Wisconinla
New Member
🗨️ 627
👍🏻 587
September 2017
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Wisconinla on Feb 25, 2022 0:55:44 GMT 1, Anyone been to this?
banksyexpo.com/los-angeles/
Is anything on display actually authentic?
|
|
u%hdjfka c
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,005
👍🏻 1,132
January 2021
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by u%hdjfka c on Feb 25, 2022 2:35:33 GMT 1, Not even bothering with these unauthorized expos… I have a real Banksy next to my office in DTLA and I prefer to watch that one.
what a 💦🍆
Not even bothering with these unauthorized expos… I have a real Banksy next to my office in DTLA and I prefer to watch that one. what a 💦🍆 |
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by New Wave Dave on Feb 25, 2022 3:55:06 GMT 1, Not to raise ire but why is there so much hostility to 'unauthorized' shows? I know Banksy has shown his disapproval and his shows are much more like events - and free, but in lieu of a Banksy show near me, I would still love the opportunity to see some of his work IRL, whether its a gallery, a street art exhibit, or breaking into some guys office in DTLA. And they sure are making it clear it's not authorized which is pretty cool of them.
Is it very uncommon to have shows without a living artist's approval?
Not to raise ire but why is there so much hostility to 'unauthorized' shows? I know Banksy has shown his disapproval and his shows are much more like events - and free, but in lieu of a Banksy show near me, I would still love the opportunity to see some of his work IRL, whether its a gallery, a street art exhibit, or breaking into some guys office in DTLA. And they sure are making it clear it's not authorized which is pretty cool of them.
Is it very uncommon to have shows without a living artist's approval?
|
|
Wisconinla
New Member
🗨️ 627
👍🏻 587
September 2017
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Wisconinla on Feb 25, 2022 4:27:40 GMT 1, Before anyone goes looking for dmatt’s office, I’m pretty sure they were talking about swing girl on Broadway (it is still there).
I was simply wondering whether these shows have authentic work on display.
Before anyone goes looking for dmatt’s office, I’m pretty sure they were talking about swing girl on Broadway (it is still there).
I was simply wondering whether these shows have authentic work on display.
|
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Charlie Bronson on Feb 25, 2022 6:32:56 GMT 1, Not to raise ire but why is there so much hostility to 'unauthorized' shows? I know Banksy has shown his disapproval and his shows are much more like events - and free, but in lieu of a Banksy show near me, I would still love the opportunity to see some of his work IRL, whether its a gallery, a street art exhibit, or breaking into some guys office in DTLA. And they sure are making it clear it's not authorized which is pretty cool of them. Is it very uncommon to have shows without a living artist's approval?
My guess would be because usually those promoting and putting on unauthorized shows are profiting off of someone else’s creative work without the artist’s approval, and often make it seem like an approved/sanctioned show, which imho is in extremely poor taste. 99.9% of those paying for and attending this show will assume B is putting the show on; basically the whole thing is a lie.
Not to raise ire but why is there so much hostility to 'unauthorized' shows? I know Banksy has shown his disapproval and his shows are much more like events - and free, but in lieu of a Banksy show near me, I would still love the opportunity to see some of his work IRL, whether its a gallery, a street art exhibit, or breaking into some guys office in DTLA. And they sure are making it clear it's not authorized which is pretty cool of them. Is it very uncommon to have shows without a living artist's approval? My guess would be because usually those promoting and putting on unauthorized shows are profiting off of someone else’s creative work without the artist’s approval, and often make it seem like an approved/sanctioned show, which imho is in extremely poor taste. 99.9% of those paying for and attending this show will assume B is putting the show on; basically the whole thing is a lie. |
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by The Italian One on Feb 25, 2022 11:43:15 GMT 1, there is not a black or white situation,
I know of some shows (like the one in LA) that are a good shows to see.
the ones organized from Andipa and Contemporary Art Trader usually are good shows with original works(prints and original).
Yes they are not authorized by the artist but they are also an opportunity from people to see works from Banksy.
there is not a black or white situation,
I know of some shows (like the one in LA) that are a good shows to see.
the ones organized from Andipa and Contemporary Art Trader usually are good shows with original works(prints and original).
Yes they are not authorized by the artist but they are also an opportunity from people to see works from Banksy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by New Wave Dave on Feb 25, 2022 15:14:15 GMT 1, Not to raise ire but why is there so much hostility to 'unauthorized' shows? I know Banksy has shown his disapproval and his shows are much more like events - and free, but in lieu of a Banksy show near me, I would still love the opportunity to see some of his work IRL, whether its a gallery, a street art exhibit, or breaking into some guys office in DTLA. And they sure are making it clear it's not authorized which is pretty cool of them. Is it very uncommon to have shows without a living artist's approval? My guess would be because usually those promoting and putting on unauthorized shows are profiting off of someone else’s creative work without the artist’s approval, and often make it seem like an approved/sanctioned show, which imho is in extremely poor taste. 99.9% of those paying for and attending this show will assume B is putting the show on; basically the whole thing is a lie.
But more importantly, on the plus side, the fact that a street artist is popular enough that people are creating unauthorized exhibits is pretty awesome for anyone with any interest in this genre, or for the art scene as a whole. Museums aren't exactly overwhelmed with visitors year round.
Not to raise ire but why is there so much hostility to 'unauthorized' shows? I know Banksy has shown his disapproval and his shows are much more like events - and free, but in lieu of a Banksy show near me, I would still love the opportunity to see some of his work IRL, whether its a gallery, a street art exhibit, or breaking into some guys office in DTLA. And they sure are making it clear it's not authorized which is pretty cool of them. Is it very uncommon to have shows without a living artist's approval? My guess would be because usually those promoting and putting on unauthorized shows are profiting off of someone else’s creative work without the artist’s approval, and often make it seem like an approved/sanctioned show, which imho is in extremely poor taste. 99.9% of those paying for and attending this show will assume B is putting the show on; basically the whole thing is a lie. Hmmm... isn't the whole art market profiting off of someone else's creative work, especially when the artist is creating prints for sale? But more importantly, on the plus side, the fact that a street artist is popular enough that people are creating unauthorized exhibits is pretty awesome for anyone with any interest in this genre, or for the art scene as a whole. Museums aren't exactly overwhelmed with visitors year round. |
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Charlie Bronson on Feb 25, 2022 16:45:48 GMT 1, My guess would be because usually those promoting and putting on unauthorized shows are profiting off of someone else’s creative work without the artist’s approval, and often make it seem like an approved/sanctioned show, which imho is in extremely poor taste. 99.9% of those paying for and attending this show will assume B is putting the show on; basically the whole thing is a lie. Hmmm... isn't the whole art market profiting off of someone else's creative work, especially when the artist is creating prints for sale? But more importantly, on the plus side, the fact that a street artist is popular enough that people are creating unauthorized exhibits is pretty awesome for anyone with any interest in this genre, or for the art scene as a whole. Museums aren't exactly overwhelmed with visitors year round.
When an artist creates prints for sale, they’re making money by doing so. The fact that B/PC has, in the past, said “We have nothing to do with/don’t approve of this exhibition” with previous unauthorized B exhibits, is very telling. Imho the art scene will be just fine without these assholes taking advantage of artists’ creative work/careers to line their pockets.
My guess would be because usually those promoting and putting on unauthorized shows are profiting off of someone else’s creative work without the artist’s approval, and often make it seem like an approved/sanctioned show, which imho is in extremely poor taste. 99.9% of those paying for and attending this show will assume B is putting the show on; basically the whole thing is a lie. Hmmm... isn't the whole art market profiting off of someone else's creative work, especially when the artist is creating prints for sale? But more importantly, on the plus side, the fact that a street artist is popular enough that people are creating unauthorized exhibits is pretty awesome for anyone with any interest in this genre, or for the art scene as a whole. Museums aren't exactly overwhelmed with visitors year round. When an artist creates prints for sale, they’re making money by doing so. The fact that B/PC has, in the past, said “We have nothing to do with/don’t approve of this exhibition” with previous unauthorized B exhibits, is very telling. Imho the art scene will be just fine without these assholes taking advantage of artists’ creative work/careers to line their pockets. |
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Jules Leotard on Feb 25, 2022 17:17:21 GMT 1, Hmmm... isn't the whole art market profiting off of someone else's creative work, especially when the artist is creating prints for sale? But more importantly, on the plus side, the fact that a street artist is popular enough that people are creating unauthorized exhibits is pretty awesome for anyone with any interest in this genre, or for the art scene as a whole. Museums aren't exactly overwhelmed with visitors year round. When an artist creates prints for sale, they’re making money by doing so. The fact that B/PC has, in the past, said “We have nothing to do with/don’t approve of this exhibition” with previous unauthorized B exhibits, is very telling. Imho the art scene will be just fine without these assholes taking advantage of artists’ creative work/careers to line their pockets. Have you ever looked into who is putting these "unauthorized" exhibits on and who started them? Interesting cast of characters there. Makes the show look less UNauthorized. If B were taking credit for them openly everyone would assert he is a money-grubbing self-promoting Capitalist. As the shows are, someone else takes that wrap. The ticket prices are pretty nominal considering the venues that are being rented out. The amount of exposure he gets from these traveling shows is unbelievable.
Seriously, what elevates you more, you putting on your own show, a gallery putting on a show accessible only to the very few who can afford your work, OR a show put on by people who so adore your work that they figure it NEEDS to be out there, even in an 'unauthorized' manner that everyone and their sister can see for a nominal ticket price?
Its also very nice to see the original work up close, to see signatures, to compare what you see on here, little nuances like the positioning of splatter marks on different screen prints and how they correspond to other B prints you have seen, take photographs, compare, etc...but that's just me.
Hmmm... isn't the whole art market profiting off of someone else's creative work, especially when the artist is creating prints for sale? But more importantly, on the plus side, the fact that a street artist is popular enough that people are creating unauthorized exhibits is pretty awesome for anyone with any interest in this genre, or for the art scene as a whole. Museums aren't exactly overwhelmed with visitors year round. When an artist creates prints for sale, they’re making money by doing so. The fact that B/PC has, in the past, said “We have nothing to do with/don’t approve of this exhibition” with previous unauthorized B exhibits, is very telling. Imho the art scene will be just fine without these assholes taking advantage of artists’ creative work/careers to line their pockets. Have you ever looked into who is putting these "unauthorized" exhibits on and who started them? Interesting cast of characters there. Makes the show look less UNauthorized. If B were taking credit for them openly everyone would assert he is a money-grubbing self-promoting Capitalist. As the shows are, someone else takes that wrap. The ticket prices are pretty nominal considering the venues that are being rented out. The amount of exposure he gets from these traveling shows is unbelievable.
Seriously, what elevates you more, you putting on your own show, a gallery putting on a show accessible only to the very few who can afford your work, OR a show put on by people who so adore your work that they figure it NEEDS to be out there, even in an 'unauthorized' manner that everyone and their sister can see for a nominal ticket price?
Its also very nice to see the original work up close, to see signatures, to compare what you see on here, little nuances like the positioning of splatter marks on different screen prints and how they correspond to other B prints you have seen, take photographs, compare, etc...but that's just me.
|
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by New Wave Dave on Feb 25, 2022 17:38:21 GMT 1, Hmmm... isn't the whole art market profiting off of someone else's creative work, especially when the artist is creating prints for sale? But more importantly, on the plus side, the fact that a street artist is popular enough that people are creating unauthorized exhibits is pretty awesome for anyone with any interest in this genre, or for the art scene as a whole. Museums aren't exactly overwhelmed with visitors year round. When an artist creates prints for sale, they’re making money by doing so. The fact that B/PC has, in the past, said “We have nothing to do with/don’t approve of this exhibition” with previous unauthorized B exhibits, is very telling. Imho the art scene will be just fine without these assholes taking advantage of artists’ creative work/careers to line their pockets.
I understand how an artist could want to control the usage and I respect an artist's wishes when they have an issue with how their art is being exploited (like a shitty exhibit or put up in a Marriott), but if someone is just exhibiting it and hopefully respectfully (I haven't been to this exhibit so not sure on the second part), I just don't see the issue.
Now displaying removed external art, that's another story.
Hmmm... isn't the whole art market profiting off of someone else's creative work, especially when the artist is creating prints for sale? But more importantly, on the plus side, the fact that a street artist is popular enough that people are creating unauthorized exhibits is pretty awesome for anyone with any interest in this genre, or for the art scene as a whole. Museums aren't exactly overwhelmed with visitors year round. When an artist creates prints for sale, they’re making money by doing so. The fact that B/PC has, in the past, said “We have nothing to do with/don’t approve of this exhibition” with previous unauthorized B exhibits, is very telling. Imho the art scene will be just fine without these assholes taking advantage of artists’ creative work/careers to line their pockets. I just don't agree with this distinction. If anyone releases a piece of art for sale, they are entering the art market and all it entails; reselling for profit, exhibiting at museums or galleries; even placing them in hotels or lobbies. You sold a commodity. Simple as that. I understand how an artist could want to control the usage and I respect an artist's wishes when they have an issue with how their art is being exploited (like a shitty exhibit or put up in a Marriott), but if someone is just exhibiting it and hopefully respectfully (I haven't been to this exhibit so not sure on the second part), I just don't see the issue. Now displaying removed external art, that's another story. |
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Charlie Bronson on Feb 25, 2022 17:57:49 GMT 1, When an artist creates prints for sale, they’re making money by doing so. The fact that B/PC has, in the past, said “We have nothing to do with/don’t approve of this exhibition” with previous unauthorized B exhibits, is very telling. Imho the art scene will be just fine without these assholes taking advantage of artists’ creative work/careers to line their pockets. Have you ever looked into who is putting these "unauthorized" exhibits on and who started them? Interesting cast of characters there. Makes the show look less UNauthorized. If B were taking credit for them openly everyone would assert he is a money-grubbing self-promoting Capitalist. As the shows are, someone else takes that wrap. The ticket prices are pretty nominal considering the venues that are being rented out. The amount of exposure he gets from these traveling shows is unbelievable.
Seriously, what elevates you more, you putting on your own show, a gallery putting on a show accessible only to the very few who can afford your work, OR a show put on by people who so adore your work that they figure it NEEDS to be out there, even in an 'unauthorized' manner that everyone and their sister can see for a nominal ticket price?
Its also very nice to see the original work up close, to see signatures, to compare what you see on here, little nuances like the positioning of splatter marks on different screen prints and how they correspond to other B prints you have seen, take photographs, compare, etc...but that's just me.
No, I haven’t. Like I stated above, B hates these shows, he and PC have tried to stop them. There’s no conspiracy. That’s all I need to know.
B doesn’t need the exposure. Just my opinion.
When an artist creates prints for sale, they’re making money by doing so. The fact that B/PC has, in the past, said “We have nothing to do with/don’t approve of this exhibition” with previous unauthorized B exhibits, is very telling. Imho the art scene will be just fine without these assholes taking advantage of artists’ creative work/careers to line their pockets. Have you ever looked into who is putting these "unauthorized" exhibits on and who started them? Interesting cast of characters there. Makes the show look less UNauthorized. If B were taking credit for them openly everyone would assert he is a money-grubbing self-promoting Capitalist. As the shows are, someone else takes that wrap. The ticket prices are pretty nominal considering the venues that are being rented out. The amount of exposure he gets from these traveling shows is unbelievable.
Seriously, what elevates you more, you putting on your own show, a gallery putting on a show accessible only to the very few who can afford your work, OR a show put on by people who so adore your work that they figure it NEEDS to be out there, even in an 'unauthorized' manner that everyone and their sister can see for a nominal ticket price?
Its also very nice to see the original work up close, to see signatures, to compare what you see on here, little nuances like the positioning of splatter marks on different screen prints and how they correspond to other B prints you have seen, take photographs, compare, etc...but that's just me.
No, I haven’t. Like I stated above, B hates these shows, he and PC have tried to stop them. There’s no conspiracy. That’s all I need to know. B doesn’t need the exposure. Just my opinion. |
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Jules Leotard on Feb 25, 2022 18:09:35 GMT 1, Steve Lazarides is putting some of them on along with other people close to B. When did B convey to you he didn't like the shows? Until about a year ago, PCO's UK filings were in Steve's name, so your basically saying Steve was trying to stop his own shows which... gives him free publicity. The more you know.
Steve Lazarides is putting some of them on along with other people close to B. When did B convey to you he didn't like the shows? Until about a year ago, PCO's UK filings were in Steve's name, so your basically saying Steve was trying to stop his own shows which... gives him free publicity. The more you know.
|
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Charlie Bronson on Feb 25, 2022 18:28:44 GMT 1, Steve Lazarides is putting some of them on along with other people close to B. When did B convey to you he didn't like the shows? Until about a year ago, PCO's UK filings were in Steve's name, so your basically saying Steve was trying to stop his own shows which... gives him free publicity. The more you know.
Not sure how that has absolutely anything to do with the show we are discussing. Two completely different shows put on by completely different people. Obviously a show put on by someone who used to rep B is a bit different than one put on by “Exhibition Hub”. The more you know.
Steve Lazarides is putting some of them on along with other people close to B. When did B convey to you he didn't like the shows? Until about a year ago, PCO's UK filings were in Steve's name, so your basically saying Steve was trying to stop his own shows which... gives him free publicity. The more you know.
Not sure how that has absolutely anything to do with the show we are discussing. Two completely different shows put on by completely different people. Obviously a show put on by someone who used to rep B is a bit different than one put on by “Exhibition Hub”. The more you know. |
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Jules Leotard on Feb 25, 2022 18:40:59 GMT 1, Steve Lazarides is putting some of them on along with other people close to B. When did B convey to you he didn't like the shows? Until about a year ago, PCO's UK filings were in Steve's name, so your basically saying Steve was trying to stop his own shows which... gives him free publicity. The more you know.
Not sure how that has absolutely anything to do with the show we are discussing. Two completely different shows put on by completely different people. Obviously a show put on by someone who used to rep B is a bit different than one put on by “Exhibition Hub”. The more you know. LOL - all the shows are interconnected. At the Expo shows, if you read the placards next to each item, take note of who 'loaned' the artwork and then locations they are from (you can look them up), you might be able to pick out some patterns. You can even figure out who organized the show by open calls on social media for works.
It takes some effort, but I believe in you.
Steve Lazarides is putting some of them on along with other people close to B. When did B convey to you he didn't like the shows? Until about a year ago, PCO's UK filings were in Steve's name, so your basically saying Steve was trying to stop his own shows which... gives him free publicity. The more you know.
Not sure how that has absolutely anything to do with the show we are discussing. Two completely different shows put on by completely different people. Obviously a show put on by someone who used to rep B is a bit different than one put on by “Exhibition Hub”. The more you know. LOL - all the shows are interconnected. At the Expo shows, if you read the placards next to each item, take note of who 'loaned' the artwork and then locations they are from (you can look them up), you might be able to pick out some patterns. You can even figure out who organized the show by open calls on social media for works.
It takes some effort, but I believe in you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Jules Leotard on Feb 25, 2022 18:51:49 GMT 1, How about I put up a popup show with copies of Banksy’s works (coming from private collectors!) and some pictures taken from here and there, I make people pay $30 and then I buy myself some real Banksy prints?
How about I put up a popup show with copies of Banksy’s works (coming from private collectors!) and some pictures taken from here and there, I make people pay $30 and then I buy myself some real Banksy prints? I would be impressed. You would have to have a lot of depth with your resources and organizational skills. You know 80 people (or 1 person with 80 of B's works) that will lend them to you? |
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by New Wave Dave on Feb 25, 2022 18:53:49 GMT 1, How about I put up a popup show with copies of Banksy’s works (coming from private collectors!) and some pictures taken from here and there, I make people pay $30 and then I buy myself some real Banksy prints?
How about I put up a popup show with copies of Banksy’s works (coming from private collectors!) and some pictures taken from here and there, I make people pay $30 and then I buy myself some real Banksy prints? That would be arguing for a crappy Banksy show. Does Not have to be a bad show without Banksy's approval. |
|
STP
New Member
🗨️ 329
👍🏻 902
February 2022
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by STP on Feb 25, 2022 19:14:32 GMT 1, Steve Lazarides is putting some of them on along with other people close to B. When did B convey to you he didn't like the shows? Until about a year ago, PCO's UK filings were in Steve's name, so your basically saying Steve was trying to stop his own shows which... gives him free publicity. The more you know.
1. Nobody 'close to B' is involved in putting on these shitshows.
2. Banksy has 'conveyed he didn't like the shows', he even has a section on his website about it - banksy.co.uk/shows.html
3. 'PCOs UK fillings' have never been 'in Steve's name'.
Are you yourself involved in these shows, because I'm struggling to understand why you'd post such utter nonsense otherwise?
Steve Lazarides is putting some of them on along with other people close to B. When did B convey to you he didn't like the shows? Until about a year ago, PCO's UK filings were in Steve's name, so your basically saying Steve was trying to stop his own shows which... gives him free publicity. The more you know.
1. Nobody 'close to B' is involved in putting on these shitshows.
2. Banksy has 'conveyed he didn't like the shows', he even has a section on his website about it - banksy.co.uk/shows.html
3. 'PCOs UK fillings' have never been 'in Steve's name'.
Are you yourself involved in these shows, because I'm struggling to understand why you'd post such utter nonsense otherwise?
|
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Charlie Bronson on Feb 25, 2022 19:42:36 GMT 1, Not sure how that has absolutely anything to do with the show we are discussing. Two completely different shows put on by completely different people. Obviously a show put on by someone who used to rep B is a bit different than one put on by “Exhibition Hub”. The more you know. LOL - all the shows are interconnected. At the Expo shows, if you read the placards next to each item, take note of who 'loaned' the artwork and then locations they are from (you can look them up), you might be able to pick out some patterns. You can even figure out who organized the show by open calls on social media for works.
It takes some effort, but I believe in you.
Absolute nonsense; they’re not interconnected apart from having the common factor that they’re a cash grab by exploiting an artist’s work without compensating him or getting their approval.
“I believe in you”. I don’t need you to believe in me. I’m doing extremely well in life without you believing in me, but since you decided to resort to a passive aggressive, personal attack, I’ll follow suit, you bozo. Go ahead and keep pushing for unsanctioned art shows that have been called out as bogus cash grabs by the artists themselves. I’m sure it’ll do a lot of good for this community of ours🤡
Never mind that the artist is literally calling out the show you’re talking about as a fake cash grab, we should all value your opinion more than the artist’s opinion.
banksy.co.uk/shows.html
Not sure how that has absolutely anything to do with the show we are discussing. Two completely different shows put on by completely different people. Obviously a show put on by someone who used to rep B is a bit different than one put on by “Exhibition Hub”. The more you know. LOL - all the shows are interconnected. At the Expo shows, if you read the placards next to each item, take note of who 'loaned' the artwork and then locations they are from (you can look them up), you might be able to pick out some patterns. You can even figure out who organized the show by open calls on social media for works.
It takes some effort, but I believe in you.
Absolute nonsense; they’re not interconnected apart from having the common factor that they’re a cash grab by exploiting an artist’s work without compensating him or getting their approval. “I believe in you”. I don’t need you to believe in me. I’m doing extremely well in life without you believing in me, but since you decided to resort to a passive aggressive, personal attack, I’ll follow suit, you bozo. Go ahead and keep pushing for unsanctioned art shows that have been called out as bogus cash grabs by the artists themselves. I’m sure it’ll do a lot of good for this community of ours🤡 Never mind that the artist is literally calling out the show you’re talking about as a fake cash grab, we should all value your opinion more than the artist’s opinion. banksy.co.uk/shows.html |
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Jules Leotard on Feb 25, 2022 19:57:52 GMT 1, Steve Lazarides is putting some of them on along with other people close to B. When did B convey to you he didn't like the shows? Until about a year ago, PCO's UK filings were in Steve's name, so your basically saying Steve was trying to stop his own shows which... gives him free publicity. The more you know.
1. Nobody 'close to B' is involved in putting on these shitshows.
2. Banksy has 'conveyed he didn't like the shows', he even has a section on his website about it - banksy.co.uk/shows.html
3. 'PCOs UK fillings' have never been 'in Steve's name'.
Are you yourself involved in these shows, because I'm struggling to understand why you'd post such utter nonsense otherwise?
I misfired on my comment you address in number three. PCO is "owned" by POW. Steve is in the POW filings.
Steve Lazarides is putting some of them on along with other people close to B. When did B convey to you he didn't like the shows? Until about a year ago, PCO's UK filings were in Steve's name, so your basically saying Steve was trying to stop his own shows which... gives him free publicity. The more you know.
1. Nobody 'close to B' is involved in putting on these shitshows.
2. Banksy has 'conveyed he didn't like the shows', he even has a section on his website about it - banksy.co.uk/shows.html
3. 'PCOs UK fillings' have never been 'in Steve's name'.
Are you yourself involved in these shows, because I'm struggling to understand why you'd post such utter nonsense otherwise?
I misfired on my comment you address in number three. PCO is "owned" by POW. Steve is in the POW filings.
|
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Jules Leotard on Feb 25, 2022 20:22:17 GMT 1, I would be impressed. You would have to have a lot of depth with your resources and organizational skills. You know 80 people (or 1 person with 80 of B's works) that will lend them to you? Just buy 10 prints from EBay and make some panels. Did you have a chance to see the Instagram page of the LA show? No, I will take a look.
I would be impressed. You would have to have a lot of depth with your resources and organizational skills. You know 80 people (or 1 person with 80 of B's works) that will lend them to you? Just buy 10 prints from EBay and make some panels. Did you have a chance to see the Instagram page of the LA show? No, I will take a look.
|
|
STP
New Member
🗨️ 329
👍🏻 902
February 2022
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by STP on Feb 25, 2022 20:25:12 GMT 1,
1. Nobody 'close to B' is involved in putting on these shitshows.
2. Banksy has 'conveyed he didn't like the shows', he even has a section on his website about it - banksy.co.uk/shows.html
3. 'PCOs UK fillings' have never been 'in Steve's name'.
Are you yourself involved in these shows, because I'm struggling to understand why you'd post such utter nonsense otherwise?
I misfired on my comment you address in number three. PCO is "owned" by POW. Steve is in the POW filings.
You 'misfired' (more like shot yourself in the bollocks) on all three.
Again, are you in any way involved in any of these shows?
1. Nobody 'close to B' is involved in putting on these shitshows.
2. Banksy has 'conveyed he didn't like the shows', he even has a section on his website about it - banksy.co.uk/shows.html
3. 'PCOs UK fillings' have never been 'in Steve's name'.
Are you yourself involved in these shows, because I'm struggling to understand why you'd post such utter nonsense otherwise?
I misfired on my comment you address in number three. PCO is "owned" by POW. Steve is in the POW filings.
You 'misfired' (more like shot yourself in the bollocks) on all three.
Again, are you in any way involved in any of these shows?
|
|
STP
New Member
🗨️ 329
👍🏻 902
February 2022
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by STP on Feb 25, 2022 20:33:06 GMT 1, Another negative to consider regarding these shitshows...
I don't know about other promoters, but the Art of Banksy shitehawks were selling reproductions of genuine prints that had been loaned (rented, actually) on which they also printed - get this - the fucking edition number!
And people wonder why Pest Control take so long to authenticate genuine prints...
Another negative to consider regarding these shitshows...
I don't know about other promoters, but the Art of Banksy shitehawks were selling reproductions of genuine prints that had been loaned (rented, actually) on which they also printed - get this - the fucking edition number!
And people wonder why Pest Control take so long to authenticate genuine prints...
|
|
|
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Jules Leotard on Feb 25, 2022 20:49:57 GMT 1, I misfired on my comment you address in number three. PCO is "owned" by POW. Steve is in the POW filings.
You 'misfired' (more like shot yourself in the bollocks) on all three.
Again, are you in any way involved in any of these shows?
Again, are you in any way involved in any of these shows? - Absolutely not.
You are either a gas-lighter or lazy/ not very bright. If its gas-lighting and I have said more than I should, I don't have a problem with that. If you are just lazy/ don't care to do your own digging to figure things out, well, that's your problem.
I misfired on my comment you address in number three. PCO is "owned" by POW. Steve is in the POW filings.
You 'misfired' (more like shot yourself in the bollocks) on all three.
Again, are you in any way involved in any of these shows?
Again, are you in any way involved in any of these shows? - Absolutely not.
You are either a gas-lighter or lazy/ not very bright. If its gas-lighting and I have said more than I should, I don't have a problem with that. If you are just lazy/ don't care to do your own digging to figure things out, well, that's your problem.
|
|
bonesy
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,387
👍🏻 264
July 2006
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by bonesy on Feb 26, 2022 0:44:35 GMT 1, When an artist creates prints for sale, they’re making money by doing so. The fact that B/PC has, in the past, said “We have nothing to do with/don’t approve of this exhibition” with previous unauthorized B exhibits, is very telling. Imho the art scene will be just fine without these assholes taking advantage of artists’ creative work/careers to line their pockets. Have you ever looked into who is putting these "unauthorized" exhibits on and who started them? Interesting cast of characters there. Makes the show look less UNauthorized. If B were taking credit for them openly everyone would assert he is a money-grubbing self-promoting Capitalist. As the shows are, someone else takes that wrap. The ticket prices are pretty nominal considering the venues that are being rented out. The amount of exposure he gets from these traveling shows is unbelievable.
Seriously, what elevates you more, you putting on your own show, a gallery putting on a show accessible only to the very few who can afford your work, OR a show put on by people who so adore your work that they figure it NEEDS to be out there, even in an 'unauthorized' manner that everyone and their sister can see for a nominal ticket price?
Its also very nice to see the original work up close, to see signatures, to compare what you see on here, little nuances like the positioning of splatter marks on different screen prints and how they correspond to other B prints you have seen, take photographs, compare, etc...but that's just me.
Nominal fee?
Boston is $70 a head to see way mostly screen prints, or $280 for a family of 4. This is the epitome of what Banksy is against.
When B put on the LA show there were hundreds of originals, with a live elephant and a couple actors thrown in as well. He charged $0 admission.
When an artist creates prints for sale, they’re making money by doing so. The fact that B/PC has, in the past, said “We have nothing to do with/don’t approve of this exhibition” with previous unauthorized B exhibits, is very telling. Imho the art scene will be just fine without these assholes taking advantage of artists’ creative work/careers to line their pockets. Have you ever looked into who is putting these "unauthorized" exhibits on and who started them? Interesting cast of characters there. Makes the show look less UNauthorized. If B were taking credit for them openly everyone would assert he is a money-grubbing self-promoting Capitalist. As the shows are, someone else takes that wrap. The ticket prices are pretty nominal considering the venues that are being rented out. The amount of exposure he gets from these traveling shows is unbelievable.
Seriously, what elevates you more, you putting on your own show, a gallery putting on a show accessible only to the very few who can afford your work, OR a show put on by people who so adore your work that they figure it NEEDS to be out there, even in an 'unauthorized' manner that everyone and their sister can see for a nominal ticket price?
Its also very nice to see the original work up close, to see signatures, to compare what you see on here, little nuances like the positioning of splatter marks on different screen prints and how they correspond to other B prints you have seen, take photographs, compare, etc...but that's just me.
Nominal fee? Boston is $70 a head to see way mostly screen prints, or $280 for a family of 4. This is the epitome of what Banksy is against. When B put on the LA show there were hundreds of originals, with a live elephant and a couple actors thrown in as well. He charged $0 admission. |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Deleted on Feb 26, 2022 0:48:46 GMT 1, Have you ever looked into who is putting these "unauthorized" exhibits on and who started them? Interesting cast of characters there. Makes the show look less UNauthorized. If B were taking credit for them openly everyone would assert he is a money-grubbing self-promoting Capitalist. As the shows are, someone else takes that wrap. The ticket prices are pretty nominal considering the venues that are being rented out. The amount of exposure he gets from these traveling shows is unbelievable.
Seriously, what elevates you more, you putting on your own show, a gallery putting on a show accessible only to the very few who can afford your work, OR a show put on by people who so adore your work that they figure it NEEDS to be out there, even in an 'unauthorized' manner that everyone and their sister can see for a nominal ticket price?
Its also very nice to see the original work up close, to see signatures, to compare what you see on here, little nuances like the positioning of splatter marks on different screen prints and how they correspond to other B prints you have seen, take photographs, compare, etc...but that's just me.
Nominal fee? Boston is $70 a head to see way mostly screen prints, or $280 for a family of 4. This is the epitome of what Banksy is against. When B put on the LA show there were hundreds of originals, with a live elephant and a couple actors thrown in as well. He charged $0 admission.
Quite unreal isn't it
Have you ever looked into who is putting these "unauthorized" exhibits on and who started them? Interesting cast of characters there. Makes the show look less UNauthorized. If B were taking credit for them openly everyone would assert he is a money-grubbing self-promoting Capitalist. As the shows are, someone else takes that wrap. The ticket prices are pretty nominal considering the venues that are being rented out. The amount of exposure he gets from these traveling shows is unbelievable.
Seriously, what elevates you more, you putting on your own show, a gallery putting on a show accessible only to the very few who can afford your work, OR a show put on by people who so adore your work that they figure it NEEDS to be out there, even in an 'unauthorized' manner that everyone and their sister can see for a nominal ticket price?
Its also very nice to see the original work up close, to see signatures, to compare what you see on here, little nuances like the positioning of splatter marks on different screen prints and how they correspond to other B prints you have seen, take photographs, compare, etc...but that's just me.
Nominal fee? Boston is $70 a head to see way mostly screen prints, or $280 for a family of 4. This is the epitome of what Banksy is against. When B put on the LA show there were hundreds of originals, with a live elephant and a couple actors thrown in as well. He charged $0 admission. Quite unreal isn't it |
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Jules Leotard on Feb 26, 2022 1:30:49 GMT 1, Have you ever looked into who is putting these "unauthorized" exhibits on and who started them? Interesting cast of characters there. Makes the show look less UNauthorized. If B were taking credit for them openly everyone would assert he is a money-grubbing self-promoting Capitalist. As the shows are, someone else takes that wrap. The ticket prices are pretty nominal considering the venues that are being rented out. The amount of exposure he gets from these traveling shows is unbelievable.
Seriously, what elevates you more, you putting on your own show, a gallery putting on a show accessible only to the very few who can afford your work, OR a show put on by people who so adore your work that they figure it NEEDS to be out there, even in an 'unauthorized' manner that everyone and their sister can see for a nominal ticket price?
Its also very nice to see the original work up close, to see signatures, to compare what you see on here, little nuances like the positioning of splatter marks on different screen prints and how they correspond to other B prints you have seen, take photographs, compare, etc...but that's just me.
Nominal fee? Boston is $70 a head to see way mostly screen prints, or $280 for a family of 4. This is the epitome of what Banksy is against. When B put on the LA show there were hundreds of originals, with a live elephant and a couple actors thrown in as well. He charged $0 admission. I went to one of the shows in 2019. Family pass was 32 Euros.
$280 does sound extraordinary. I took a quick look at the ticket website and it says tickets for children are $30 and adults $40. VIP tickets are $70, so your quote is kind of inflated. I note the location is Cambridge - right near Harvard, pretty high-rent district there. They could have put it in lower rent Southie and charged half as much, but then again it would get half the exposure.
I wonder how many shows B could put on for $0 before he was bankrupted...
Have you ever looked into who is putting these "unauthorized" exhibits on and who started them? Interesting cast of characters there. Makes the show look less UNauthorized. If B were taking credit for them openly everyone would assert he is a money-grubbing self-promoting Capitalist. As the shows are, someone else takes that wrap. The ticket prices are pretty nominal considering the venues that are being rented out. The amount of exposure he gets from these traveling shows is unbelievable.
Seriously, what elevates you more, you putting on your own show, a gallery putting on a show accessible only to the very few who can afford your work, OR a show put on by people who so adore your work that they figure it NEEDS to be out there, even in an 'unauthorized' manner that everyone and their sister can see for a nominal ticket price?
Its also very nice to see the original work up close, to see signatures, to compare what you see on here, little nuances like the positioning of splatter marks on different screen prints and how they correspond to other B prints you have seen, take photographs, compare, etc...but that's just me.
Nominal fee? Boston is $70 a head to see way mostly screen prints, or $280 for a family of 4. This is the epitome of what Banksy is against. When B put on the LA show there were hundreds of originals, with a live elephant and a couple actors thrown in as well. He charged $0 admission. I went to one of the shows in 2019. Family pass was 32 Euros.
$280 does sound extraordinary. I took a quick look at the ticket website and it says tickets for children are $30 and adults $40. VIP tickets are $70, so your quote is kind of inflated. I note the location is Cambridge - right near Harvard, pretty high-rent district there. They could have put it in lower rent Southie and charged half as much, but then again it would get half the exposure.
I wonder how many shows B could put on for $0 before he was bankrupted...
|
|
bonesy
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,387
👍🏻 264
July 2006
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by bonesy on Feb 26, 2022 8:25:38 GMT 1, Nominal fee? Boston is $70 a head to see way mostly screen prints, or $280 for a family of 4. This is the epitome of what Banksy is against. When B put on the LA show there were hundreds of originals, with a live elephant and a couple actors thrown in as well. He charged $0 admission. I went to one of the shows in 2019. Family pass was 32 Euros.
$280 does sound extraordinary. I took a quick look at the ticket website and it says tickets for children are $30 and adults $40. VIP tickets are $70, so your quote is kind of inflated. I note the location is Cambridge - right near Harvard, pretty high-rent district there. They could have put it in lower rent Southie and charged half as much, but then again it would get half the exposure.
I wonder how many shows B could put on for $0 before he was bankrupted...
www.banksyexhibit.com/boston/buy-tickets-boston/#/?month=2022-03
Weekday tickets are $40 and $55
Weekend tickets are $55 and mostly $70. Weekend vip is $110.
But wait, then when you get to the checkout screen they add a service fee of $7 per ticket.
I don’t see why anyone would try to defend these exhibits. If you don’t see they’re robbing you then I guess you are the one they are probably ripping off.
Nominal fee? Boston is $70 a head to see way mostly screen prints, or $280 for a family of 4. This is the epitome of what Banksy is against. When B put on the LA show there were hundreds of originals, with a live elephant and a couple actors thrown in as well. He charged $0 admission. I went to one of the shows in 2019. Family pass was 32 Euros.
$280 does sound extraordinary. I took a quick look at the ticket website and it says tickets for children are $30 and adults $40. VIP tickets are $70, so your quote is kind of inflated. I note the location is Cambridge - right near Harvard, pretty high-rent district there. They could have put it in lower rent Southie and charged half as much, but then again it would get half the exposure.
I wonder how many shows B could put on for $0 before he was bankrupted...
Weekday tickets are $40 and $55 Weekend tickets are $55 and mostly $70. Weekend vip is $110. But wait, then when you get to the checkout screen they add a service fee of $7 per ticket. I don’t see why anyone would try to defend these exhibits. If you don’t see they’re robbing you then I guess you are the one they are probably ripping off. |
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Jules Leotard on Feb 27, 2022 3:01:51 GMT 1, I went to one of the shows in 2019. Family pass was 32 Euros.
$280 does sound extraordinary. I took a quick look at the ticket website and it says tickets for children are $30 and adults $40. VIP tickets are $70, so your quote is kind of inflated. I note the location is Cambridge - right near Harvard, pretty high-rent district there. They could have put it in lower rent Southie and charged half as much, but then again it would get half the exposure.
I wonder how many shows B could put on for $0 before he was bankrupted...
Weekday tickets are $40 and $55 Weekend tickets are $55 and mostly $70. Weekend vip is $110. But wait, then when you get to the checkout screen they add a service fee of $7 per ticket. I don’t see why anyone would try to defend these exhibits. If you don’t see they’re robbing you then I guess you are the one they are probably ripping off. Bonesy,
I don't disagree with you that the prices you list are absurd. When four of us went for 32 Euros, I felt it was a bargain. I would think they could have kids under 12 free and ask $10 for kids under 18. I don't personally think that B and co. are divorced from this show though. The ticket price alone would be embarrassing for B to be associated with, but there also is the aspect that I would expect he would be putting the money to good use. The Gift Shop was well-stocked and if he has no association with the show, he does have the standing to shut the Gift Shop down. Of course, he wouldn't either way.
All that said, the show I went to in 2019 was the only time I have ever seen B originals in person. I'm not sure where else I can see originals without spending money WAY more money (flights, hotels, etc.). This conversation (assuming that they are originals) is odd to me considering it's mostly about the cost of admission when all anyone on here talks about is how much this or that is worth and constantly inflating prices. I would rather go to see a pile of his work with my family in one place than own a Peckham Rock. That's just me (and that's pretty much the cost of admission).
I also expect that some level of the inflation of ticket prices is associated with Covid and limiting human throughput.
I went to one of the shows in 2019. Family pass was 32 Euros.
$280 does sound extraordinary. I took a quick look at the ticket website and it says tickets for children are $30 and adults $40. VIP tickets are $70, so your quote is kind of inflated. I note the location is Cambridge - right near Harvard, pretty high-rent district there. They could have put it in lower rent Southie and charged half as much, but then again it would get half the exposure.
I wonder how many shows B could put on for $0 before he was bankrupted...
Weekday tickets are $40 and $55 Weekend tickets are $55 and mostly $70. Weekend vip is $110. But wait, then when you get to the checkout screen they add a service fee of $7 per ticket. I don’t see why anyone would try to defend these exhibits. If you don’t see they’re robbing you then I guess you are the one they are probably ripping off. Bonesy,
I don't disagree with you that the prices you list are absurd. When four of us went for 32 Euros, I felt it was a bargain. I would think they could have kids under 12 free and ask $10 for kids under 18. I don't personally think that B and co. are divorced from this show though. The ticket price alone would be embarrassing for B to be associated with, but there also is the aspect that I would expect he would be putting the money to good use. The Gift Shop was well-stocked and if he has no association with the show, he does have the standing to shut the Gift Shop down. Of course, he wouldn't either way.
All that said, the show I went to in 2019 was the only time I have ever seen B originals in person. I'm not sure where else I can see originals without spending money WAY more money (flights, hotels, etc.). This conversation (assuming that they are originals) is odd to me considering it's mostly about the cost of admission when all anyone on here talks about is how much this or that is worth and constantly inflating prices. I would rather go to see a pile of his work with my family in one place than own a Peckham Rock. That's just me (and that's pretty much the cost of admission).
I also expect that some level of the inflation of ticket prices is associated with Covid and limiting human throughput.
|
|
Shoeless
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,112
👍🏻 624
February 2011
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Shoeless on Feb 28, 2022 19:51:20 GMT 1, This is coming through Nashville.
I, like many of you, saw this as a money grab and not being a genuine Banksy exhibit, I had no interest.
Then I get messages from a couple friends who aren’t necessarily interested in much art but are excited to see Banksy works in person. I started to explain to them that this isn’t authorized when I realized that they don’t care…and why would I knock something that excites them. I then thought that I should accompany them to see that excitement and talk to them about everything.
I am now excited to go……as long as ticket prices aren’t ridiculously high.
This is coming through Nashville.
I, like many of you, saw this as a money grab and not being a genuine Banksy exhibit, I had no interest.
Then I get messages from a couple friends who aren’t necessarily interested in much art but are excited to see Banksy works in person. I started to explain to them that this isn’t authorized when I realized that they don’t care…and why would I knock something that excites them. I then thought that I should accompany them to see that excitement and talk to them about everything.
I am now excited to go……as long as ticket prices aren’t ridiculously high.
|
|
|
|
“Banksy” Los Angeles, by Street Arted 2020 on Feb 28, 2022 20:33:49 GMT 1, I have seen photos of the show. Looks like shit.
I have seen photos of the show. Looks like shit.
|
|
