. Prior to 5 October's auction, the twice-mentioned 2006 date in Sotheby's lot description had in fact left me a bit stumped. Especially given the originals of Girl With Balloon for sale in 2006 โ like the diptych edition, metal panel series, and massive canvas at Barely Legal. All of these featured the earlier, less-detailed versions of both girl and balloon. This older style was still used in 2010, for the spraypaint on masonite piece gifted to Dennis Hopper during his divorce proceedings (as shown here). Another original, with a kitschy landscape background (shown here), was added to Ban ksy's website in 2012. And it wasn't before the Love Hurts print in 2012 that I first noticed Ban ksy's heart-shaped balloons switch from a rubber look to having more of a foil or mylar appearance in their design, reflections and shading. Still, in my head there remained a possibility the artist might have experimented with more sophisticated styles in 2006, yet without at that time releasing his revised imagery of Girl With Balloon to the public. So it was only after the canvas shredding last Friday that I realised the references to "Executed in 2006" and "Acquired directly from the artist by the present owner in 2006" had been disinformation. __________ The 2006 date in the auction lot description now seems more interesting. From the artist's perspective, lying can to some degree be brushed off as theatrical misdirection. This is commonly part of the toolkit for a number of professions, including those of impresario and magician. And while lies or misleading video footage may just be self-serving (e.g. for myth-making purposes), they can also enhance the impact of a showman's performance for audiences: Are you not entertained? Are You Not Entertained? Is this not why you are here?From Sotheby's perspective, the situation is more delicate. It might not have expressly known the cited year was false. But given its expertise, there's a credible argument that Sotheby's should have known 2006 was incorrect. Legally, I wouldn't imagine there's an issue. The auction house has plausible deniability. A claim can be made that it was reasonable to rely on details given by the consignor, which were presumably corroborated by Pest Control's certificate of authenticity. Sotheby's is however exposed to greater risk from a public perception and reputation standpoint. Among some onlookers, there's doubt regarding its assertions of good-faith innocence. This may include suspicion it knew or had reason to believe the lot-description date of 2006 was inaccurate โ meaning an ethical line was crossed if false information was published under such circumstances (to the extent "auction house" and "integrity" are not a contradiction in terms). __________ Addressing a separate point you raised, I agree that one or more individuals at Sotheby's were probably aware something was up. For condition-report purposes, even a superficial examination would have revealed the slot opening at the base of the frame. That said, what I'm uncertain about is whether Sotheby's knew precisely what would happen, or when. If there was an inside-job element, I fully understand the stunt being ruined for you. Compromises to conceptual purity are always regrettable. In this instance, they would include any artifice in connection with the identity of the consignor or winning bidder. While compromises (if indeed made) need to be considered when assessing the stunt's value as an artistic work, it doesn't seem right to stop there. My view is they should also be weighed up against the end results combined. Against success levels reached for all of the artist's presumed objectives. And when considering what Ban ksy actually achieved on this occasion, it's rather glorious โ at least in terms of self-promotion, media coverage, and generally getting people excited and chattering. The overall spectacle has been magnificent. __________ Now, what we've been shown could very well be an illusion, or partial illusion. But it's one I find amusing enough to embrace. As an audience member, I'm willing to indulge in a temporary suspension of disbelief. Purely for entertainment's sake.
|
|
avec art
Junior Member
Posts โข 3,727
Likes โข 3,061
March 2014
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by avec art on Oct 10, 2018 23:12:12 GMT 1, I don't think the possible involvement of Sothebys in the stunt would compromise conceptual purity. If anything makes it even better, getting them to bend and be complicit in the mischief. In some ways exposes cracks in their own pantomime.
I don't think the possible involvement of Sothebys in the stunt would compromise conceptual purity. If anything makes it even better, getting them to bend and be complicit in the mischief. In some ways exposes cracks in their own pantomime.
|
|
Shoot Again
Junior Member
Posts โข 5,561
Likes โข 2,765
April 2011
|
|
|
pippyt75
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,010
Likes โข 1,265
March 2015
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by pippyt75 on Oct 11, 2018 18:15:59 GMT 1, Winning bidder has confirmed they want to keep the shredded Banksy at the hammer price. Fair play! Itโll be on display in Sothebyโs this weekend.
Winning bidder has confirmed they want to keep the shredded Banksy at the hammer price. Fair play! Itโll be on display in Sothebyโs this weekend.
|
|
WOOF
Junior Member
Posts โข 4,462
Likes โข 4,758
March 2014
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by WOOF on Oct 11, 2018 18:20:57 GMT 1, Winning bidder has confirmed they want to keep the shredded Banksy at the hammer price. Fair play! Itโll be on display in Sothebyโs this weekend. Only a fool would give it up it after the stunt...
Winning bidder has confirmed they want to keep the shredded Banksy at the hammer price. Fair play! Itโll be on display in Sothebyโs this weekend. Only a fool would give it up it after the stunt...
|
|
|
|
Deleted
Posts โข 0
Likes โข
January 1970
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by Deleted on Oct 11, 2018 18:53:42 GMT 1, Boo! That post makes it look more and more like a collusion with the house.
Boo! That post makes it look more and more like a collusion with the house.
|
|
Poster Bob
Junior Member
Posts โข 5,869
Likes โข 5,480
September 2013
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by Poster Bob on Oct 11, 2018 19:49:22 GMT 1, Why say it is a female, European collector? Who cares?
Why say it is a female, European collector? Who cares?
|
|
Fake
Artist
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,376
Likes โข 2,144
July 2008
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by Fake on Oct 11, 2018 20:31:20 GMT 1, Why say it is a female, European collector? Who cares? To let us believe the buyer did not know what was about to happen
Why say it is a female, European collector? Who cares? To let us believe the buyer did not know what was about to happen
|
|
|
jkesquire
New Member
Posts โข 507
Likes โข 646
May 2017
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by jkesquire on Oct 17, 2018 23:05:05 GMT 1, And now, for the Director's Cut (my apologies if this was posted elsewhere already).....
banksy.co.uk/
And now, for the Director's Cut (my apologies if this was posted elsewhere already)..... banksy.co.uk/
|
|
Deleted
Posts โข 0
Likes โข
January 1970
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by Deleted on Oct 18, 2018 0:48:42 GMT 1, Really good quality for 2006.
Really good quality for 2006.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,782
Likes โข 6,706
June 2009
|
Sotheby's Art Auctions โข LONDON ๐ฌ๐ง, by met on Oct 18, 2018 14:47:43 GMT 1, And now, for the Director's Cut (my apologies if this was posted elsewhere already)..... banksy.co.uk/
The Director's Cut is such a felicitous title that it makes me think the release of a second video was planned from the start.
And from the priceless expressions on the faces of Oliver Barker and his colleagues, it seems clear to me that Sotheby's did not know in advance what was about to happen.
And now, for the Director's Cut (my apologies if this was posted elsewhere already)..... banksy.co.uk/ The Director's Cut is such a felicitous title that it makes me think the release of a second video was planned from the start. And from the priceless expressions on the faces of Oliver Barker and his colleagues, it seems clear to me that Sotheby's did not know in advance what was about to happen.
|
|