I seem to remember talk of prints like this being given as gifts to people who helped with the first Cans Festival The dedication on this one seems to fit with that story.

In my life, if I give someone a gift it doesn't come with conditions. If you give something to somebody they can do what they want with it.

Shades of Grey always apply, however i would think when these were gifted the lucky recipients were aware of what they were receiving and that Banksy didn't have to do this.With that in mind these are very personal items that have been gifted, can understand how i would feel if i gave something to someone on the understanding it was thank you gift


PC could issue COA's for these which are marked genuine gifted artwork not intended for resale???

Sticky issue without a doubt, people have to take into account both sides of the story/argument imo

I totally agree with PA about giving with no strings attached, but a gift from a very successful artist especially Banksy adds a whole range of issues not usually associated with the odd pair of Christmas socks (sorry, tongue in cheek, but you see my point).

I'm going to have to mention the 'v' word now, I've tried to steer clear but think it's inevitable!

Banksy gives a personalised piece of art to friend to say thank you, during presentation of gift artist makes friend aware that he really doesn't want to see it sold (possibly saying Pest Control will never authenticate one of his gifts), friend says 'Thanks' and accepts gift, later friend wants to sell gift because they are really skint and need the money. Because it cannot be authenticated it will remain an uncertain purchase, therefore reducing it's value considerably, even tho it is authentic.

I'm not really talking about the relationship between Banksy and the friend, and only about it being a gift because it won't be authenticated. What worries me is the possibility in the future that (many years down the line) there's going to be a lot of confusion over authentic, not authentic and authentic but not authenticated work (say that after a couple of Nelson Mandela's!!!!).

Sorry, crap ramble, find it difficult to explain... this is a new phenomenon to the art market tho isn't it (all stemming from street work removal and selling), the living artist actually providing a service that authenticates his own work. Yet ironically not authenticating some perfectly legitimate pieces because they were gifts.

Ahhh very confused!

around £1100 maybe? That's if it's a screen print. I wonder if anyone from the Bristol show got a signed Monkey Parliament print?

with a COA £3000+ maybe, depending how many were made and signed

I'd never buy this or any art with a personalised dedication to anyone else apart from myself. What's the point unless it's cheap as chips..?

I also agree with PA, once I give a gift it's not mine. Having said that, if a mate then turned and flogged it just for profit I'd be pissed.

I think you guys are crazy.
Who wants to pay so much money for a print dedicated to someone else? Come on... For 5K you easily buy an awesome signed print.
Luca should keep it and tell his kids how he got it. I would.

A change of heart PA?

Trade are all over it it's true. I think this might, might make about 10,000. I have a client willing to go near that level, so it's going to be interesting to see what happens

£10k phew!

That will put it well beyond what I'd be prepared to pay for it

I have a signed WSM that is inscribed with a heart and turf war written after it. Not dedicated to anyone personally and that has a full COA from Pest Control. These items are postcard size, Charlie (Pure Evil) has one in his shop dedicated to him.

Took this picture of Pure Evil's Banksy gift at his gallery.

perhaps I wont bother going along after all ;D