Are people on here secretly buying up mr brainwash, by boaty on Feb 16, 2010 14:15:04 GMT 1, You win Raiden - what do I know.....

Feb 16, 2010 8:46:52 GMT 1 raiden said:

-It seems Banksy and Shep encouraged and nurtured MBW into this sphere (like parents, I dare say);

-MBW is seemingly an alter ego to Banksy. Banksy took the organic street road (he knew no other, at the time?). Shep then drove towards a commercial road - along the way they adopted MBW. Now, MBW has gone the speedy commercial road and quickly targeted a higher money clientile: a primary client base outside the original B and Shep audience (well to do celebrity retail art market clients: the "take a picture of and paint me types" vs. the diehard artists and collectors on here). Their paths are diverging now - who is paying the most for all of B's, Shep's and MBW's work currently? Does MBW need to take the same old path?: his "creators" have already done and continue to do that; is he creating success at a different level and pace? - could it be evolution? (Which parents wouldn't be proud of their offspring doing it more efficiently and with less pain?)

-and now B, MBW and Shep make AND release a movie together - all in the family!; what may have started out to be fun and risqué for them at all varying stages in their and our lives - they're in the art business game now (new risks) - turning back is not easy for leaders of any effort (the art business included) - and they are leaders!;

-Successful art is a business (short and long term) and B, Shep and MBW are growing up to be successful in the business of art: networking; capitalizing, producing new talent, evolving etc; - good on them....

-let us not be stuck, as clearly they're growing and moving on; we should keep assessing and encouraging new and old talent (as clearly this forum played a key role in the growth of Banksy and other talent); but we also need to continue to be open minded....let's not be pawns in the collective games!

[Quality of art is not a factor in my comments above, as that is subjective – no skin in the current MBW art critique debacle. But I will say, I have a close middle-aged british well-heeled girlfriend who I recently suggested that she take a look and consider purchasing a Banksy print and her response was ["Yuck, graffitti art, never, not in to that!"] Clearly she knew who he was by mention of his name, but to each their own - not many are in to what we value either.

Boaty.... Watch the movie first.

MBW is not an alter ego of Banksy.

Your characterization is completely wrong.

He wasn't a creation of them. Shep has said that Thierry basically weaseled his way into their inner circle through his nepotistic connection with Invader and his earnest desire to direct a documentary on street art, which he failed at.

Banksy didn't create Mr Brainwash - I've been telling people for ages, there was an MBW prior to Banksy.

The only thing that was eye opening was how much access Thierry got to so many street artists because Invader vouched for him to Shep, and then Shep vouched for him to Banksy.

And in the movie, MBW is shown to be basically a pathetic fan boy of urban art - who is tickled pink when Banksy actually calls him - which Banksy did because in advance of his LA show, he asked Shep to take him to all the spots in LA which were perfect for bombing, but Shep was busy so he said why don't you call Thierry, because he knows all the spots from following me around with a camera.... That, and it helped that Thierry actually owns a number of those spots as well - namely on Melrose where there was a Shep, then a Banksy for the LA show, then a Mr Brainwash (which half the board was pissed at because MBW buffed a Banksy - little did I know he owned the wall in the first place)

Don't even give MBW that much credit as "created by" Banksy. He's created by the artists he hired on craigslist (mentioned in the movie as a "Classified ad" and which I reported on a year ago) They actually show them in the movie. Those people had more to do with creating MBW than anyone else - because they actually created the art.

Second, Shep did not release the movie. He is featured in the movie, but he didn't make it. He was largely in the dark about it during its production - though I don't how in the dark and at what point he was more or less in the know since he clearly was interviewed for the film.

Third, if you see MBWs footage --- its insane!!! But then he's a bit crazy too, because he had this weird pathological addiction to filming everything - and piled all the tapes (mostly unlabled) up in bins in a room in his house.

He literally has thousands (potentially tens of thousands) of hours of street art footage spanning eight years and including practically every artist in the whole scene.

So when Banksy called him on it, and he actually had to edit it to make the documentary he promised to make for 8 year, he made a garbled mess of a movie. Its incredible that anyone even had the patience to go through all his tapes (and I'm pretty sure no one successfully went through it all, even a cadre of PAs, because MBW had tens of thousands of hours of unlabled footage of everything from his kids, to his walks, to Invader getting stopped by police, to the contents of his refrigerator)

The point that you easily glean from Banksy's Doc was that MBW was a complete retard as a filmmaker. No one in their right mind claims to be a documentarian and then fails to log their footage - and the gasps in the Sundance audience were audible when they showed his tape room. And then when the show clips of what MBW presented to Bansky, you realize, MBW has almost no cohesive creative vision at all. It was a garbled mess of mash cuts.

A good deal of fine artists turned their hand to the camera - and all of them did so with more vision and coherence than Mr Brainwash - and that includes some of Warhol's most ridiculous film experiments.

-Successful art is a business (short and long term) and B, Shep and MBW are growing up to be successful in the business of art: networking; capitalizing, producing new talent, evolving etc; - good on them....

Yes, Warhol once said, "making money is art." But MBW isn't artful even in his making money. He's crass and visionless - resorting to the most base of offenses - including alleged willful plagiarism.

Plus, you mischaracterize MBW with the phrase "growing up to be successful in the business of art." MBW never grew as an artist. He hired a team to produce his first artshow, did it on a huge scale, and from day one charged upwards of $20,000 for a piece, when up to that point he had never created a piece of art in his life - and "created" even today is a loose term.

I also take offense to everything else you said

"networking; capitalizing, producing new talent, evolving etc;

"because its blatantly wrong....

MBW also has done nothing to "produce new talent." He has never given back to art in anyway - at all. He's never done a group show. He's never even done a full charity print. The best he's done is "A portion of the proceeds of each print sold will be donated to the red cross for aid to Haiti." A portion??? Why not 100%

Both Shep and Bansky have done 100% charity print releases and donations. And so have hundreds of other artists.

MBW has never given credit to any other artist. Sure he's collaborated, but largely with artists who at the time were bigger than he was and had actual street cred. So he's done nothing to produce new talent, if anything, he has obscured other artists who are far more deserving.

Evolving??? He hasn't evovled one iota since his 2008 show. He's had practically no notable progression - but that's unfair because he's been only active in fine art for two years, and in that period has been the most prolific releasers of prints in the entire scene.

So yes, I'll give you that he's tops on capitalizing on his work, for now. He's released well over 100 different prints in just two year. (market saturation anyone)

Consequently, he has a legion of invested fans - willing to come to the defense of their investment at every turn. Huge portions of which purchased their prints under false auspices: whether during the period when he was rumored to be Banksy, or the rumor that he was Michael Jackson's favorite artist, or the rumor that Banksy produced several of his images, to the fact he was in fact one of the members of a Banksy collective.... yada yada yada - all of which are utterly false.

et's not be pawns in the collective games!

The fact you're thinking this is some collective game, tells me you are the pawn... The only gaming that is going on here is the gaming of a system by Thierry to gain his own fame and fortune. And the only way you're a pawn, is if you buy his work. Period.

[Quality of art is not a factor in my comments above

Then get off this board. Seriously. How can you not consider quality in art? Is the lack of quality as a factor the reason you support MBW?

You win Raiden - what do I know.....

Feb 16, 2010 8:46:52 GMT 1 raiden said:

-It seems Banksy and Shep encouraged and nurtured MBW into this sphere (like parents, I dare say);

-MBW is seemingly an alter ego to Banksy. Banksy took the organic street road (he knew no other, at the time?). Shep then drove towards a commercial road - along the way they adopted MBW. Now, MBW has gone the speedy commercial road and quickly targeted a higher money clientile: a primary client base outside the original B and Shep audience (well to do celebrity retail art market clients: the "take a picture of and paint me types" vs. the diehard artists and collectors on here). Their paths are diverging now - who is paying the most for all of B's, Shep's and MBW's work currently? Does MBW need to take the same old path?: his "creators" have already done and continue to do that; is he creating success at a different level and pace? - could it be evolution? (Which parents wouldn't be proud of their offspring doing it more efficiently and with less pain?)

-and now B, MBW and Shep make AND release a movie together - all in the family!; what may have started out to be fun and risqué for them at all varying stages in their and our lives - they're in the art business game now (new risks) - turning back is not easy for leaders of any effort (the art business included) - and they are leaders!;

-Successful art is a business (short and long term) and B, Shep and MBW are growing up to be successful in the business of art: networking; capitalizing, producing new talent, evolving etc; - good on them....

-let us not be stuck, as clearly they're growing and moving on; we should keep assessing and encouraging new and old talent (as clearly this forum played a key role in the growth of Banksy and other talent); but we also need to continue to be open minded....let's not be pawns in the collective games!

[Quality of art is not a factor in my comments above, as that is subjective – no skin in the current MBW art critique debacle. But I will say, I have a close middle-aged british well-heeled girlfriend who I recently suggested that she take a look and consider purchasing a Banksy print and her response was ["Yuck, graffitti art, never, not in to that!"] Clearly she knew who he was by mention of his name, but to each their own - not many are in to what we value either.

Boaty.... Watch the movie first.

MBW is not an alter ego of Banksy.

Your characterization is completely wrong.

He wasn't a creation of them. Shep has said that Thierry basically weaseled his way into their inner circle through his nepotistic connection with Invader and his earnest desire to direct a documentary on street art, which he failed at.

Banksy didn't create Mr Brainwash - I've been telling people for ages, there was an MBW prior to Banksy.

The only thing that was eye opening was how much access Thierry got to so many street artists because Invader vouched for him to Shep, and then Shep vouched for him to Banksy.

And in the movie, MBW is shown to be basically a pathetic fan boy of urban art - who is tickled pink when Banksy actually calls him - which Banksy did because in advance of his LA show, he asked Shep to take him to all the spots in LA which were perfect for bombing, but Shep was busy so he said why don't you call Thierry, because he knows all the spots from following me around with a camera.... That, and it helped that Thierry actually owns a number of those spots as well - namely on Melrose where there was a Shep, then a Banksy for the LA show, then a Mr Brainwash (which half the board was pissed at because MBW buffed a Banksy - little did I know he owned the wall in the first place)

Don't even give MBW that much credit as "created by" Banksy. He's created by the artists he hired on craigslist (mentioned in the movie as a "Classified ad" and which I reported on a year ago) They actually show them in the movie. Those people had more to do with creating MBW than anyone else - because they actually created the art.

Second, Shep did not release the movie. He is featured in the movie, but he didn't make it. He was largely in the dark about it during its production - though I don't how in the dark and at what point he was more or less in the know since he clearly was interviewed for the film.

Third, if you see MBWs footage --- its insane!!! But then he's a bit crazy too, because he had this weird pathological addiction to filming everything - and piled all the tapes (mostly unlabled) up in bins in a room in his house.

He literally has thousands (potentially tens of thousands) of hours of street art footage spanning eight years and including practically every artist in the whole scene.

So when Banksy called him on it, and he actually had to edit it to make the documentary he promised to make for 8 year, he made a garbled mess of a movie. Its incredible that anyone even had the patience to go through all his tapes (and I'm pretty sure no one successfully went through it all, even a cadre of PAs, because MBW had tens of thousands of hours of unlabled footage of everything from his kids, to his walks, to Invader getting stopped by police, to the contents of his refrigerator)

The point that you easily glean from Banksy's Doc was that MBW was a complete retard as a filmmaker. No one in their right mind claims to be a documentarian and then fails to log their footage - and the gasps in the Sundance audience were audible when they showed his tape room. And then when the show clips of what MBW presented to Bansky, you realize, MBW has almost no cohesive creative vision at all. It was a garbled mess of mash cuts.

A good deal of fine artists turned their hand to the camera - and all of them did so with more vision and coherence than Mr Brainwash - and that includes some of Warhol's most ridiculous film experiments.

-Successful art is a business (short and long term) and B, Shep and MBW are growing up to be successful in the business of art: networking; capitalizing, producing new talent, evolving etc; - good on them....

Yes, Warhol once said, "making money is art." But MBW isn't artful even in his making money. He's crass and visionless - resorting to the most base of offenses - including alleged willful plagiarism.

Plus, you mischaracterize MBW with the phrase "growing up to be successful in the business of art." MBW never grew as an artist. He hired a team to produce his first artshow, did it on a huge scale, and from day one charged upwards of $20,000 for a piece, when up to that point he had never created a piece of art in his life - and "created" even today is a loose term.

I also take offense to everything else you said

"networking; capitalizing, producing new talent, evolving etc;

"because its blatantly wrong....

MBW also has done nothing to "produce new talent." He has never given back to art in anyway - at all. He's never done a group show. He's never even done a full charity print. The best he's done is "A portion of the proceeds of each print sold will be donated to the red cross for aid to Haiti." A portion??? Why not 100%

Both Shep and Bansky have done 100% charity print releases and donations. And so have hundreds of other artists.

MBW has never given credit to any other artist. Sure he's collaborated, but largely with artists who at the time were bigger than he was and had actual street cred. So he's done nothing to produce new talent, if anything, he has obscured other artists who are far more deserving.

Evolving??? He hasn't evovled one iota since his 2008 show. He's had practically no notable progression - but that's unfair because he's been only active in fine art for two years, and in that period has been the most prolific releasers of prints in the entire scene.

So yes, I'll give you that he's tops on capitalizing on his work, for now. He's released well over 100 different prints in just two year. (market saturation anyone)

Consequently, he has a legion of invested fans - willing to come to the defense of their investment at every turn. Huge portions of which purchased their prints under false auspices: whether during the period when he was rumored to be Banksy, or the rumor that he was Michael Jackson's favorite artist, or the rumor that Banksy produced several of his images, to the fact he was in fact one of the members of a Banksy collective.... yada yada yada - all of which are utterly false.

et's not be pawns in the collective games!

The fact you're thinking this is some collective game, tells me you are the pawn... The only gaming that is going on here is the gaming of a system by Thierry to gain his own fame and fortune. And the only way you're a pawn, is if you buy his work. Period.

[Quality of art is not a factor in my comments above

Then get off this board. Seriously. How can you not consider quality in art? Is the lack of quality as a factor the reason you support MBW?