The 1st of the 3 prints were editions of 5, 100x145cm
The 2nd was edition of 10, same size
And the 3rd was 15 I think and slightly smaller size, I’ll confirm
They are on Stowe as collectors edition

In terms of artistic or business integrity, there is no real difference between the so-called Collector's Edition and the regular edition.


1.  Both editions were products of an equally parasitic, wholesale appropriation by Mason Storm of another artist's idea and output.

Besides the obvious motive of financial profit, this was presumably part of an ongoing attempt by Storm to gain relevance. Albeit sadly by artifice, with Storm creating yet another forced association between himself and an actually-talented, successful artist.


2.  Both editions were equally reliant upon deceptive marketing by Storm and Stowe Gallery.

Specifically, the deceit consisted of repeated insinuations of some fabricated professional relationship between Storm and the other artist.

It was a prolonged, cynical effort to mislead collectors and speculators — so they would be more amenable to opening their wallets for the large quantities of imitation art being offloaded onto them.

This would include print releases of a pastiche version of the famous painting, Devolved Parliament.

In a desperate bid to maximise revenue, however, Storm and Stowe Gallery would choose to release the image in three separate sections over a two-year period. Moreover, the sections were cropped in a manner that made zero compositional sense.

For any collector with an artistic eye and desire to hang all three sections, the end result would therefore become a big "Fuck you, you're screwed, haha!", courtesy of Storm and his enabler gallery.


__________


Mason Storm and Stowe Gallery: Taking the notion of adding insult to injury to whole new level.


Possible hanging choices for Monkey Parliament (tough call regarding which option works best):


A.



B.



C.

Met?

LOL 🤣🤣🤣🤣

First, it's important for me to acknowledge your tone of calm, which is appreciated. In part for its relative rarity.

What I've found over the years is that sellers on this platform rather often get emotional over the For Sale threads they initiate. They can even get territorial, frequently making silly references to "my thread" — specifically when any comments by fellow members take a critical turn.

This is unfortunate; hysterical or defensive replies almost invariably result in a loss of social esteem for the authors.

It is therefore refreshing whenever a seller responds with a coolness of composure.


__________


Now, to your question (with bold font added by me to emphasise your particular choice of words):

Do you know, beyond any doubt, that mason storm news not part of the team of painters that banksy employed to paint the more technically challenging pieces from his portfolio?



SHORT ANSWER


I do not know. Nor do I believe the statement to be true beyond any doubt:

(a)  Knowledge-wise, I haven't the requisite insider knowledge of the facts.

(b)  Belief-wise, I haven't the requisite evidence to claim there is zero doubt whatsoever.



FULLER, QUALIFIED ANSWER


On the belief front, what I am comfortable stating is that the publicly-available evidence in support of my position would meet the UK criminal law standard of proof.

The evidence is in my view sufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Mason Storm had no professional tie with Banksy and was in no way involved with the painting of Question Time in or around 2009.



What does this actually mean regarding my level of certainty?

Here are different betting scenarios for illustration purposes:


1.  Random collector says to me, "I am placing £10 on the table. If you turn out to be correct, then you take my £10. But if you're wrong, I will shoot somebody you love in the head, right in front of you."

I would decline to accept that bet.

Because I do not know the facts. And the consequences of getting things wrong seem disproportionately severe, when compared to the potential upside of the £10 I could spend on a tub of Haribo Tangfastics (400g version only, not the 1kg party tub which costs about twice as much).


2.  Random collector says to me, "I am placing £10 on the table. If you turn out to be correct, then you take my £10. But if you're wrong, you have to live the rest of this month of February without gas or electricity in your home."

[In other words, no heating, no working refrigerator or stove, no washing machine for cleaning clothes, no hot water for bathing, no lights on at night, no laptop recharging, etc.]

I would happily accept that bet, confident it would lead to me becoming a tenner wealthier.

Because the quantum of evidence is such that, if this were a criminal trial, certain facts could be said to exist (or to not exist). And such evidence, which I consider nearly impossible to refute in good faith, is the basis of my own belief.


3.  Random collector says to me, "I am placing £10 on the table. If you turn out to be correct, then you take my £10. But if you're wrong, you owe me £1,000. The odds we're playing for are 100/1 in my favour."

Once again, I would happily accept that bet.


__________


During an exchange with @castlegalleryltd in November last year, I made the following comments in the Who is Mason Storm ? ? ? thread*:




The substance and structure of this case study continues to slowly take shape in my brain.

It will end up being an exceptionally long post, even by my own standards. The priority is to be fair as well as comprehensive, clinical, clear and non-misleading.

There will probably be two main arguments, based on evidence (including visual evidence) and simple reasoning. Each argument, individually, is to my mind convincing and conclusive in itself, without having to rely on the other as backup.



Now admittedly, I do feel a bit resentful about the time and effort I'll have to invest, especially for an artist whose work I have such little interest in or respect for. But I see this task as a duty to fellow art enthusiasts, even if it amounts to just spelling out what should already be obvious to anyone paying attention.

Mason Storm collectors have in my opinion been treated as and taken for fools. Both by Storm and by Stowe Gallery.



To any owners of Storm's work, I would advise them to dump it.

To any potential collectors of his work, my advice would be to keep well away.

When posting, it is the interests of the latter that I choose to prioritise over the former.

Encouraging those who are sitting on the fence to think things fully through and avoid making purchase mistakes feels honourable to me. Much more so than encouraging existing owners to offload their purchase mistakes onto innocent dupes.


__________


Although my case study is still in works, consider reaching out in the meantime to Stowe Gallery. Presumably, that's where you bought your own prints.

If, in a moment of madness, I had acquired anything by Storm, I would certainly be asking the gallery a similar, simple question to the one you asked me, but conversely:

It's been suggested many times, including by Mason Storm himself, that he was hired by Banksy or Banksy's team in or around 2009 to assist with the painting of the original Question Time (now known as Devolved Parliament).

Please could you elaborate on whether there is any truth to those stories.


Such a query is an obvious one, especially since Storm's entire career hinges so heavily on a purported Banksy connection. And since it is also a fair question, it would be completely reasonable for any customer to expect a straight answer from the business that pocketed their money.



Pick up the telephone during business hours, ring Stowe Gallery, and see what they say.

It is one thing to allow (and even encourage) commercially-convenient fake rumours to circulate. But to blatantly lie when speaking with a customer is quite a different level of deception. At least for non-sociopaths, lying so directly would be more uncomfortable.

And so, after asking the question about whether any employment or commission link does exist between Storm and Banksy, what I imagine you'd get at the other end of the line is a bit of stuttering at first.

Perhaps there would then be a faux-humorous "Can't help you there. That's way above my pay grade!" or "Ooh… If I told you, I'd have to kill you afterwards!". Or some other type of disingenuous non-reply and evasiveness — no doubt followed by an awkward attempt to change the subject.



Please give us an update in case you do decide to call the gallery.

Sporadic at best, but I do go through periods of intensive binging.

My particular interest lies with charlatans and scammers.

I think I would have been satisfied with a yes or a no, and despite your long ramble, your answer was no.
and so the point would be, what qualifies you to crash in so negatively on someone else’s for sale thread with essentially what amounts to a personal viewpoint?
I have several conversations with storm and he left me in no doubt he worked in some capacity with banksy. I have had this thought verified by another with close ties to banksy’s team, and whilst I may be wrong, it seems my story has more depth than yours. 
This image is contentious, no doubt, but analyse what it is that you dislike about it, is it the image itself?, in which case you surely do not like the banksy version?, is it the triptych?, fair enough, but I have seen the first & second hung and they look well, as does the third hung individually, it is it because storm has gone against your hero?, the truth of it in my mind is that storm contributed to the painting of the original and when it was auctioned for such a huge amount, decided to capitalise and launch his own career on the back of it, that doesn’t offend me in the least. It obviously does you and the vociferous nature of your attack indicates to what extent, and it just leaves me with conclusion it is an example of the banksy fellatio that is all too often found on this site, that causes the conflict that you allude to, begging the question. Are you part of the solution with your observations, or part of the problem?

He still wears a twatty gimp mask, and I think what you’re referring to was he was going to reveal banksy’s identity in a crap Instagram stunt,
I don’t thin pest control is designed to get involved in squabbles they don’t have, people are bound by NDA

I’m not a fan of his per se, I own a couple of his pieces but I do object to someone who, irrespective of how finely composed their text is, irrelevant of how erudite they appear, trash’s a for sale thread with what amounts to be a unfounded opinion
that is all

Details for the prints below:

Monkey Parliament (2020)
Print on Hahnemuhle Museum Etching 350gsm
56 x 80 cm
Edition of 250
Signed & Numbered
 
Looking for  £ 850 

Details for the prints below:

Monkey Parliament (2020)
Print on Hahnemuhle Museum Etching 350gsm
56 x 80 cm
Edition of 250
Signed & Numbered

£650

Interesting comment since you are Mrs. Banksy. You’ve been minting money yet that’s still not enough…

Ciao, is your Mason Storm Monkey Parliament part 1 still for sale? I'd be interested in buying! Thanks Florence

I have Parts 1, 2 and 3, all same low Edition No. Happy to sell together only. Offers.