|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by Run Pig Run on Sept 28, 2008 13:50:15 GMT 1, Money, Money Money thats all this thread is about. Not the art, your just kidding yourselves if you believe that. I'll print up some Banksy POLICE badges and distribute to those I feel deserve them.
currently in a police station up north due to someones greed.
Money, Money Money thats all this thread is about. Not the art, your just kidding yourselves if you believe that. I'll print up some Banksy POLICE badges and distribute to those I feel deserve them. currently in a police station up north due to someones greed. |
|
funyoung
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,040
👍🏻 20
February 2008
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by funyoung on Sept 28, 2008 15:38:12 GMT 1, Interesting article. I wonder how much of the lack of sales was based on lack of confidence in the prov and how much was down to the state of the economy? Is the next big auction the Drewetts one, only that'll probably the best way of telling? That is assuming they aren't selling street pieces and that what is for sale has watertight prov... Phillips was only 3 weeks ago and wasn't seen as a bad auction and the entire economy hasnt gone t1ts up in a fornight, so guessing alot was down the no confidence in the vermin certs and people voting with their feet rather than dealing with an auction house that was willing to give them credence.
Some might say it has in the last 10 days.
Do you only read this place and not the papers?
Interesting article. I wonder how much of the lack of sales was based on lack of confidence in the prov and how much was down to the state of the economy? Is the next big auction the Drewetts one, only that'll probably the best way of telling? That is assuming they aren't selling street pieces and that what is for sale has watertight prov... Phillips was only 3 weeks ago and wasn't seen as a bad auction and the entire economy hasnt gone t1ts up in a fornight, so guessing alot was down the no confidence in the vermin certs and people voting with their feet rather than dealing with an auction house that was willing to give them credence. Some might say it has in the last 10 days. Do you only read this place and not the papers? |
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by weaver on Sept 28, 2008 15:51:11 GMT 1, Phillips was only 3 weeks ago and wasn't seen as a bad auction and the entire economy hasnt gone t1ts up in a fornight, so guessing alot was down the no confidence in the vermin certs and people voting with their feet rather than dealing with an auction house that was willing to give them credence. Some might say it has in the last 10 days. Do you only read this place and not the papers? 
Phillips was only 3 weeks ago and wasn't seen as a bad auction and the entire economy hasnt gone t1ts up in a fornight, so guessing alot was down the no confidence in the vermin certs and people voting with their feet rather than dealing with an auction house that was willing to give them credence. Some might say it has in the last 10 days. Do you only read this place and not the papers? LOL, dont worry funyoung, I do pay the slightest bit of attention to other sources of information and am fully aware of the current global economic crisis, I am also fully aware that it has been blatantly and very publicly going down the pan for alot longer than 2 weeks, in my own personal opinion, the energy markets have alot more to answer for than a couple of banks previously illfounded investments. Back to the point in hand, nothing that has happened in the last 2 weeks would have such a drastic affect on an auction if there wasn't other more significant issues to bear. Then again I may be very wrong, as I have very little to do with this type of thing. |
|
nattymatt
New Member
🗨️ 59
👍🏻 0
September 2007
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by nattymatt on Sept 28, 2008 16:05:22 GMT 1, Only reading bits and bobs of this long post, but this is really bad for Banksy and street art i would say.
The headlines, manipulated into a load of twaddle by the press will say.....BANKSY FAILS TO SELL AT AUCTION!!!
IS THIS THE END FOR BANKSY.... i can see it now. FAKE BANKSY WITH COA AT AUCTION balh! blah!
Terrible...just confirms the critics bleeting on that "street art is not in the big leauge when it comes to art.
Low life drunks with spray cans"...( not my opinion) .
Hope not but.......
Only reading bits and bobs of this long post, but this is really bad for Banksy and street art i would say.
The headlines, manipulated into a load of twaddle by the press will say.....BANKSY FAILS TO SELL AT AUCTION!!!
IS THIS THE END FOR BANKSY.... i can see it now. FAKE BANKSY WITH COA AT AUCTION balh! blah!
Terrible...just confirms the critics bleeting on that "street art is not in the big leauge when it comes to art.
Low life drunks with spray cans"...( not my opinion) .
Hope not but.......
|
|
Pattycakes
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,379
👍🏻 423
June 2007
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by Pattycakes on Sept 28, 2008 16:39:37 GMT 1, I've said all along that Ben and Graham Lyon and Turnbull were a bunch of jokers with no real knowledge or ability, and the results of the sale have proved this right. I honestly don't know what they thought they were doing, but frankly i'm glad that the sale failes as it did, their arrogance was pretty much out of control with the Vermin fiasco. That said I think that they sale also failed because the market is definitely weakening, I have a feeling that prices are going to start to crumble in the coming months.
I've said all along that Ben and Graham Lyon and Turnbull were a bunch of jokers with no real knowledge or ability, and the results of the sale have proved this right. I honestly don't know what they thought they were doing, but frankly i'm glad that the sale failes as it did, their arrogance was pretty much out of control with the Vermin fiasco. That said I think that they sale also failed because the market is definitely weakening, I have a feeling that prices are going to start to crumble in the coming months.
|
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by robinbarton49 on Sept 28, 2008 19:13:32 GMT 1, once again i have to remind you that you know who i am because i have nothing to hide except a slight yawn at your infant name calling.... offer up a debate or f*ck off...
once again i have to remind you that you know who i am because i have nothing to hide except a slight yawn at your infant name calling.... offer up a debate or f*ck off...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by snausages on Sept 28, 2008 19:15:22 GMT 1, I still just don't get everyone's blind allegiance to Banksy.
In a nutshell you have an artist who believes who should be allowed to paint anywhere and everywhere on property he doesn't own. And then he feels that he should control the fate of that property after he's defaced it even though he doesn't own it.
Then he has the gaul to say you shouldn't buy that stuff but that you should buy his art through official channels (such as his gallery shows with lazarides) where of course Banksy will make thousands. The part that I don't like is that Banksy's work sells for thousands only because of the free advertising he's gotten by spraypainting on private and public property.
He has the nerve to engage in illegal activity and then through legal channels wants to control what happens to it later. Hello!?!
Street art is transitory it's not long lasting and I think it's a massive stroke of his ego to say it shouldn't be removed because he wants the public to enjoy it. (i.e. be force fed his free advertising so he gets even more famous and gets press attention when he defaces property.)
You can't have it both ways. Either you're willing to paint in public and trade off the free advertising that you're getting for giving up control to what happens to it next. Or you just show in f&*cking galleries and sell you crap for a hundred thousand pounds and buy billboards if you want to advertise your 'brand.' I've lost a lot of respect for Banksy because of this and if I lived in an area where.he was working. I'd spray over that shit in an instant. Also I have absolutely nothing to gain or lose because of this, it just strikes me as completely hypocritical.
I still just don't get everyone's blind allegiance to Banksy.
In a nutshell you have an artist who believes who should be allowed to paint anywhere and everywhere on property he doesn't own. And then he feels that he should control the fate of that property after he's defaced it even though he doesn't own it.
Then he has the gaul to say you shouldn't buy that stuff but that you should buy his art through official channels (such as his gallery shows with lazarides) where of course Banksy will make thousands. The part that I don't like is that Banksy's work sells for thousands only because of the free advertising he's gotten by spraypainting on private and public property.
He has the nerve to engage in illegal activity and then through legal channels wants to control what happens to it later. Hello!?!
Street art is transitory it's not long lasting and I think it's a massive stroke of his ego to say it shouldn't be removed because he wants the public to enjoy it. (i.e. be force fed his free advertising so he gets even more famous and gets press attention when he defaces property.)
You can't have it both ways. Either you're willing to paint in public and trade off the free advertising that you're getting for giving up control to what happens to it next. Or you just show in f&*cking galleries and sell you crap for a hundred thousand pounds and buy billboards if you want to advertise your 'brand.' I've lost a lot of respect for Banksy because of this and if I lived in an area where.he was working. I'd spray over that shit in an instant. Also I have absolutely nothing to gain or lose because of this, it just strikes me as completely hypocritical.
|
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by robinbarton49 on Sept 28, 2008 19:18:46 GMT 1,
BARBARA ELLEN / SUNDAY OBSERVER
Now he's laughing all the way to the bank, Banksy's a bore
Banksy, the graffiti guerrilla artist, has formed a 'pest fund' to identify the hundreds of works attributed to him that aren't actually his. He is also urging people not to take any of these works, or to buy them, unless they have been created for sale and officially authenticated. Wow - how renegade, how 'out there'. It's like van Gogh hacking his ear off all over again. Except it isn't.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought this type of art was all about madness and impetuosity, as well as challenging the very definition of what art is or could be. So surely the fake Banksys fit right in. If guerrilla artists can run amok, why not fake guerrilla artists or even guerrilla art lovers?
Yet here we see Banksy whingeing about wanting everything officially authenticated and fastidiously pointing out which spray-canned doodles are his. 'Nah, that rat shitting in a Starbucks cup ain't mine. Nor that one of Ann Widdecombe lap dancing neither.' Amazing isn't it how once someone's work starts selling for big bucks how corporate and humourless they become?
Mind you, some of us always had doubts. There's been lots of speculation about who Banksy is - a man, a woman, a gang? - but there's no doubt what he's become - just another art book talking point on the coffee table, the 21st-century equivalent of those 'amusing' clacking balls businessmen used to have on their desks.
But maybe this is sour grapes. There is what I thought to be a Banksy at the top of my street. It's a Che Guevara sketch which, feeling a bit broke, I had half a mind to chisel off and hotfoot it to Sotheby's with. As Che is not doing anything peculiar, such as changing a baby's nappy or French kissing Stalin, I had this romantic idea that Banksy might have suffered sprayus interruptus and had to run off before he'd finished.
Now I realise that it's just a fake, it seems more authentically Banksy than ever.
BARBARA ELLEN / SUNDAY OBSERVER
Now he's laughing all the way to the bank, Banksy's a bore
Banksy, the graffiti guerrilla artist, has formed a 'pest fund' to identify the hundreds of works attributed to him that aren't actually his. He is also urging people not to take any of these works, or to buy them, unless they have been created for sale and officially authenticated. Wow - how renegade, how 'out there'. It's like van Gogh hacking his ear off all over again. Except it isn't.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought this type of art was all about madness and impetuosity, as well as challenging the very definition of what art is or could be. So surely the fake Banksys fit right in. If guerrilla artists can run amok, why not fake guerrilla artists or even guerrilla art lovers?
Yet here we see Banksy whingeing about wanting everything officially authenticated and fastidiously pointing out which spray-canned doodles are his. 'Nah, that rat shitting in a Starbucks cup ain't mine. Nor that one of Ann Widdecombe lap dancing neither.' Amazing isn't it how once someone's work starts selling for big bucks how corporate and humourless they become?
Mind you, some of us always had doubts. There's been lots of speculation about who Banksy is - a man, a woman, a gang? - but there's no doubt what he's become - just another art book talking point on the coffee table, the 21st-century equivalent of those 'amusing' clacking balls businessmen used to have on their desks.
But maybe this is sour grapes. There is what I thought to be a Banksy at the top of my street. It's a Che Guevara sketch which, feeling a bit broke, I had half a mind to chisel off and hotfoot it to Sotheby's with. As Che is not doing anything peculiar, such as changing a baby's nappy or French kissing Stalin, I had this romantic idea that Banksy might have suffered sprayus interruptus and had to run off before he'd finished.
Now I realise that it's just a fake, it seems more authentically Banksy than ever.
|
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by pfffffffffft on Sept 28, 2008 19:35:38 GMT 1, BARBARA ELLEN / SUNDAY OBSERVER Now he's laughing all the way to the bank, Banksy's a bore Banksy, the graffiti guerrilla artist, has formed a 'pest fund' to identify the hundreds of works attributed to him that aren't actually his. He is also urging people not to take any of these works, or to buy them, unless they have been created for sale and officially authenticated. Wow - how renegade, how 'out there'. It's like van Gogh hacking his ear off all over again. Except it isn't. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought this type of art was all about madness and impetuosity, as well as challenging the very definition of what art is or could be. So surely the fake Banksys fit right in. If guerrilla artists can run amok, why not fake guerrilla artists or even guerrilla art lovers? Yet here we see Banksy whingeing about wanting everything officially authenticated and fastidiously pointing out which spray-canned doodles are his. 'Nah, that rat s**tting in a Starbucks cup ain't mine. Nor that one of Ann Widdecombe lap dancing neither.' Amazing isn't it how once someone's work starts selling for big bucks how corporate and humourless they become? Mind you, some of us always had doubts. There's been lots of speculation about who Banksy is - a man, a woman, a gang? - but there's no doubt what he's become - just another art book talking point on the coffee table, the 21st-century equivalent of those 'amusing' clacking balls businessmen used to have on their desks. But maybe this is sour grapes. There is what I thought to be a Banksy at the top of my street. It's a Che Guevara sketch which, feeling a bit broke, I had half a mind to chisel off and hotfoot it to Sotheby's with. As Che is not doing anything peculiar, such as changing a baby's nappy or French kissing Stalin, I had this romantic idea that Banksy might have suffered sprayus interruptus and had to run off before he'd finished. Now I realise that it's just a fake, it seems more authentically Banksy than ever.
You can keep trying to push your agenda in an attempt to fill your bank account, but street work is meant for US to enjoy, not to fill your greedy, fraud ridden pockets.
All serious art collectors appreciate having a legitimate company such as pest control out there to protect them as a BUYER. Again, why your miserable stolen street pieces, fakes, and your vermin signed certificates mean nothing.
Go ahead, keep trying to tear down pest control and the artist you are trying to make a profit off of. The thing is, the only people here posting about this that have been discredited by the artist himself are you and your fraudulent cronies who founded Vermin.
The people here arent stupid and the collectors apparently agree with the artist as all 5 of your "certified" lots failed to get anywhere near reserve, in fact I believe 4 of the 5 of them only had 1 bid, no doubt by your friends.
BARBARA ELLEN / SUNDAY OBSERVER Now he's laughing all the way to the bank, Banksy's a bore Banksy, the graffiti guerrilla artist, has formed a 'pest fund' to identify the hundreds of works attributed to him that aren't actually his. He is also urging people not to take any of these works, or to buy them, unless they have been created for sale and officially authenticated. Wow - how renegade, how 'out there'. It's like van Gogh hacking his ear off all over again. Except it isn't. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought this type of art was all about madness and impetuosity, as well as challenging the very definition of what art is or could be. So surely the fake Banksys fit right in. If guerrilla artists can run amok, why not fake guerrilla artists or even guerrilla art lovers? Yet here we see Banksy whingeing about wanting everything officially authenticated and fastidiously pointing out which spray-canned doodles are his. 'Nah, that rat s**tting in a Starbucks cup ain't mine. Nor that one of Ann Widdecombe lap dancing neither.' Amazing isn't it how once someone's work starts selling for big bucks how corporate and humourless they become? Mind you, some of us always had doubts. There's been lots of speculation about who Banksy is - a man, a woman, a gang? - but there's no doubt what he's become - just another art book talking point on the coffee table, the 21st-century equivalent of those 'amusing' clacking balls businessmen used to have on their desks. But maybe this is sour grapes. There is what I thought to be a Banksy at the top of my street. It's a Che Guevara sketch which, feeling a bit broke, I had half a mind to chisel off and hotfoot it to Sotheby's with. As Che is not doing anything peculiar, such as changing a baby's nappy or French kissing Stalin, I had this romantic idea that Banksy might have suffered sprayus interruptus and had to run off before he'd finished. Now I realise that it's just a fake, it seems more authentically Banksy than ever. You can keep trying to push your agenda in an attempt to fill your bank account, but street work is meant for US to enjoy, not to fill your greedy, fraud ridden pockets. All serious art collectors appreciate having a legitimate company such as pest control out there to protect them as a BUYER. Again, why your miserable stolen street pieces, fakes, and your vermin signed certificates mean nothing. Go ahead, keep trying to tear down pest control and the artist you are trying to make a profit off of. The thing is, the only people here posting about this that have been discredited by the artist himself are you and your fraudulent cronies who founded Vermin. The people here arent stupid and the collectors apparently agree with the artist as all 5 of your "certified" lots failed to get anywhere near reserve, in fact I believe 4 of the 5 of them only had 1 bid, no doubt by your friends. |
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by baileymontana on Sept 28, 2008 20:13:28 GMT 1, Very interesting thread. Someone who had a vested interest in Banksy's art now spitting their dummy out of the pram when street pieces are refused authentication by the artist. Then contributing negative posts about Banksy when no doubt a few weeks ago they would have been bigging up Banksy as it was in their financial interests to do so. It all seems a bit childish.
You seemed to have taken a gamble on street art and lost and like Snausages seem not to have a real idea how most fans of street art (not just Banksy's art) feel about it.
Trying to diss Banksy on a forum called Banksy Forum is really just a waste your time.
Very interesting thread. Someone who had a vested interest in Banksy's art now spitting their dummy out of the pram when street pieces are refused authentication by the artist. Then contributing negative posts about Banksy when no doubt a few weeks ago they would have been bigging up Banksy as it was in their financial interests to do so. It all seems a bit childish.
You seemed to have taken a gamble on street art and lost and like Snausages seem not to have a real idea how most fans of street art (not just Banksy's art) feel about it.
Trying to diss Banksy on a forum called Banksy Forum is really just a waste your time.
|
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by buffin on Sept 28, 2008 20:29:53 GMT 1, [glow=red,2,300]I still just don't get everyone's blind allegiance to Banksy.[/glow] In a nutshell you have an artist who believes who should be allowed to paint anywhere and everywhere on property he doesn't own. And then he feels that he should control the fate of that property after he's defaced it even though he doesn't own it. Then he has the gaul to say you shouldn't buy that stuff but that you should buy his art through official channels (such as his gallery shows with lazarides) where of course Banksy will make thousands. The part that I don't like is that Banksy's work sells for thousands only because of the free advertising he's gotten by spraypainting on private and public property. He has the nerve to engage in illegal activity and then through legal channels wants to control what happens to it later. Hello!?! Street art is transitory it's not long lasting and I think it's a massive stroke of his ego to say it shouldn't be removed because he wants the public to enjoy it. (i.e. be force fed his free advertising so he gets even more famous and gets press attention when he defaces property.) You can't have it both ways. Either you're willing to paint in public and trade off the free advertising that you're getting for giving up control to what happens to it next. Or you just show in f&*cking galleries and sell you crap for a hundred thousand pounds and buy billboards if you want to advertise your 'brand.' I've lost a lot of respect for Banksy because of this and if I lived in an area where.he was working. I'd spray over that s**t in an instant. Also I have absolutely nothing to gain or lose because of this, it just strikes me as completely hypocritical.
Its called loyalty and its not a blind allegiance. I respect Mr B's work, the messages he portrays and the charities he supports. I have no interest in how much street pieces, originals and prints are worth. If you have no respect for the artist, and you obviously have no loyalty, might I suggest you move on.
[glow=red,2,300]I still just don't get everyone's blind allegiance to Banksy.[/glow] In a nutshell you have an artist who believes who should be allowed to paint anywhere and everywhere on property he doesn't own. And then he feels that he should control the fate of that property after he's defaced it even though he doesn't own it. Then he has the gaul to say you shouldn't buy that stuff but that you should buy his art through official channels (such as his gallery shows with lazarides) where of course Banksy will make thousands. The part that I don't like is that Banksy's work sells for thousands only because of the free advertising he's gotten by spraypainting on private and public property. He has the nerve to engage in illegal activity and then through legal channels wants to control what happens to it later. Hello!?! Street art is transitory it's not long lasting and I think it's a massive stroke of his ego to say it shouldn't be removed because he wants the public to enjoy it. (i.e. be force fed his free advertising so he gets even more famous and gets press attention when he defaces property.) You can't have it both ways. Either you're willing to paint in public and trade off the free advertising that you're getting for giving up control to what happens to it next. Or you just show in f&*cking galleries and sell you crap for a hundred thousand pounds and buy billboards if you want to advertise your 'brand.' I've lost a lot of respect for Banksy because of this and if I lived in an area where.he was working. I'd spray over that s**t in an instant. Also I have absolutely nothing to gain or lose because of this, it just strikes me as completely hypocritical. Its called loyalty and its not a blind allegiance. I respect Mr B's work, the messages he portrays and the charities he supports. I have no interest in how much street pieces, originals and prints are worth. If you have no respect for the artist, and you obviously have no loyalty, might I suggest you move on. |
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by savilerogue on Sept 28, 2008 20:55:57 GMT 1, I still just don't get everyone's blind allegiance to Banksy.
Where is this 'blind allegiance' of which you speak? I can't see it. Mainly peope are speaking out against Vermin because they are greedy f**kers who will fleece anyone to line their own pockets.
In a nutshell you have an artist who believes who should be allowed to paint anywhere and everywhere on property he doesn't own. And then he feels that he should control the fate of that property after he's defaced it even though he doesn't own it.
I disagree. There is no effort to 'control the fate' of the property, hence the total absence of any involvement in authentication of it.
Then he has the gaul to say you shouldn't buy that stuff but that you should buy his art through official channels (such as his gallery shows with lazarides) where of course Banksy will make thousands. The part that I don't like is that Banksy's work sells for thousands only because of the free advertising he's gotten by spraypainting on private and public property.
I think you're on the wrong board if you have a problem with spraypainting on private or public property.
He has the nerve to engage in illegal activity and then through legal channels wants to control what happens to it later. Hello!?!
What 'legal channels'? All he is doing is refusing authentication. That's got nothing to do with 'legal channels'. Furthermore, I'm sure that if the owner of a property took issue with him painting on their walls he would send someone out to paint over it.
Street art is transitory it's not long lasting and I think it's a massive stroke of his ego to say it shouldn't be removed because he wants the public to enjoy it. (i.e. be force fed his free advertising so he gets even more famous and gets press attention when he defaces property.)
Yes it is transitory. But there is a world of difference between a piece fading over time/getting buffed/painted over and a piece being pulled from a wall so that wankers like those at Bankrobber can line their pockets.
Read here how they exploited one particular gentleman:
www.thisislondon.co.uk/arts/article-23388170-details/Victim+of+the+Great+Banksy+Robbery/article.do
See how the bloke was more upset by some c**t (probably from Bankrobber) intimidating him and ripping him off than by his property being painted on.
You can't have it both ways. Either you're willing to paint in public and trade off the free advertising that you're getting for giving up control to what happens to it next.
But that's what he is doing. Refusing authentication is giving up control.
I still just don't get everyone's blind allegiance to Banksy. Where is this 'blind allegiance' of which you speak? I can't see it. Mainly peope are speaking out against Vermin because they are greedy f**kers who will fleece anyone to line their own pockets. In a nutshell you have an artist who believes who should be allowed to paint anywhere and everywhere on property he doesn't own. And then he feels that he should control the fate of that property after he's defaced it even though he doesn't own it. I disagree. There is no effort to 'control the fate' of the property, hence the total absence of any involvement in authentication of it. Then he has the gaul to say you shouldn't buy that stuff but that you should buy his art through official channels (such as his gallery shows with lazarides) where of course Banksy will make thousands. The part that I don't like is that Banksy's work sells for thousands only because of the free advertising he's gotten by spraypainting on private and public property. I think you're on the wrong board if you have a problem with spraypainting on private or public property. He has the nerve to engage in illegal activity and then through legal channels wants to control what happens to it later. Hello!?! What 'legal channels'? All he is doing is refusing authentication. That's got nothing to do with 'legal channels'. Furthermore, I'm sure that if the owner of a property took issue with him painting on their walls he would send someone out to paint over it. Street art is transitory it's not long lasting and I think it's a massive stroke of his ego to say it shouldn't be removed because he wants the public to enjoy it. (i.e. be force fed his free advertising so he gets even more famous and gets press attention when he defaces property.) Yes it is transitory. But there is a world of difference between a piece fading over time/getting buffed/painted over and a piece being pulled from a wall so that wankers like those at Bankrobber can line their pockets. Read here how they exploited one particular gentleman: www.thisislondon.co.uk/arts/article-23388170-details/Victim+of+the+Great+Banksy+Robbery/article.doSee how the bloke was more upset by some c**t (probably from Bankrobber) intimidating him and ripping him off than by his property being painted on. You can't have it both ways. Either you're willing to paint in public and trade off the free advertising that you're getting for giving up control to what happens to it next. But that's what he is doing. Refusing authentication is giving up control. |
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by savilerogue on Sept 28, 2008 21:01:01 GMT 1, BARBARA ELLEN / SUNDAY OBSERVER Now he's laughing all the way to the bank, Banksy's a bore Banksy, the graffiti guerrilla artist, has formed a 'pest fund' to identify the hundreds of works attributed to him that aren't actually his. He is also urging people not to take any of these works, or to buy them, unless they have been created for sale and officially authenticated. Wow - how renegade, how 'out there'. It's like van Gogh hacking his ear off all over again. Except it isn't. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought this type of art was all about madness and impetuosity, as well as challenging the very definition of what art is or could be. So surely the fake Banksys fit right in. If guerrilla artists can run amok, why not fake guerrilla artists or even guerrilla art lovers? Yet here we see Banksy whingeing about wanting everything officially authenticated and fastidiously pointing out which spray-canned doodles are his. 'Nah, that rat s**tting in a Starbucks cup ain't mine. Nor that one of Ann Widdecombe lap dancing neither.' Amazing isn't it how once someone's work starts selling for big bucks how corporate and humourless they become? Mind you, some of us always had doubts. There's been lots of speculation about who Banksy is - a man, a woman, a gang? - but there's no doubt what he's become - just another art book talking point on the coffee table, the 21st-century equivalent of those 'amusing' clacking balls businessmen used to have on their desks. But maybe this is sour grapes. There is what I thought to be a Banksy at the top of my street. It's a Che Guevara sketch which, feeling a bit broke, I had half a mind to chisel off and hotfoot it to Sotheby's with. As Che is not doing anything peculiar, such as changing a baby's nappy or French kissing Stalin, I had this romantic idea that Banksy might have suffered sprayus interruptus and had to run off before he'd finished. Now I realise that it's just a fake, it seems more authentically Banksy than ever. You can keep trying to push your agenda in an attempt to fill your bank account, but street work is meant for US to enjoy, not to fill your greedy, fraud ridden pockets. All serious art collectors appreciate having a legitimate company such as pest control out there to protect them as a BUYER. Again, why your miserable stolen street pieces, fakes, and your vermin signed certificates mean nothing. Go ahead, keep trying to tear down pest control and the artist you are trying to make a profit off of. The thing is, the only people here posting about this that have been discredited by the artist himself are you and your fraudulent cronies who founded Vermin. The people here arent stupid and the collectors apparently agree with the artist as all 5 of your "certified" lots failed to get anywhere near reserve, in fact I believe 4 of the 5 of them only had 1 bid, no doubt by your friends.
The more Robin fills up this board with bulls**t, the more I laugh at him. I don't know why anyone takes him seriously, after all, this is a guy who once waxed lyrical thusly on Pete Doherty's juvenile crackhead scrawls:
"His use of blood lends itself perfectly to exploring the extraordinary personal and physical intensity that characterises so much of Peter's life and work as an artist in the broadest sense."
Ahem. Bulls**t.
BARBARA ELLEN / SUNDAY OBSERVER Now he's laughing all the way to the bank, Banksy's a bore Banksy, the graffiti guerrilla artist, has formed a 'pest fund' to identify the hundreds of works attributed to him that aren't actually his. He is also urging people not to take any of these works, or to buy them, unless they have been created for sale and officially authenticated. Wow - how renegade, how 'out there'. It's like van Gogh hacking his ear off all over again. Except it isn't. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought this type of art was all about madness and impetuosity, as well as challenging the very definition of what art is or could be. So surely the fake Banksys fit right in. If guerrilla artists can run amok, why not fake guerrilla artists or even guerrilla art lovers? Yet here we see Banksy whingeing about wanting everything officially authenticated and fastidiously pointing out which spray-canned doodles are his. 'Nah, that rat s**tting in a Starbucks cup ain't mine. Nor that one of Ann Widdecombe lap dancing neither.' Amazing isn't it how once someone's work starts selling for big bucks how corporate and humourless they become? Mind you, some of us always had doubts. There's been lots of speculation about who Banksy is - a man, a woman, a gang? - but there's no doubt what he's become - just another art book talking point on the coffee table, the 21st-century equivalent of those 'amusing' clacking balls businessmen used to have on their desks. But maybe this is sour grapes. There is what I thought to be a Banksy at the top of my street. It's a Che Guevara sketch which, feeling a bit broke, I had half a mind to chisel off and hotfoot it to Sotheby's with. As Che is not doing anything peculiar, such as changing a baby's nappy or French kissing Stalin, I had this romantic idea that Banksy might have suffered sprayus interruptus and had to run off before he'd finished. Now I realise that it's just a fake, it seems more authentically Banksy than ever. You can keep trying to push your agenda in an attempt to fill your bank account, but street work is meant for US to enjoy, not to fill your greedy, fraud ridden pockets. All serious art collectors appreciate having a legitimate company such as pest control out there to protect them as a BUYER. Again, why your miserable stolen street pieces, fakes, and your vermin signed certificates mean nothing. Go ahead, keep trying to tear down pest control and the artist you are trying to make a profit off of. The thing is, the only people here posting about this that have been discredited by the artist himself are you and your fraudulent cronies who founded Vermin. The people here arent stupid and the collectors apparently agree with the artist as all 5 of your "certified" lots failed to get anywhere near reserve, in fact I believe 4 of the 5 of them only had 1 bid, no doubt by your friends. The more Robin fills up this board with bulls**t, the more I laugh at him. I don't know why anyone takes him seriously, after all, this is a guy who once waxed lyrical thusly on Pete Doherty's juvenile crackhead scrawls: "His use of blood lends itself perfectly to exploring the extraordinary personal and physical intensity that characterises so much of Peter's life and work as an artist in the broadest sense." Ahem. Bulls**t. |
|
j8jweb
New Member
🗨️ 24
👍🏻 0
September 2008
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by j8jweb on Sept 28, 2008 21:10:36 GMT 1, Perhaps Banksy doesn't want to authenticate street pieces because then something else would be called into question: the pieces that aren't authenticated.
Banksy wants his work to be copied, in my opinion, and regrets having to say what is "real" and what isn't. He is anti-capitalist from the get-go and I am sure he doesn't believe his pieces are worth $500k even if the art world does. I imagine he is redefining how he fits in to a capitalist society currently - it is just as difficult to be 100% anti-capitalist as it is to be 100% capitalist. Sadly, the real world gets in the way of these things...
Perhaps Banksy doesn't want to authenticate street pieces because then something else would be called into question: the pieces that aren't authenticated.
Banksy wants his work to be copied, in my opinion, and regrets having to say what is "real" and what isn't. He is anti-capitalist from the get-go and I am sure he doesn't believe his pieces are worth $500k even if the art world does. I imagine he is redefining how he fits in to a capitalist society currently - it is just as difficult to be 100% anti-capitalist as it is to be 100% capitalist. Sadly, the real world gets in the way of these things...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by savilerogue on Sept 28, 2008 21:11:42 GMT 1, BARBARA ELLEN / SUNDAY OBSERVER Now he's laughing all the way to the bank, Banksy's a bore Banksy, the graffiti guerrilla artist, has formed a 'pest fund' to identify the hundreds of works attributed to him that aren't actually his. He is also urging people not to take any of these works, or to buy them, unless they have been created for sale and officially authenticated. Wow - how renegade, how 'out there'. It's like van Gogh hacking his ear off all over again. Except it isn't. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought this type of art was all about madness and impetuosity, as well as challenging the very definition of what art is or could be. So surely the fake Banksys fit right in. If guerrilla artists can run amok, why not fake guerrilla artists or even guerrilla art lovers? Yet here we see Banksy whingeing about wanting everything officially authenticated and fastidiously pointing out which spray-canned doodles are his. 'Nah, that rat s**tting in a Starbucks cup ain't mine. Nor that one of Ann Widdecombe lap dancing neither.' Amazing isn't it how once someone's work starts selling for big bucks how corporate and humourless they become? Mind you, some of us always had doubts. There's been lots of speculation about who Banksy is - a man, a woman, a gang? - but there's no doubt what he's become - just another art book talking point on the coffee table, the 21st-century equivalent of those 'amusing' clacking balls businessmen used to have on their desks. But maybe this is sour grapes. There is what I thought to be a Banksy at the top of my street. It's a Che Guevara sketch which, feeling a bit broke, I had half a mind to chisel off and hotfoot it to Sotheby's with. As Che is not doing anything peculiar, such as changing a baby's nappy or French kissing Stalin, I had this romantic idea that Banksy might have suffered sprayus interruptus and had to run off before he'd finished. Now I realise that it's just a fake, it seems more authentically Banksy than ever.
That's a woeful piece of writing from someone who has been churning out their sub-"Polly Filler" s**te for years. She semms to have spectacularly missed the point too, in relation to the refusal to authenticate street pieces. You seem to have missed the point of her article too - you have posted an article decrying authentication of 'street art', as a way of supporting your own authentication process? Muppet.
BARBARA ELLEN / SUNDAY OBSERVER Now he's laughing all the way to the bank, Banksy's a bore Banksy, the graffiti guerrilla artist, has formed a 'pest fund' to identify the hundreds of works attributed to him that aren't actually his. He is also urging people not to take any of these works, or to buy them, unless they have been created for sale and officially authenticated. Wow - how renegade, how 'out there'. It's like van Gogh hacking his ear off all over again. Except it isn't. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought this type of art was all about madness and impetuosity, as well as challenging the very definition of what art is or could be. So surely the fake Banksys fit right in. If guerrilla artists can run amok, why not fake guerrilla artists or even guerrilla art lovers? Yet here we see Banksy whingeing about wanting everything officially authenticated and fastidiously pointing out which spray-canned doodles are his. 'Nah, that rat s**tting in a Starbucks cup ain't mine. Nor that one of Ann Widdecombe lap dancing neither.' Amazing isn't it how once someone's work starts selling for big bucks how corporate and humourless they become? Mind you, some of us always had doubts. There's been lots of speculation about who Banksy is - a man, a woman, a gang? - but there's no doubt what he's become - just another art book talking point on the coffee table, the 21st-century equivalent of those 'amusing' clacking balls businessmen used to have on their desks. But maybe this is sour grapes. There is what I thought to be a Banksy at the top of my street. It's a Che Guevara sketch which, feeling a bit broke, I had half a mind to chisel off and hotfoot it to Sotheby's with. As Che is not doing anything peculiar, such as changing a baby's nappy or French kissing Stalin, I had this romantic idea that Banksy might have suffered sprayus interruptus and had to run off before he'd finished. Now I realise that it's just a fake, it seems more authentically Banksy than ever. That's a woeful piece of writing from someone who has been churning out their sub-"Polly Filler" s**te for years. She semms to have spectacularly missed the point too, in relation to the refusal to authenticate street pieces. You seem to have missed the point of her article too - you have posted an article decrying authentication of 'street art', as a way of supporting your own authentication process? Muppet. |
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by alsbabar on Sept 28, 2008 21:30:11 GMT 1, Robin - I would rather have Freddie Kruger control the fate of Banksys' works then chancers like you, Ben Hanley, James Allen, Punk Daisy and the others who set up vermin. Come on trying to discredit him, and others, is boring and predictable and if this is your only angle, it is embarassing
Why dont you just accept you tried to take on Pest Control and found that the people (buyers) decided they had no confidence in vermin in this auction, i mean it wasnt just Pest Control this auction had to deal with, it also had the Colony Club issue that added more doubt to this auction. To have only around 30 people sitting in the room during the auction, was a shocker, I felt sorry for Lyon and Turnbull, having being misled by vermin, you and by its own staff, ben hanley. You must have all felt untouchable, patting each other on the backs at Thursday nights preview party, a packed turnout, with a couple of have been celebs eating and drinking for free. What a bummer saturday was for you all!!
If you really lost respect for Banksy, are you then offering to sell your entire collection at greatly reduced prices, ie below cost price? You have flogged his works, to include stolen pieces, for long enough at ridiculously inflated prices. Now because you can no longer have your way, you are trying to take him down. It wont happen, not ever, because not everyone is in it for the money.
Robin - I would rather have Freddie Kruger control the fate of Banksys' works then chancers like you, Ben Hanley, James Allen, Punk Daisy and the others who set up vermin. Come on trying to discredit him, and others, is boring and predictable and if this is your only angle, it is embarassing
Why dont you just accept you tried to take on Pest Control and found that the people (buyers) decided they had no confidence in vermin in this auction, i mean it wasnt just Pest Control this auction had to deal with, it also had the Colony Club issue that added more doubt to this auction. To have only around 30 people sitting in the room during the auction, was a shocker, I felt sorry for Lyon and Turnbull, having being misled by vermin, you and by its own staff, ben hanley. You must have all felt untouchable, patting each other on the backs at Thursday nights preview party, a packed turnout, with a couple of have been celebs eating and drinking for free. What a bummer saturday was for you all!!
If you really lost respect for Banksy, are you then offering to sell your entire collection at greatly reduced prices, ie below cost price? You have flogged his works, to include stolen pieces, for long enough at ridiculously inflated prices. Now because you can no longer have your way, you are trying to take him down. It wont happen, not ever, because not everyone is in it for the money.
|
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by giiiant on Sept 28, 2008 22:02:05 GMT 1, getting rich off the back of an artist by means which they do not agree with is plain wrong no matter what angle you look at it
getting rich off the back of an artist by means which they do not agree with is plain wrong no matter what angle you look at it
|
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by snausages on Sept 28, 2008 23:47:24 GMT 1, getting rich off the back of an artist by means which they do not agree with is plain wrong no matter what angle you look at it
But the artist is getting rich off of other peoples backs by using their property for free advertising. ...And if it wasn't done for personal gain then the artist wouldn't have left his tag by so many of the works or posted them on his website to take credit for them. But he did and he now charges hundreds of thousands of pounds for his work thanks in no small part to all that free advertising he got.
And if Banksy decided to just not authenticate street works fine, but my issue is that he came out very publicly warning people not to buy street works but to buy his work through legal channels such as his gallery where he would get even more rich.
If Banksy didn't want to see this kind of thing happen he shouldn't have painted on the street illegally where there are no rules. But he did and now he wants to make up the rules. BS!
getting rich off the back of an artist by means which they do not agree with is plain wrong no matter what angle you look at it But the artist is getting rich off of other peoples backs by using their property for free advertising. ...And if it wasn't done for personal gain then the artist wouldn't have left his tag by so many of the works or posted them on his website to take credit for them. But he did and he now charges hundreds of thousands of pounds for his work thanks in no small part to all that free advertising he got. And if Banksy decided to just not authenticate street works fine, but my issue is that he came out very publicly warning people not to buy street works but to buy his work through legal channels such as his gallery where he would get even more rich. If Banksy didn't want to see this kind of thing happen he shouldn't have painted on the street illegally where there are no rules. But he did and now he wants to make up the rules. BS! |
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by alsbabar on Sept 29, 2008 0:05:25 GMT 1, he made a mint out of Cans Festival didnt he? he made a mint out of Santas Ghetto Bethlehem, especially when all proceeds went to charitable causes? he makes a mint when POW sells prints which have ranged from £10 - 600? he makes a mint from setting up and staffing Pest Control? he makes a mint from travelling the world and doing streetpieces for all to enjoy, which they get stolen/lifted and sold in auction houses around the world? He makes a mint for all those pieces sold on ebay? God forbid he makes any money at all - i mean i would expect him to do it all for free and out of the kindness of his art and for him to go out and get a 9-5 job like everyone else!!!!
I agree with G, others have gotten rich off the back of his success. What kind of person does it take, who makes a rich living out of selling his works, then complains about it later???
he made a mint out of Cans Festival didnt he? he made a mint out of Santas Ghetto Bethlehem, especially when all proceeds went to charitable causes? he makes a mint when POW sells prints which have ranged from £10 - 600? he makes a mint from setting up and staffing Pest Control? he makes a mint from travelling the world and doing streetpieces for all to enjoy, which they get stolen/lifted and sold in auction houses around the world? He makes a mint for all those pieces sold on ebay? God forbid he makes any money at all - i mean i would expect him to do it all for free and out of the kindness of his art and for him to go out and get a 9-5 job like everyone else!!!!
I agree with G, others have gotten rich off the back of his success. What kind of person does it take, who makes a rich living out of selling his works, then complains about it later???
|
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by snausages on Sept 29, 2008 0:10:42 GMT 1, Plain and simple if you paint on the street then you have to live by the rules of the street. And there ARE NO FU&*ING RULES on the street. If you don't like it, and you don't like what happens or what people do with it, then don't paint on the F&*KING street!
Plain and simple if you paint on the street then you have to live by the rules of the street. And there ARE NO FU&*ING RULES on the street. If you don't like it, and you don't like what happens or what people do with it, then don't paint on the F&*KING street!
|
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by alsbabar on Sept 29, 2008 0:16:43 GMT 1, and if no one buys your F&*KING street piece that you stole off the F&*KING streets, don't complain or throw your toys out of your pram!!!
dem da roolz
and if no one buys your F&*KING street piece that you stole off the F&*KING streets, don't complain or throw your toys out of your pram!!!
dem da roolz
|
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by snausages on Sept 29, 2008 0:26:21 GMT 1, and if no one buys your F&*KING street piece that you stole off the F&*KING streets, don't complain or throw your toys out of your pram!!! dem da roolz
fine, but Banksy should then also expect retribution on the streets...
and if no one buys your F&*KING street piece that you stole off the F&*KING streets, don't complain or throw your toys out of your pram!!! dem da roolz fine, but Banksy should then also expect retribution on the streets... |
|
|
|
jam
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,629
👍🏻 31
November 2006
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by jam on Sept 29, 2008 0:26:27 GMT 1, Somewhere in those rules you've dreamt up, why don't you add a couple more:
-Don't think that just because it looks like a Banksy, and even has a Banksy tag, means it is by Banksy if it came from the street.
-Don't think it's cool to steal pieces from the street without consulting the property owners so you can flog them on ebay or in auctions. When you do steal art, or buy art that is stolen, don't be upset when you have a hard time shifting it.
-Dont set up a sham of an 'authentication' company to try to give credibility to the authorship and sell said works in an auction because you hold so many street pieces and have no other way to profit on them.
Somewhere in those rules you've dreamt up, why don't you add a couple more:
-Don't think that just because it looks like a Banksy, and even has a Banksy tag, means it is by Banksy if it came from the street.
-Don't think it's cool to steal pieces from the street without consulting the property owners so you can flog them on ebay or in auctions. When you do steal art, or buy art that is stolen, don't be upset when you have a hard time shifting it.
-Dont set up a sham of an 'authentication' company to try to give credibility to the authorship and sell said works in an auction because you hold so many street pieces and have no other way to profit on them.
|
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by snausages on Sept 29, 2008 0:33:24 GMT 1, Somewhere in those rules you've dreamt up, why don't you add a couple more: -Don't think that just because it looks like a Banksy, and even has a Banksy tag, means it is by Banksy if it came from the street. -Don't think it's cool to steal pieces from the street without consulting the property owners so you can flog them on ebay or in auctions. When you do steal art, or buy art that is stolen, don't be upset when you have a hard time shifting it. -Dont set up a sham of an 'authentication' company to try to give credibility to the authorship and sell said works in an auction because you hold so many street pieces and have no other way to profit on them.
Rules I've dreamt up  In fact I said there are no rules. You're the one coming up with a list of rules.All this is is let the buyer beware and let the public decide it's fate. And if Banksy is so worried about people damaging private property while removing his street pieces then maybe he should think about not painting on other peoples property.
Somewhere in those rules you've dreamt up, why don't you add a couple more: -Don't think that just because it looks like a Banksy, and even has a Banksy tag, means it is by Banksy if it came from the street. -Don't think it's cool to steal pieces from the street without consulting the property owners so you can flog them on ebay or in auctions. When you do steal art, or buy art that is stolen, don't be upset when you have a hard time shifting it. -Dont set up a sham of an 'authentication' company to try to give credibility to the authorship and sell said works in an auction because you hold so many street pieces and have no other way to profit on them. Rules I've dreamt up In fact I said there are no rules. You're the one coming up with a list of rules.All this is is let the buyer beware and let the public decide it's fate. And if Banksy is so worried about people damaging private property while removing his street pieces then maybe he should think about not painting on other peoples property. |
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by alsbabar on Sept 29, 2008 0:34:06 GMT 1, and if no one buys your F&*KING street piece that you stole off the F&*KING streets, don't complain or throw your toys out of your pram!!! dem da roolz fine, but Banksy should then also expect retribution on the streets...
what being a wanted man by the police for vandalism isnt retribution enough? Oh hang on is retribution in your eyes, where he makes no money, while others do, like the people who steal them off the streets, from public and private property?
I tell you who deserves retribution are people like Jon Swintead, who stole a street bollard. Firstly that is taxpayers money who paid for that bollard, and secondly, which is a far more important issue, he had a blatant disregard for peoples safety when he did - because those bollards are in place for safety reasons, not for decorative purposes. You also have the person who steals doors from someones private property, without their consent or knowledge.
Seems like you are picking on the wrong person(s) snausages!
and if no one buys your F&*KING street piece that you stole off the F&*KING streets, don't complain or throw your toys out of your pram!!! dem da roolz fine, but Banksy should then also expect retribution on the streets... what being a wanted man by the police for vandalism isnt retribution enough? Oh hang on is retribution in your eyes, where he makes no money, while others do, like the people who steal them off the streets, from public and private property? I tell you who deserves retribution are people like Jon Swintead, who stole a street bollard. Firstly that is taxpayers money who paid for that bollard, and secondly, which is a far more important issue, he had a blatant disregard for peoples safety when he did - because those bollards are in place for safety reasons, not for decorative purposes. You also have the person who steals doors from someones private property, without their consent or knowledge. Seems like you are picking on the wrong person(s) snausages! |
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by pfffffffffft on Sept 29, 2008 0:42:13 GMT 1, Robin....see this...it's not even worth the paper it's printed on.
Robin....see this...it's not even worth the paper it's printed on. |
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by ejvaze on Sept 29, 2008 0:47:47 GMT 1, I find it astounding that people like these VERMIN lot can carry on heir respective business with their sort of business ethics.
I think all their postings here on this forum have opened up art collectors eyes as to just how unsavory their morals and business ethics are
The more they post on here the bigger their grave.
I am sure a lot would never touch them with a barge pole ever again
The auction on Saturday was a disaster for L&T and VERMIN they thought they could pull the wool over the eyes of collectors of Banksy work.
They thought they could take us all for fools.
Seems the buyers were more intelligent than they had envisaged
I would image all the London Auction Hos and even provincial ones know what happened re this sale and its flop on Saturday... it is a small world in their game
I find it laughable that they now should try to down Banksy and his work
He was for them nothing more but a Money spinner.
I find it astounding that people like these VERMIN lot can carry on heir respective business with their sort of business ethics.
I think all their postings here on this forum have opened up art collectors eyes as to just how unsavory their morals and business ethics are
The more they post on here the bigger their grave.
I am sure a lot would never touch them with a barge pole ever again
The auction on Saturday was a disaster for L&T and VERMIN they thought they could pull the wool over the eyes of collectors of Banksy work.
They thought they could take us all for fools.
Seems the buyers were more intelligent than they had envisaged
I would image all the London Auction Hos and even provincial ones know what happened re this sale and its flop on Saturday... it is a small world in their game
I find it laughable that they now should try to down Banksy and his work
He was for them nothing more but a Money spinner.
|
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by alsbabar on Sept 29, 2008 0:48:39 GMT 1, is that quilted paper pfffffffffft?
is that quilted paper pfffffffffft?
|
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by Deleted on Sept 29, 2008 0:49:54 GMT 1, is that quilted paper pfffffffffft?
 (who is James Allen? , the name at the bottom.
is that quilted paper pfffffffffft? (who is James Allen? , the name at the bottom. |
|
|
|
Banksy Statement RE: Lyon & Turnbull, by pfffffffffft on Sept 29, 2008 0:50:51 GMT 1, is that quilted paper pfffffffffft?
I can assure you it's not quilted. Far too rough to be proper toilet paper...
is that quilted paper pfffffffffft? I can assure you it's not quilted. Far too rough to be proper toilet paper... |
|
In fact I said there are no rules. You're the one coming up with a list of rules.All this is is let the buyer beware and let the public decide it's fate. And if Banksy is so worried about people damaging private property while removing his street pieces then maybe he should think about not painting on other peoples property. 
(who is James Allen? , the name at the bottom.
