ciscokid
New Member
๐จ๏ธ 151
๐๐ป 0
June 2010
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by ciscokid on Dec 31, 2010 9:23:32 GMT 1, mate, you are in TORONTO. T O R O N T O, C A N A D A. The only art going on there is sculpted igloos and eskimo soapstone sculptors. Perhaps Banksy should stencil a baby seal or a maple syrup bottle then they may take notice.
For those in the UK I understand how you think of Banksy as already super famous / popular, what ever you want to call it but outside of the UK he really isn't that big. Here in Toronto he is far from a household name. it is the same in the US. Fairey is a bigger name. Kaws is up there as well in the US. I think Banksy has done big things for street art in the UK but as much as I like the stuff he does, he is only continuing the work that has been going on for decades in the US.
mate, you are in TORONTO. T O R O N T O, C A N A D A. The only art going on there is sculpted igloos and eskimo soapstone sculptors. Perhaps Banksy should stencil a baby seal or a maple syrup bottle then they may take notice. For those in the UK I understand how you think of Banksy as already super famous / popular, what ever you want to call it but outside of the UK he really isn't that big. Here in Toronto he is far from a household name. it is the same in the US. Fairey is a bigger name. Kaws is up there as well in the US. I think Banksy has done big things for street art in the UK but as much as I like the stuff he does, he is only continuing the work that has been going on for decades in the US. |
|
jusdeep
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 2,797
๐๐ป 464
October 2007
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by jusdeep on Dec 31, 2010 9:34:45 GMT 1, mate, you are in TORONTO. T O R O N T O, C A N A D A. The only art going on there is sculpted igloos and eskimo soapstone sculptors. Perhaps Banksy should stencil a baby seal or a maple syrup bottle then they may take notice. For those in the UK I understand how you think of Banksy as already super famous / popular, what ever you want to call it but outside of the UK he really isn't that big. Here in Toronto he is far from a household name. it is the same in the US. Fairey is a bigger name. Kaws is up there as well in the US. I think Banksy has done big things for street art in the UK but as much as I like the stuff he does, he is only continuing the work that has been going on for decades in the US.
Banksy has done several pieces in Toronto for the run-up to ETTGS and previous to that!
mate, you are in TORONTO. T O R O N T O, C A N A D A. The only art going on there is sculpted igloos and eskimo soapstone sculptors. Perhaps Banksy should stencil a baby seal or a maple syrup bottle then they may take notice. For those in the UK I understand how you think of Banksy as already super famous / popular, what ever you want to call it but outside of the UK he really isn't that big. Here in Toronto he is far from a household name. it is the same in the US. Fairey is a bigger name. Kaws is up there as well in the US. I think Banksy has done big things for street art in the UK but as much as I like the stuff he does, he is only continuing the work that has been going on for decades in the US. Banksy has done several pieces in Toronto for the run-up to ETTGS and previous to that! |
|
hlarmy
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 3,199
๐๐ป 64
November 2007
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by hlarmy on Dec 31, 2010 9:45:16 GMT 1, I love Banksy but IMO he doesn't have a chance. Banksy may become as famous as Warhol, as popular but he isn't changing what people consider art, how people look at art, how people look at the world in general like Warhol did. Warhol changed the game. Banksy is one of the most interesting current players in the game. Banksy is building on what Haring and many others have built up. IMO the better question is how Banksy will be compared to Keith Haring. Again I think Banksy has a long way to go to get to Haring's level. But Banksy VS Haring is more realistic. 50 years from now I think Banksy will be a big name but I don't think as big as Koons or Hirst. I would put Banksy in the top 10 of living artists but not number 1. In my opinion the top guys today are nowhere near Warhol. If I had a lot of money to invest in an artist's work who I think will have the brightest future it would be Ai Weiwei. But that doesn't mean I don't think Banksy is great. I just don't think Warhol is a good comparison.
I agree with much of the above, and feel that with time Banksy could become huge; he's still young and every year he seems to step it up and surprise us all. There's plenty more to come but I do feel he has the potential, but in saying that, I disagree with many on here that think it's pretty much a forgone conclusion that Banksy WILL be this generation's Warhol...
mmmike, I'd be interested in hearing more about the top 10 living artists, and how they are changing the way we see art? 
I love Banksy but IMO he doesn't have a chance. Banksy may become as famous as Warhol, as popular but he isn't changing what people consider art, how people look at art, how people look at the world in general like Warhol did. Warhol changed the game. Banksy is one of the most interesting current players in the game. Banksy is building on what Haring and many others have built up. IMO the better question is how Banksy will be compared to Keith Haring. Again I think Banksy has a long way to go to get to Haring's level. But Banksy VS Haring is more realistic. 50 years from now I think Banksy will be a big name but I don't think as big as Koons or Hirst. I would put Banksy in the top 10 of living artists but not number 1. In my opinion the top guys today are nowhere near Warhol. If I had a lot of money to invest in an artist's work who I think will have the brightest future it would be Ai Weiwei. But that doesn't mean I don't think Banksy is great. I just don't think Warhol is a good comparison. I agree with much of the above, and feel that with time Banksy could become huge; he's still young and every year he seems to step it up and surprise us all. There's plenty more to come but I do feel he has the potential, but in saying that, I disagree with many on here that think it's pretty much a forgone conclusion that Banksy WILL be this generation's Warhol... mmmike, I'd be interested in hearing more about the top 10 living artists, and how they are changing the way we see art? |
|
pezlow
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 5,388
๐๐ป 254
January 2007
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by pezlow on Dec 31, 2010 9:50:28 GMT 1, I don't think anyone is comparing banksy to Warhol as banksy is now the question is more about potential - ie does banksy have the potential to be our generations Warhol. And the answer is emphatically yes.
Whether it is right or not banksy will be seen as the person who bought street art into the mainstream. I understand the importance of haring, basquiat and all the other legends from the eighties and whilst it is true that those artists have crossed over into the mainstream art world (auctions, museums etc) I don't believe that the level of public consciousness for their work is the same as banksy.
The art world (as with every other world) is changing all the time and one of the key drivers to that change is the internet. Banksy puts a piece of work up on the street in Toronto and everyone in the world can view it on their screens moments later. Haring etc didn't have that luxury.
I think banksy will be seen as being different and changing things. I think he does have the potential to be one of the biggest artists of our generation. Obviously whether he does or not only time will tell.
I don't think anyone is comparing banksy to Warhol as banksy is now the question is more about potential - ie does banksy have the potential to be our generations Warhol. And the answer is emphatically yes.
Whether it is right or not banksy will be seen as the person who bought street art into the mainstream. I understand the importance of haring, basquiat and all the other legends from the eighties and whilst it is true that those artists have crossed over into the mainstream art world (auctions, museums etc) I don't believe that the level of public consciousness for their work is the same as banksy.
The art world (as with every other world) is changing all the time and one of the key drivers to that change is the internet. Banksy puts a piece of work up on the street in Toronto and everyone in the world can view it on their screens moments later. Haring etc didn't have that luxury.
I think banksy will be seen as being different and changing things. I think he does have the potential to be one of the biggest artists of our generation. Obviously whether he does or not only time will tell.
|
|
Damien
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 3,324
๐๐ป 284
July 2008
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by Damien on Dec 31, 2010 10:09:12 GMT 1, they or he can go on for much longer i suppose compared to any other artist also as no one is meant to know who he is, if he died someone else he does work with could just carry on and say no he didnt die. That would be quite cool(if im making sense ha)
they or he can go on for much longer i suppose compared to any other artist also as no one is meant to know who he is, if he died someone else he does work with could just carry on and say no he didnt die. That would be quite cool(if im making sense ha)
|
|
balibob
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 1,782
๐๐ป 326
November 2010
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by balibob on Dec 31, 2010 11:17:01 GMT 1, He is the biggest artist in the UK by far. He hasn't matched the enduring popularity of Warhol yet but he hasn't put out a fraction Warhols attributed work.
Banksy has probably done more than any other artist to get a new generation interested in art, much the same as Warhol did in his day. With Kaufman and the factory in full swing, only his death was going to stop Warhol producing new work, Banksy may just get bored and then just vanish.
Lets just enjoy the stimulation he brings to the scene. Only time will tell where he stands in comparison with the great and the not so great of the art world.
That of course is just my opinion.
He is the biggest artist in the UK by far. He hasn't matched the enduring popularity of Warhol yet but he hasn't put out a fraction Warhols attributed work.
Banksy has probably done more than any other artist to get a new generation interested in art, much the same as Warhol did in his day. With Kaufman and the factory in full swing, only his death was going to stop Warhol producing new work, Banksy may just get bored and then just vanish.
Lets just enjoy the stimulation he brings to the scene. Only time will tell where he stands in comparison with the great and the not so great of the art world.
That of course is just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Karl Read
Artist
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 3,569
๐๐ป 637
April 2008
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by Karl Read on Dec 31, 2010 11:52:35 GMT 1, If your comparing Banksy to Warhol, thats way off.
Shepard Fairey is more like Warhol than Banksy.
If we are talking about popularity or who will be looked back on in years to come, i think Banksy would take it. I think its very possible that he would be as well known as what Warhol is now in 50 years time. I do believe he will be taught about to kids in school in art classes years from now.
If your comparing Banksy to Warhol, thats way off.
Shepard Fairey is more like Warhol than Banksy.
If we are talking about popularity or who will be looked back on in years to come, i think Banksy would take it. I think its very possible that he would be as well known as what Warhol is now in 50 years time. I do believe he will be taught about to kids in school in art classes years from now.
|
|
Warm Gun
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 4,646
๐๐ป 1,130
August 2009
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by Warm Gun on Dec 31, 2010 12:41:47 GMT 1, Warhol was a celebrity schmoozer who loved fame and yearned the spotlight. He loved the company of a-list stars and basked in the attention he gained from such publicity. This fame played a massive role in getting his name and art work out there and into the public's subconscious via magazines, tv documentaries, news reports, films etc...he was a genuine star in his own right, a recognisable face to his own brand. This is something Banksy will possibly never have while he stays hidden away to the 'celebrity' world. Although part of his intrigue lies with his almost super hero like double identity essentially it's the lack of a recognisable face that's now restricting his progress into a global heavyweight. People love to know what they are buying into with art, intrigue and mystery can only last so long. (although personally I like it).
The thing that scares me somewhat is that this particular scene or movement currently has an artist who's desire for fame and popularity replicates Warhol's, he's grinding his was into the public's consciousness and he has a face and personality to front his brand, I'm in no way comparing the two as artists but as market brands then perhaps Mr Brainwash will claim the next chapter of this art world book.........(shudders at the thought)
Warhol was a celebrity schmoozer who loved fame and yearned the spotlight. He loved the company of a-list stars and basked in the attention he gained from such publicity. This fame played a massive role in getting his name and art work out there and into the public's subconscious via magazines, tv documentaries, news reports, films etc...he was a genuine star in his own right, a recognisable face to his own brand. This is something Banksy will possibly never have while he stays hidden away to the 'celebrity' world. Although part of his intrigue lies with his almost super hero like double identity essentially it's the lack of a recognisable face that's now restricting his progress into a global heavyweight. People love to know what they are buying into with art, intrigue and mystery can only last so long. (although personally I like it).
The thing that scares me somewhat is that this particular scene or movement currently has an artist who's desire for fame and popularity replicates Warhol's, he's grinding his was into the public's consciousness and he has a face and personality to front his brand, I'm in no way comparing the two as artists but as market brands then perhaps Mr Brainwash will claim the next chapter of this art world book.........(shudders at the thought)
|
|
Winter
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 7,155
๐๐ป 4,461
March 2007
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by Winter on Dec 31, 2010 12:45:51 GMT 1, Banksy is big on this forum
Banksy is big on this forum
|
|
Warm Gun
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 4,646
๐๐ป 1,130
August 2009
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by Warm Gun on Dec 31, 2010 12:49:14 GMT 1, Banksy is big on this forum
Banksy is big on this forum Well, that's a good point really, after all this was the banksy forum so we'll hardly get an unbiased view on his ranking in the art establishment. We're in a bubble here. |
|
bullet
Blank Rank
๐จ๏ธ 0
๐๐ป 16
January 2013
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by bullet on Dec 31, 2010 13:11:34 GMT 1, Warhol was a celebrity schmoozer who loved fame and yearned the spotlight. He loved the company of a-list stars and basked in the attention he gained from such publicity. This fame played a massive role in getting his name and art work out there and into the public's subconscious via magazines, tv documentaries, news reports, films etc...he was a genuine star in his own right, a recognisable face to his own brand. This is something Banksy will possibly never have while he stays hidden away to the 'celebrity' world. Although part of his intrigue lies with his almost super hero like double identity essentially it's the lack of a recognisable face that's now restricting his progress into a global heavyweight. People love to know what they are buying into with art, intrigue and mystery can only last so long. (although personally I like it). The thing that scares me somewhat is that this particular scene or movement currently has an artist who's desire for fame and popularity replicates Warhol's, he's grinding his was into the public's consciousness and he has a face and personality to front his brand, I'm in no way comparing the two as artists but as market brands then perhaps Mr Brainwash will claim the next chapter of this art world book.........(shudders at the thought)
I would not say banksy is hidden away from the celebrity world... far from it. Kevin Spacey, Damon Albarn, Simon Cowell and Brad Pitt are all on speed dial.
Warhol was a celebrity schmoozer who loved fame and yearned the spotlight. He loved the company of a-list stars and basked in the attention he gained from such publicity. This fame played a massive role in getting his name and art work out there and into the public's subconscious via magazines, tv documentaries, news reports, films etc...he was a genuine star in his own right, a recognisable face to his own brand. This is something Banksy will possibly never have while he stays hidden away to the 'celebrity' world. Although part of his intrigue lies with his almost super hero like double identity essentially it's the lack of a recognisable face that's now restricting his progress into a global heavyweight. People love to know what they are buying into with art, intrigue and mystery can only last so long. (although personally I like it). The thing that scares me somewhat is that this particular scene or movement currently has an artist who's desire for fame and popularity replicates Warhol's, he's grinding his was into the public's consciousness and he has a face and personality to front his brand, I'm in no way comparing the two as artists but as market brands then perhaps Mr Brainwash will claim the next chapter of this art world book.........(shudders at the thought) I would not say banksy is hidden away from the celebrity world... far from it. Kevin Spacey, Damon Albarn, Simon Cowell and Brad Pitt are all on speed dial. |
|
bullet
Blank Rank
๐จ๏ธ 0
๐๐ป 16
January 2013
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by bullet on Dec 31, 2010 13:18:50 GMT 1, For those in the UK I understand how you think of Banksy as already super famous / popular, what ever you want to call it but outside of the UK he really isn't that big. Here in Toronto he is far from a household name. it is the same in the US. Fairey is a bigger name. Kaws is up there as well in the US. I think Banksy has done big things for street art in the UK but as much as I like the stuff he does, he is only continuing the work that has been going on for decades in the US.
Kaws?
lol
For those in the UK I understand how you think of Banksy as already super famous / popular, what ever you want to call it but outside of the UK he really isn't that big. Here in Toronto he is far from a household name. it is the same in the US. Fairey is a bigger name. Kaws is up there as well in the US. I think Banksy has done big things for street art in the UK but as much as I like the stuff he does, he is only continuing the work that has been going on for decades in the US. Kaws? lol |
|
ciscokid
New Member
๐จ๏ธ 151
๐๐ป 0
June 2010
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by ciscokid on Dec 31, 2010 13:26:47 GMT 1, For those in the UK I understand how you think of Banksy as already super famous / popular, what ever you want to call it but outside of the UK he really isn't that big. Here in Toronto he is far from a household name. it is the same in the US. Fairey is a bigger name. Jboy is up there as well in the US. I think Banksy has done big things for street art in the UK but as much as I like the stuff he does, he is only continuing the work that has been going on for decades in the US. Jboy? lol
word.
For those in the UK I understand how you think of Banksy as already super famous / popular, what ever you want to call it but outside of the UK he really isn't that big. Here in Toronto he is far from a household name. it is the same in the US. Fairey is a bigger name. Jboy is up there as well in the US. I think Banksy has done big things for street art in the UK but as much as I like the stuff he does, he is only continuing the work that has been going on for decades in the US. Jboy? lol word. |
|
|
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by colinfishwick on Dec 31, 2010 13:28:12 GMT 1, i think Pezlow makes a very good point - Banksy may not have been the man to revolutionise street art but over time that may well be the perception.
Warhol is not a fair comparison but i can see the parallels, the time to make that call is when Banksy has passed on and his legacy is being written, in the meantime anything can happen.
in the space of ten years only he has gone from nothing to selling out work to A-list movie stars, his older work has appreciated by about a million per cent, he has made a critically acclaimed film and he is seriously starting to cross over.
ask any male under 40 in the UK if he likes art and maybe 50-50 would say yes/no, ask the 50% who said no "if they've heard of/like Banksy?" 99% would say "yes" IMO.
the show at Bristol Museum was a sell-out every day for 3 months!!
Warhol was popular during his lifetime in an even more spectacular way but it took him longer to get to where Banksy is now, at least in this country, the British sense of humour is an acquired taste and sometimes travels well and sometimes doesn't, i think so long as Banksy stays true to what he does and doesn't try to please everybody then he'll do well - if people like him and what he does then fine but the minute he compromises his integrity to suit someone else i think he's in danger of becoming just another artist and less a phenomenon.
IMO of course 
i think Pezlow makes a very good point - Banksy may not have been the man to revolutionise street art but over time that may well be the perception. Warhol is not a fair comparison but i can see the parallels, the time to make that call is when Banksy has passed on and his legacy is being written, in the meantime anything can happen. in the space of ten years only he has gone from nothing to selling out work to A-list movie stars, his older work has appreciated by about a million per cent, he has made a critically acclaimed film and he is seriously starting to cross over. ask any male under 40 in the UK if he likes art and maybe 50-50 would say yes/no, ask the 50% who said no "if they've heard of/like Banksy?" 99% would say "yes" IMO. the show at Bristol Museum was a sell-out every day for 3 months!! Warhol was popular during his lifetime in an even more spectacular way but it took him longer to get to where Banksy is now, at least in this country, the British sense of humour is an acquired taste and sometimes travels well and sometimes doesn't, i think so long as Banksy stays true to what he does and doesn't try to please everybody then he'll do well - if people like him and what he does then fine but the minute he compromises his integrity to suit someone else i think he's in danger of becoming just another artist and less a phenomenon. IMO of course |
|
|
|
|
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by colinfishwick on Dec 31, 2010 13:29:12 GMT 1, sorry, to answer the OP, yes, most definitely Banksy will be our Warhol, no doubt about that.
sorry, to answer the OP, yes, most definitely Banksy will be our Warhol, no doubt about that.
|
|
Warm Gun
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 4,646
๐๐ป 1,130
August 2009
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by Warm Gun on Dec 31, 2010 14:17:22 GMT 1, Warhol was a celebrity schmoozer who loved fame and yearned the spotlight. He loved the company of a-list stars and basked in the attention he gained from such publicity. This fame played a massive role in getting his name and art work out there and into the public's subconscious via magazines, tv documentaries, news reports, films etc...he was a genuine star in his own right, a recognisable face to his own brand. This is something Banksy will possibly never have while he stays hidden away to the 'celebrity' world. Although part of his intrigue lies with his almost super hero like double identity essentially it's the lack of a recognisable face that's now restricting his progress into a global heavyweight. People love to know what they are buying into with art, intrigue and mystery can only last so long. (although personally I like it). The thing that scares me somewhat is that this particular scene or movement currently has an artist who's desire for fame and popularity replicates Warhol's, he's grinding his was into the public's consciousness and he has a face and personality to front his brand, I'm in no way comparing the two as artists but as market brands then perhaps Mr Brainwash will claim the next chapter of this art world book.........(shudders at the thought) I would not say banksy is hidden away from the celebrity world... far from it. Kevin Spacey, Damon Albarn, Simon Cowell and Brad Pitt are all on speed dial.
Yes but he's not seen to be with them is he, which is my point regarding Warhol's coverage and exposure. Has Banksy even met these celebrity fans face to face? who knows, I do doubt it though.
Warhol was a celebrity schmoozer who loved fame and yearned the spotlight. He loved the company of a-list stars and basked in the attention he gained from such publicity. This fame played a massive role in getting his name and art work out there and into the public's subconscious via magazines, tv documentaries, news reports, films etc...he was a genuine star in his own right, a recognisable face to his own brand. This is something Banksy will possibly never have while he stays hidden away to the 'celebrity' world. Although part of his intrigue lies with his almost super hero like double identity essentially it's the lack of a recognisable face that's now restricting his progress into a global heavyweight. People love to know what they are buying into with art, intrigue and mystery can only last so long. (although personally I like it). The thing that scares me somewhat is that this particular scene or movement currently has an artist who's desire for fame and popularity replicates Warhol's, he's grinding his was into the public's consciousness and he has a face and personality to front his brand, I'm in no way comparing the two as artists but as market brands then perhaps Mr Brainwash will claim the next chapter of this art world book.........(shudders at the thought) I would not say banksy is hidden away from the celebrity world... far from it. Kevin Spacey, Damon Albarn, Simon Cowell and Brad Pitt are all on speed dial. Yes but he's not seen to be with them is he, which is my point regarding Warhol's coverage and exposure. Has Banksy even met these celebrity fans face to face? who knows, I do doubt it though. |
|
pezlow
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 5,388
๐๐ป 254
January 2007
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by pezlow on Dec 31, 2010 14:26:04 GMT 1, The world had moved on since Warhol. Banksy doesn't have to be seen at hip parties in order to get on in the art world as Warhol did. In fact banksy's relative anonymity is IMHO likely to be of a help than a hindrance in developing banksy the brand.
The world had moved on since Warhol. Banksy doesn't have to be seen at hip parties in order to get on in the art world as Warhol did. In fact banksy's relative anonymity is IMHO likely to be of a help than a hindrance in developing banksy the brand.
|
|
pezlow
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 5,388
๐๐ป 254
January 2007
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by pezlow on Dec 31, 2010 14:32:02 GMT 1, One other point. Whilst shep no doubt has a huge following if you look at the relative performances of banksy and shep at auction then banksy does appear to have more commercial appeal.
One other point. Whilst shep no doubt has a huge following if you look at the relative performances of banksy and shep at auction then banksy does appear to have more commercial appeal.
|
|
|
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by My Name is Frank on Dec 31, 2010 14:39:41 GMT 1, For those in the UK I understand how you think of Banksy as already super famous / popular, what ever you want to call it but outside of the UK he really isn't that big. Here in Toronto he is far from a household name. it is the same in the US. Fairey is a bigger name. Kaws is up there as well in the US. I think Banksy has done big things for street art in the UK but as much as I like the stuff he does, he is only continuing the work that has been going on for decades in the US.
There's the difference as to why Banksy is more important, all those guys have relied on patronage, folks like Deitch with a vested interest. The reason they are heard of more in NOrth America is cos Deitch sells all his people that work. Banksy, who paid for his LA show?
It's all well and good throwing up kimpsons (although surely the better pop statement is to actually subverse the title scene and guess who done that?) and making massive legal walls, but who has taken it forward, moved it off walls and into sculpture, animatronic pet stores with no promotion and into record shops and Disneyland?
I would already say his star eclipses Haring and Basquait to the masses, just not in the accepted art world yet, however I would imagine that's the whole point. Who needs MOMA/ Pompidou when you can just throw something up yourself and 100,000's turn up without any promotion other than a you tube video and a picture of turd in an ice cream cone?
For those in the UK I understand how you think of Banksy as already super famous / popular, what ever you want to call it but outside of the UK he really isn't that big. Here in Toronto he is far from a household name. it is the same in the US. Fairey is a bigger name. Kaws is up there as well in the US. I think Banksy has done big things for street art in the UK but as much as I like the stuff he does, he is only continuing the work that has been going on for decades in the US. There's the difference as to why Banksy is more important, all those guys have relied on patronage, folks like Deitch with a vested interest. The reason they are heard of more in NOrth America is cos Deitch sells all his people that work. Banksy, who paid for his LA show? It's all well and good throwing up kimpsons (although surely the better pop statement is to actually subverse the title scene and guess who done that?) and making massive legal walls, but who has taken it forward, moved it off walls and into sculpture, animatronic pet stores with no promotion and into record shops and Disneyland? I would already say his star eclipses Haring and Basquait to the masses, just not in the accepted art world yet, however I would imagine that's the whole point. Who needs MOMA/ Pompidou when you can just throw something up yourself and 100,000's turn up without any promotion other than a you tube video and a picture of turd in an ice cream cone? |
|
|
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by don on Dec 31, 2010 14:42:15 GMT 1, spot on leftery.
spot on leftery.
|
|
|
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by manty on Dec 31, 2010 15:03:10 GMT 1, sorry, to answer the OP, yes, most definitely Banksy will be our Warhol, no doubt about that.
I do not think so
sorry, to answer the OP, yes, most definitely Banksy will be our Warhol, no doubt about that. I do not think so |
|
|
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by manty on Dec 31, 2010 15:04:19 GMT 1, Banksy is like Zorro
Banksy is like Zorro
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by don on Dec 31, 2010 15:10:42 GMT 1, I would not say banksy is hidden away from the celebrity world... far from it. Kevin Spacey, Damon Albarn, Simon Cowell and Brad Pitt are all on speed dial. Yes but he's not seen to be with them is he, which is my point regarding Warhol's coverage and exposure. Has Banksy even met these celebrity fans face to face? who knows, I do doubt it though.
It's all the celebrities that want to meet banksy these days.
I would not say banksy is hidden away from the celebrity world... far from it. Kevin Spacey, Damon Albarn, Simon Cowell and Brad Pitt are all on speed dial. Yes but he's not seen to be with them is he, which is my point regarding Warhol's coverage and exposure. Has Banksy even met these celebrity fans face to face? who knows, I do doubt it though. It's all the celebrities that want to meet banksy these days. |
|
mmmike
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 2,421
๐๐ป 759
March 2010
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by mmmike on Dec 31, 2010 15:37:56 GMT 1, I'm just catching up on the posts. There are so many that I want to comment on, don't know where to start...
I'm just catching up on the posts. There are so many that I want to comment on, don't know where to start...
|
|
mmmike
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 2,421
๐๐ป 759
March 2010
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by mmmike on Dec 31, 2010 15:47:16 GMT 1, mate, you are in TORONTO. T O R O N T O, C A N A D A. The only art going on there is sculpted igloos and eskimo soapstone sculptors. Perhaps Banksy should stencil a baby seal or a maple syrup bottle then they may take notice. For those in the UK I understand how you think of Banksy as already super famous / popular, what ever you want to call it but outside of the UK he really isn't that big. Here in Toronto he is far from a household name. it is the same in the US. Fairey is a bigger name. Kaws is up there as well in the US. I think Banksy has done big things for street art in the UK but as much as I like the stuff he does, he is only continuing the work that has been going on for decades in the US.
LOL
No question Toronto is not New York or London in terms of art.
There is great native art in Canada and as well as many very cool artists. Ed Burtynsky may very well be considered more important to art then Banksy in 50 or 100 years. It should be interesting how photography grows in acceptance in the art world.
But yes London is a much large hub for art. Not sure what your point is though? Does that mean because of where I live my opinion is less valuable?
mate, you are in TORONTO. T O R O N T O, C A N A D A. The only art going on there is sculpted igloos and eskimo soapstone sculptors. Perhaps Banksy should stencil a baby seal or a maple syrup bottle then they may take notice. For those in the UK I understand how you think of Banksy as already super famous / popular, what ever you want to call it but outside of the UK he really isn't that big. Here in Toronto he is far from a household name. it is the same in the US. Fairey is a bigger name. Kaws is up there as well in the US. I think Banksy has done big things for street art in the UK but as much as I like the stuff he does, he is only continuing the work that has been going on for decades in the US. LOL No question Toronto is not New York or London in terms of art. There is great native art in Canada and as well as many very cool artists. Ed Burtynsky may very well be considered more important to art then Banksy in 50 or 100 years. It should be interesting how photography grows in acceptance in the art world. But yes London is a much large hub for art. Not sure what your point is though? Does that mean because of where I live my opinion is less valuable? |
|
mmmike
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 2,421
๐๐ป 759
March 2010
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by mmmike on Dec 31, 2010 15:51:30 GMT 1, I love Banksy but IMO he doesn't have a chance. Banksy may become as famous as Warhol, as popular but he isn't changing what people consider art, how people look at art, how people look at the world in general like Warhol did. Warhol changed the game. Banksy is one of the most interesting current players in the game. Banksy is building on what Haring and many others have built up. IMO the better question is how Banksy will be compared to Keith Haring. Again I think Banksy has a long way to go to get to Haring's level. But Banksy VS Haring is more realistic. 50 years from now I think Banksy will be a big name but I don't think as big as Koons or Hirst. I would put Banksy in the top 10 of living artists but not number 1. In my opinion the top guys today are nowhere near Warhol. If I had a lot of money to invest in an artist's work who I think will have the brightest future it would be Ai Weiwei. But that doesn't mean I don't think Banksy is great. I just don't think Warhol is a good comparison. I agree with much of the above, and feel that with time Banksy could become huge; he's still young and every year he seems to step it up and surprise us all. There's plenty more to come but I do feel he has the potential, but in saying that, I disagree with many on here that think it's pretty much a forgone conclusion that Banksy WILL be this generation's Warhol... mmmike, I'd be interested in hearing more about the top 10 living artists, and how they are changing the way we see art?
In terms of my top 10. I don't really have one I was more speaking about a top ten list 50 years from now about current artists.
I don't know enough to feel comfortable trying to put together a list like that. My point was there are a whole lot of already very successful artists out there. Banksy I currently very popular outside of the art world, inside he is barely on the radar. So I think it raises the question of what exactly are we comparing? Popularity, auction prices, gallery acceptance? World wide just in the UK?
I love Banksy but IMO he doesn't have a chance. Banksy may become as famous as Warhol, as popular but he isn't changing what people consider art, how people look at art, how people look at the world in general like Warhol did. Warhol changed the game. Banksy is one of the most interesting current players in the game. Banksy is building on what Haring and many others have built up. IMO the better question is how Banksy will be compared to Keith Haring. Again I think Banksy has a long way to go to get to Haring's level. But Banksy VS Haring is more realistic. 50 years from now I think Banksy will be a big name but I don't think as big as Koons or Hirst. I would put Banksy in the top 10 of living artists but not number 1. In my opinion the top guys today are nowhere near Warhol. If I had a lot of money to invest in an artist's work who I think will have the brightest future it would be Ai Weiwei. But that doesn't mean I don't think Banksy is great. I just don't think Warhol is a good comparison. I agree with much of the above, and feel that with time Banksy could become huge; he's still young and every year he seems to step it up and surprise us all. There's plenty more to come but I do feel he has the potential, but in saying that, I disagree with many on here that think it's pretty much a forgone conclusion that Banksy WILL be this generation's Warhol... mmmike, I'd be interested in hearing more about the top 10 living artists, and how they are changing the way we see art? In terms of my top 10. I don't really have one I was more speaking about a top ten list 50 years from now about current artists. I don't know enough to feel comfortable trying to put together a list like that. My point was there are a whole lot of already very successful artists out there. Banksy I currently very popular outside of the art world, inside he is barely on the radar. So I think it raises the question of what exactly are we comparing? Popularity, auction prices, gallery acceptance? World wide just in the UK? |
|
mmmike
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 2,421
๐๐ป 759
March 2010
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by mmmike on Dec 31, 2010 15:53:43 GMT 1, For those in the UK I understand how you think of Banksy as already super famous / popular, what ever you want to call it but outside of the UK he really isn't that big. Here in Toronto he is far from a household name. it is the same in the US. Fairey is a bigger name. Kaws is up there as well in the US. I think Banksy has done big things for street art in the UK but as much as I like the stuff he does, he is only continuing the work that has been going on for decades in the US. There's the difference as to why Banksy is more important, all those guys have relied on patronage, folks like Deitch with a vested interest. The reason they are heard of more in NOrth America is cos Deitch sells all his people that work. Banksy, who paid for his LA show? It's all well and good throwing up kimpsons (although surely the better pop statement is to actually subverse the title scene and guess who done that?) and making massive legal walls, but who has taken it forward, moved it off walls and into sculpture, animatronic pet stores with no promotion and into record shops and Disneyland? I would already say his star eclipses Haring and Basquait to the masses, just not in the accepted art world yet, however I would imagine that's the whole point. Who needs MOMA/ Pompidou when you can just throw something up yourself and 100,000's turn up without any promotion other than a you tube video and a picture of turd in an ice cream cone?
Does it matter why they are successful or just that they are successful. Maybe Banksy's claim to fame is that he is gaining popularity in a different way?
For those in the UK I understand how you think of Banksy as already super famous / popular, what ever you want to call it but outside of the UK he really isn't that big. Here in Toronto he is far from a household name. it is the same in the US. Fairey is a bigger name. Kaws is up there as well in the US. I think Banksy has done big things for street art in the UK but as much as I like the stuff he does, he is only continuing the work that has been going on for decades in the US. There's the difference as to why Banksy is more important, all those guys have relied on patronage, folks like Deitch with a vested interest. The reason they are heard of more in NOrth America is cos Deitch sells all his people that work. Banksy, who paid for his LA show? It's all well and good throwing up kimpsons (although surely the better pop statement is to actually subverse the title scene and guess who done that?) and making massive legal walls, but who has taken it forward, moved it off walls and into sculpture, animatronic pet stores with no promotion and into record shops and Disneyland? I would already say his star eclipses Haring and Basquait to the masses, just not in the accepted art world yet, however I would imagine that's the whole point. Who needs MOMA/ Pompidou when you can just throw something up yourself and 100,000's turn up without any promotion other than a you tube video and a picture of turd in an ice cream cone? Does it matter why they are successful or just that they are successful. Maybe Banksy's claim to fame is that he is gaining popularity in a different way? |
|
mmmike
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 2,421
๐๐ป 759
March 2010
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by mmmike on Dec 31, 2010 15:57:05 GMT 1, One other point. Whilst shep no doubt has a huge following if you look at the relative performances of banksy and shep at auction then banksy does appear to have more commercial appeal.
But remember Shep produces about a billion prints a day. If you value of the work is how you want to measure success or importance, I'm pretty sure the value of all the work Shep has put out, far exceeds Banksy's work.
But neither comes anywhere near Koons or Hirst.
One other point. Whilst shep no doubt has a huge following if you look at the relative performances of banksy and shep at auction then banksy does appear to have more commercial appeal. But remember Shep produces about a billion prints a day. If you value of the work is how you want to measure success or importance, I'm pretty sure the value of all the work Shep has put out, far exceeds Banksy's work. But neither comes anywhere near Koons or Hirst. |
|
|
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by My Name is Frank on Dec 31, 2010 16:22:19 GMT 1, There's the difference as to why Banksy is more important, all those guys have relied on patronage, folks like Deitch with a vested interest. The reason they are heard of more in NOrth America is cos Deitch sells all his people that work. Banksy, who paid for his LA show? It's all well and good throwing up kimpsons (although surely the better pop statement is to actually subverse the title scene and guess who done that?) and making massive legal walls, but who has taken it forward, moved it off walls and into sculpture, animatronic pet stores with no promotion and into record shops and Disneyland? I would already say his star eclipses Haring and Basquait to the masses, just not in the accepted art world yet, however I would imagine that's the whole point. Who needs MOMA/ Pompidou when you can just throw something up yourself and 100,000's turn up without any promotion other than a you tube video and a picture of turd in an ice cream cone? Does it matter why they are successful or just that they are successful. Maybe Banksy's claim to fame is that he is gaining popularity in a different way?
Yep, that's exactly what I meant by the post and why he is going to be remembered as a 'game changer'. The first artist to completely and utterly ignore the art establishment and annoyingly end up up selling higher than many of the 'key stock' artist so admired. The famous for 15 seconds has been replaced famous on the internet.
There's the difference as to why Banksy is more important, all those guys have relied on patronage, folks like Deitch with a vested interest. The reason they are heard of more in NOrth America is cos Deitch sells all his people that work. Banksy, who paid for his LA show? It's all well and good throwing up kimpsons (although surely the better pop statement is to actually subverse the title scene and guess who done that?) and making massive legal walls, but who has taken it forward, moved it off walls and into sculpture, animatronic pet stores with no promotion and into record shops and Disneyland? I would already say his star eclipses Haring and Basquait to the masses, just not in the accepted art world yet, however I would imagine that's the whole point. Who needs MOMA/ Pompidou when you can just throw something up yourself and 100,000's turn up without any promotion other than a you tube video and a picture of turd in an ice cream cone? Does it matter why they are successful or just that they are successful. Maybe Banksy's claim to fame is that he is gaining popularity in a different way? Yep, that's exactly what I meant by the post and why he is going to be remembered as a 'game changer'. The first artist to completely and utterly ignore the art establishment and annoyingly end up up selling higher than many of the 'key stock' artist so admired. The famous for 15 seconds has been replaced famous on the internet. |
|
mmmike
Junior Member
๐จ๏ธ 2,421
๐๐ป 759
March 2010
|
Is Banksy this chapters Warhol?, by mmmike on Dec 31, 2010 16:33:41 GMT 1, Does it matter why they are successful or just that they are successful. Maybe Banksy's claim to fame is that he is gaining popularity in a different way? Yep, that's exactly what I meant by the post and why he is going to be remembered as a 'game changer'. The first artist to completely and utterly ignore the art establishment and annoyingly end up up selling higher than many of the 'key stock' artist so admired. The famous for 15 seconds has been replaced famous on the internet.
OK could be but does that make him comparable to Warhol? Warhol is already credited with bringing art to the people. Haring the same through street art. So the only real difference is that Banksy has been vocal against the art world and started POW rather than staying with a Laz? Putting his stuff in museums without permission that was pretty cool but a game changer?
Does it matter why they are successful or just that they are successful. Maybe Banksy's claim to fame is that he is gaining popularity in a different way? Yep, that's exactly what I meant by the post and why he is going to be remembered as a 'game changer'. The first artist to completely and utterly ignore the art establishment and annoyingly end up up selling higher than many of the 'key stock' artist so admired. The famous for 15 seconds has been replaced famous on the internet. OK could be but does that make him comparable to Warhol? Warhol is already credited with bringing art to the people. Haring the same through street art. So the only real difference is that Banksy has been vocal against the art world and started POW rather than staying with a Laz? Putting his stuff in museums without permission that was pretty cool but a game changer? |
|
