To me, this looks like the work of someone who lacks any originality or creativity.......

Mr. Brainfart more like......

i think brainwash goes here for inspiration.

The sad thing is if I was in Miami I'd probably go along to have a look

c'mon.....that was amazing how he spray painted that paintbrush.....it's all in the wrist!

Very well said!

you guys are a bunch of haters....

Haters has to be one of the gayest words to have ever come out of America.

Wrong, that would be Richard Simmons!

please could i have photos from "under construction" for people who are in Miami. I have a blog and i'd like to put photos. thank you
artmore.over-blog.com/

"I agree that he is the warhol of this genre"

This is insulting.

First, this is like those people who spuriously compare every bad leader in history to Hitler because their knowledge of history doesn't extend to the 10,000 other more apt comparisons to be made.

Second learn your art history. Warhol was a movement. Just like Banksy is a movement.

Warhol actually is credited with totally original developments in art history. Here are things that Warhol is attributed as being responsible for:

1) Turning Commercial Art into Fine Art (yeah, there are a handful of contemporaries who can claim some of the credit, but no one can stake a claim to this quite like Warhol)
2) Forcing, somewhat for the first time, to have the fine art world accept the high art of the low brow objects like Tomato Soup cans.
3) He is credited for popularizing the screen print and serigraphy. So the entire concept of "prints" as we understand them now - i.e. as being numbered, having value, and , originated with Andy Warhol.
4) Is credited as the first artist to exhibit video as art.
5) Warhol developed Pop Art as a lifestyle - becoming arguably the first artist to develop a "360 degree" brand leaving a lasting empire that includes the still in circulation Interview Magazine, insane amounts of licensing, books, features, advertisements, and record producing.

Additionally, his fine art career began after a highly successful illustrating career for major brands.

Also Andy Warhol, while often erroneously credited as the father of pop art, certainly is the artist most associated with the medium. Much like Banksy is most associated with Urban art, even though he's not the father of the medium.

--

I actually am not out so much to criticize MBW, than simply to stop the bulls**t by calling out absolutely ridiculous statements about the guy.

He's not Banksy or Shep, he's not able to draw, he's not much of an artist, and he really isn't as self aware as he's credited for.

He's also contributed nothing to art and its progression that hasn't been done before and done better. I wouldn't hold that as a capital offense, plenty of artists can't make that claim.

Even his arguably his most important contribution - making art for fame and fortunes stake alone with minimal talent - is less attributable to MBW himself, than Banksy's influence in secretly filming a Documentary around him thus fueling a crazy bubble market for MBW.

And besides, even creating art solely for fame and fortunes sake using publicity and little talent - has been done before as every five to ten years post Warhol, there has been an MBW like character in the art world who through massive hype reaches some absurd height, only to fizzle out over time. (And every one of them seized upon whatever the dominant medium of the moment may be)

Clearly, MBW has secured a rather dubious place in art history. He's pretty much guaranteed a mention in any biography of Banksy thanks to ETTGS - but I'd be surprised if he retains prominence in the wider world of art in 30 years, unless he shows insane levels of progression - which is a stretch as he's now been on the scene for several years, and more often shows signs of regression than progression.

---

I really don't mean to be such a hater. If everyone was just like "Ha, funny, he had storm troopers on a wall. What a dumb but fun idea."

Or said "Look at that, he enlarged Homer Simpson and put a paint brush in his hand. That's cute."

Then I wouldn't argue. Those are VALID opinions.

Comparing him to Warhol is like comparing David Cameron, George Bush, Tony Blair, or Barack Obama to Hitler. Its just a completely ill informed comparison (I would say something beginning with an "st" and ending with a "d", but I want to respect Silky's "be nice" edict, and you're probably very intelligent and a great bloke to grab a pint with, just suffering from momentary MBW insanity)

Hell, I bought MBWs "splash heart" print from his NY show on the 'bay because I like the image and actually think its a really original urban art take on the simple image of a heart - plus I got it for a cheap price.

I do like Mr. MBW. I don't own anything signed MBW. The only thing I could contemplate buying is the batpapi/catmama. Would I buy a piece of art? Not really. Consciouly, I would buy a collectible (if not too expensive).

Where I differ from you is that you look piece by piece and think about the quality of the piece. Of course, it's s**tty. But, is Fairey Hello Kitty print art? Seriously, on what accout would it be? It's simply a collectible. That thing should normally be an open edition...

There is nothing new intrinsically in the Mr. Brainwash thing. Read REVS for example in Autograf, the book from 2004, explaining his views on graffiti art. Put some s**t with a number on it, limited, etc...and then people think they are Picasso...REVS defines some of the s**t like Rock n Roll memorabilia...I totally agree. And it goes very far in this scene...

So, to me, the MBW thing put something on the table in putting it like crazy for real. The ebay listings of some of his stuff are hilarious. When I see the quanitity of paper from MBW, I want to puke, but I laugh. Nobody knows for sure how this will end...so there "he" adds something unlike many....

The crazyness about "signed banksy" is it about 1) art 2) flipping-investment or 3) collectible? What are the %? People are often called "fans" in this "scene"...It goes very far in urban art...and now in ART in general...

What I expect from MBW is great kitsch spectacle and s**tty limited products (you can make it big...s**t can be big...the biggest it is, the best)...Limited but a LOT,,,...When he does, his brand is more interesting than many to me...But a lot like Banksy, it does not mean that you need to own to appreciate...and here is the biggest contradiction between street art and many many many "fans" (including me sometimes)...and maybe some of the answer of sausages' question...MBW is not the culprit...and it's good performance art to me...Stormtro0pers are great lol, what is the problem?

I prefer this:


But actually, is it more?
- wannabes in the art establishment;
- people buying ""street art"" prints believing there is something edgy in it:
- etc.

I'm not sure that the conservative art establishment really gives a s**t about Mr. Brainwash...