Nice work!
This is slightly different tho no??
A production line of 100 Chinese method taught painters opposed to a taught and trained artist receiving a brief and charged with presenting an interpretation is a world of difference, not comparable really is it?

How many people are going to hang: frame all three works?

Why is the edition double the size of the initial release?
Will the third release be an edition of 1000?

If there is any truth to the artist painting the original for banksy, it will crash the market and prices will return to to 2013 prices ?

But you must

I like you Lroy

From what I can make out, the number of artists was circa 500, in a village of 3000, not the thousands that you referenced earlier

Doubtless you will have all read this, but it is relevant to this conversation
creativefolk.co.uk/who-really-painted-banksys-devolved-parliament/

Is it any different to Hirst, Koons or Gormley (and many more I can think of) using assistants to creat their art. Whilst I don’t know the intricate working practices of those artists, I’d be surprised if they all made all of their artworks, considering their scale.
You wouldn’t say, to pick but one, that a huge Koon’s sculpture is not “by” Koons, just because the creation of an actual sculpture was done wholly or partly by an assistant or team. The creating artist is the person who had the idea, and oversaw its creation, is it not?
If that is correct, I can’t see that there is any obligation on the artist to credit assistants.
As to what happened in relation to this particular artwork (Monkey Parliament) I simply do not know.

exactly, all hearsay at this point, Outis shenanigans again, easy to string people along on a belief of money to be made

If MS was involved, I guarantee he was falling all over himself at the opportunity to work for Banksy and co. At a minimum, he was working from a set of Banksy sketches that he/they do before executing a large scale piece (i.e. 100% not MS's original idea). MS probably had grandiose plans of being a part of the Banksy tribe and that didn't pan out. He probably feels, when he went down this avenue with his art, that he had Banksy and co. over a barrel as he knew enough about the team to create headaches for everyone and used that to his advantage.

The part that irks me is that he sells his prints at "established" artist prices as opposed to working his way up and just re-hashes all of Banksy's work. If he worked on 'Devolved' and is "re-issuing" it, that's bad enough, but everyone realizes whatever tenuous link he has to Banksy doesn't extend to all of Banksy's other work. He's sort of working his "plausible deniability" from both directions.

Lroy, have you actually seen him (MS) paint, like brush to canvas? I haven't seen a shred of proof that he (MS) does the work himself and on his old website a lot of the work looked like it was simply manipulated on a computer. I would love to watch a video of him actually painting. He posts a lot of videos of himself on Insta. I'd love to see one of him working as opposed to running around like a madman.

Last annoying detail...all uber-productive artists have assistants. When they talk about old masters' paintings, they frequently mention that they can see areas of paintings that students and understudies did. We generally don't know their names because it would have been career-ending to later issue the painting in their own name...

.03 (one cent more than usual)

Stowe gallery sold the recent clown prints recently too? Maybe a glitter print in the offering, later in the year

When the Monkey Parliament painting resurfaced in 2019 to be sold at Sotheby's (after being exhibited at Bristol Museum in 2009) there were some changes made. The lights in the ceiling were off, a banana pointed the other way and a few other details. And the name had been changed to Devolved Parliament. 

Some believe there are two versions of the painting, but Banksy is known for changing his art over the years so that is nothing I agree with.

I think I was the first to notice the changes.

Is it true that the first part of this image was an edition of 250 and part 2 is 500?

Not correct, main edition 250 and 25 AP now main edition 500 and 50 AP

He wrote on Instagram that he “didn’t paint Banksy’s Monkey Parliament”.

I haven’t followed the whole debate (so maybe I am wrong about this) but I think there is a lot of assuming going on here (for example regarding the existence of an NDA) that in my opinion adds to the overall confusion thereby allowing people to assume whatever they want to be true.

That being said, I like the image and like the point made above that at least “Banksy-like” art is made accessible through a talented artist. That also being said, I don’t think he should get a pass for misleading some of his buyers that truly believe he did paint Monkey Parliament/Devolved Paliament and wouldn’t otherwise have bought his prints.

I doubt he would be selling prints made up from an image of the original Banksy canvas. The Banksy piece was massive! So obviously gonna have more detail than the much smaller MS canvas that I guess Mason is taking his prints from? Being slightly different image, is that a good or bad thing in peoples opinion?