[ramraiders]

Cheers I thought I'd dreamed it.

What are your thoughts on that Mr Ronhill? Yay or Nay?

[Guest]

just thought i would show you that work does get bombed, and if news paper articles are on the site in favor of work being preserved, make your on mind up ramraider.

[ramraiders]

So you don't have an opinion on it, or you just follow the Banksy website party line?

[mcster]

What makes me laugh is that at least one of the pieces isn't Banksy. The gril scrawling is by a Liverpool artist called Geeka. I've seen this attributed to Banksy before and I am 100% sure it isn't him. Have a look on the 7Press website and the girl scrawling is Geeka's.

[pelle]

Apr 23, 2008 3:00:32 GMT 1 @ronhill said:

if news paper articles are on the site in favor of work being preserved, make your on mind up ramraider.

It could mean that he condones the preservations, though my money is on Banksy taking the piss and wanting to show how absurd it is that his work gets preserved while everybody elses gets buffed.

[Curley]

Its just plain old theft in my book as it belongs to the people in my book.
I hope that Pest Control can do something about this now his details have been revealed

[daveanthony28]

I personally agree with Alsabar on this, let Pest Control use their wisdom,money & lawyers which they obviously have in place. at least we all agree on the fact of it is wrong that people are trying to profit from this. back to art i say ! :-)

[hanky]

Alsbabar

as controversial as ever I see. Anyway next time you're strolling down the South Bank PM me and we'll have that beer especially as it's starting to get sunny and I need to get out of the office at lunchtime!!

Hanky

[alsbabar]

hanky - you're on mate

[danvnuk]

Obviously the whole thing is extremely distasteful and wrong.

But - what I'm wondering is - Girl with Balloon on his site -

Wasn't it on the South Bank?
Surely those stairs are public property.

Did they cut the image out of the stonework?
If so - isn't that criminal damage?

Anyone seen that area since the image was removed? was it cut out?

[mammal2]

This is wack. Absolute bulls**t...but not as wack as this....

[alsbabar]

danvnuk, I walked along the southbank yesterday, GWB has been removed by the council - stairs are still there though, coke snorting copper gone, as has most of the paint that was dripped along the ground, Rat opposite parliament gone. The only 2 places I saw graff were Space Invaders under Westminster Bridge, and where the people skateboard by the Royal Festival Hall. None of the pieces were removed, just simply deleted by the council - so with that said, it seems hypocritical of Ken Livingstone to allow councils to remove these pieces, but yet when it comes ot re-election 95% of funds raised, was due to the selling of one of Banksy's canvases, which he donated to his campaign!!!

So who's the worst out of the 2 - Ken Livingstone or Haiste?

[danvnuk]

Apr 23, 2008 10:02:28 GMT 1 @alsbabar said:

danvnuk, I walked along the southbank yesterday, GWB has been removed by the council - stairs are still there though, coke snorting copper gone, as has most of the paint that was dripped along the ground, Rat opposite parliament gone.

Which is interesting - as either he hasn't got GWB for sale at all.

or-

They were removed by that specialist company using the chemical process that had the 'Old Skool' piece on Clerkenwell Rd.

If so, presuming he has got Girl With Balloon - seeing as it was on public propety - would the council have given him permission? I'm guessing as this is London and you need a license or a permit to do anything - they must have dealt with some authority.
Were they paid to allow it to be removed?

It's interesting to speculate on the transactions and nature of the discussions, between this guy and the authorities that must have taken place to arrange this.

[richy00]

last time i saw the rat on hayne street it looked like it had been painted over so im not too sure how this guy claims to have it.

[eddiedangerous]

Apr 23, 2008 10:02:28 GMT 1 @alsbabar said:

danvnuk, I walked along the southbank yesterday, GWB has been removed by the council - stairs are still there though, coke snorting copper gone, as has most of the paint that was dripped along the ground, Rat opposite parliament gone. The only 2 places I saw graff were Space Invaders under Westminster Bridge, and where the people skateboard by the Royal Festival Hall. None of the pieces were removed, just simply deleted by the council - so with that said, it seems hypocritical of Ken Livingstone to allow councils to remove these pieces, but yet when it comes ot re-election 95% of funds raised, was due to the selling of one of Banksy's canvases, which he donated to his campaign!!!

So who's the worst out of the 2 - Ken Livingstone or Haiste?

all of these pieces were removed before the days of "red ken" but i think you have to look furthe rinto the move by banksy...

after giving him the best part of a million quid for his campaign surely now he could never remove any of the large pieces ala "one nation", and now with ken in his pocket I think Banksy will be free to move around town making more and more political statements in his work. I think Ken will eventually be left a little red faced when Mr B goes over the top with a future piece, and Ken will effectively be powerless to stop it or remove it. Either that or risk the chance of looking like a complete hypocrytical idiot....

oh dear, hes done that already hasn't he!!!!!!

[poofly]

Apr 23, 2008 8:37:28 GMT 1 Curley said:

Its just plain old theft in my book as it belongs to the people in my book.

Surely it would belong to the person who owned the wall?

If they just see it as vandalism, then getting rid of it is doing them a service.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not into what mr Haiste is upto but its no different from selling a print.

If banksy wants to paint on a strangers wall then its up to them what they do with it.

If he wants it to stay then he can always seek permission beforehand.

It is a shame that they are disappearing, but isn't that for the better? It would be tragic if it got to the point of 'yeah banksy's pretty much covered the whole of London, infact it looks quite pathetic now' etc...

just a thought (or three)

[Curley]

Apr 23, 2008 10:17:49 GMT 1 danvnuk said:

Apr 23, 2008 10:02:28 GMT 1 @alsbabar said:

danvnuk, I walked along the southbank yesterday, GWB has been removed by the council - stairs are still there though, coke snorting copper gone, as has most of the paint that was dripped along the ground, Rat opposite parliament gone.

Which is interesting - as either he hasn't got GWB for sale at all.

or-

They were removed by that specialist company using the chemical process that had the 'Old Skool' piece on Clerkenwell Rd.

If so, presuming he has got Girl With Balloon - seeing as it was on public propety - would the council have given him permission? I'm guessing as this is London and you need a license or a permit to do anything - they must have dealt with some authority.
Were they paid to allow it to be removed?

It's interesting to speculate on the transactions and nature of the discussions, between this guy and the authorities that must have taken place to arrange this.

The one on London bridge is actually still partly there just very very faded.

[richy00]

i think somehow they just take the paint off the wall and leave the wall..... as the one on haynes st is like the picture above, its still there but really really faded.

[dadclot]

Smudger you are such a fecking novice.

[cutty]

FYI blah blah blah............

His work is transient, it is meant to be cleaned off thats what he wants.
Its street art.............
If someone takes a piece that will be cleaned or removed and puts it on there wall for show I guess thats OK.(only if is not gunna be sold for profit).
If some Muppet is removing it for personal gain then fuck em.
Why don't they sell them for the same price as they bought them for?
Also is the company address on there site? If so why doesnt someone from London that is writing on this topic go down there and ask them "WHAT THE FUCK''.

Cheers

[qprfc1967]

address on site is , 40 dover street , mayfair , london , w1 s 4nd
lets just put all our junk mail into jiffi bags and keep sending them all our sh*t
serves them right , or sh*t into a jiffi bag and send them that , see if they can sell our logs

[chleseaboy]

Apr 29, 2008 19:11:32 GMT 1 qprfc1967 said:

address on site is , 40 dover street , mayfair , london , w1 s 4nd
lets just put all our junk mail into jiffi bags and keep sending them all our sh*t
serves them right , or sh*t into a jiffi bag and send them that , see if they can sell our logs

That is the same address as The Arts Club. I'm totally against people selling bits of wall etc that don't belong to them as it is a criminal offence, but I can't understand how some of the 'pieces' have been obtained.
Also, some of you guys seem to be getting a little hot under the collar about Banksys work being removed/destroyed.... at the end of the day, its spray painted on walls, hardly a Renaissance oil painting. These works were intended/expected to have short life spans and I kinda like that idea.... replenish the old with the new. If Banksy wants his work to be enjoyed for generations to come, he wouldn't be painting them on old fire exit doors, derelect walls and pavements, and if he did want to be more traditional, he wouldn't be the icon he is today!?!?!

(I think that'll stir some of you? :-) )

[cutty]

I wanna know what any of you Banksy fans are doing about it?
Why don't you go down and see if this is for real?

I think this site is made up of a few Star Trek Geeks that sit on their computer all day.
Get off your computer and do something!

I am corresponding with the company at the moment to find out what the fark they are up to.
Can some more of you Banksy supporters do the same?

Cheers


I will post their reply.

[cutty]

This is what they wrote......

Dear Sir,

What may intitially seem a high price does not take into account the value that these pieces go for through galleries.
Banksy pieces fetch between £30,000- £200,000. A Google search will confirm this and there are news links on the site showing this.

When we remove the pieces we have to pay the owner of the wall a premium price as he has had the fortune of Banksy writing on his wall.

We are not paying Banksy. No one knows who he is.

Since he paints on other people's walls without permission, he has no legal or ethical right to demand payment.
The artist makes a very profitable living out of the free publicity he garners from painting on public walls, so I would not be too concerned.

I hope this has answered your questions.

[chleseaboy]

Personally, I don't really care! If someone can make a quick buck from selling bits of wall, then they are clearly doing something quite clever considering they have no COA... and the idiots who buy them, well, they are just idiots.

[BONGO]

BONGO WOULD NEVER ADVOCATE DIRECT ACTION

BUT BONGO ALSO ACCOMODATE THAT STREET ART IS BUT A FLEETING PLEASURE , PIVOTAL TO THE MOMENT OF DISCOVERY

BANKSY IS NOT POMPEII AND SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS SUCH. TO PRESERVE AND TO FETISH IS THE ANTITHESIS OF THE WORKS BASE ETHOS IN BONGOS OPINION

BONGO WOULD NOT BE SURPRISED OR OVERLY DISTURBED SHOULD WORKS BE RENDERED UNSALEABLE BY PERSON / PERSONS UNKNOWN

BETTER TO UNSALEABLE THAN TO BE USED AS AURAL MASTURBATION FODDER BY VULGAR WEALTH

[skylarkin]

I agree with cutty in regards that people here get too possessive about Banksy's work. Having been following it since the 90's I don't understand this requirement to preserve his art. I enjoy the fact that he paints and walks on, he releases his stuff to the wild.
People who then try and claim his stuff as their own (by this I mean that they get protective of it and want to wrap it in cotton wool) and defend the right for it to be kept for eternity are missing the point of street art completely in my book.
Street art is and always has been disposable. Maybe thats what attracts me to it, is that somebody has brought their view of a subject and put it into the public domain. Its a sound byte that if it resonates with me, I take away from it a good and soulful feeling about that message.
Banksy happens to have a similar take on things as me. He sees things as I wish other people did. He's not the only one by a long stretch, I have many influences and find many things thought provoking. But once he has said his piece, discuss it by all means but dont try and become its keeper.

I really liked the poster campaign that went around a few years ago, where by when this crew found a space where a poster had been removed they placed a 'web browser missing image' image on it. Perhaps the same should be done with banksys stuff. a missing image placed in the top left hand corner of the missing piece, with banksy.jpg underneath.
depth-first.com/demo/20061127/broken_image.png

[cutty]

Skylarkin,

Great you agree, but they should not be sold like that.
If you read this guys site he says he is preserving Banksy art, BULLSHIT!
I think if the council remove it fine, if some wanker is selling it to make money then ?
Street art is transient sure, this guy is not letting it be that.
The two coppers kissing in Brighton has a clear cover over it, that is preserving Banksy!
I said to this guy why doesn't he buy the piece and leave it on the wall, I will post his response after this.

As for chleseaboy go sell your fake Gucci at your stall Fag boy.
Nice comment, yeah the guys a real entrepreneur.
Do you not think that a thousand others have thought about doing this and relied that it is morally wrong.
SO FUCKEN CLEAVER.
Why don't you get off to your market.

And to the rest of you Trekkie(?) geeks that wanna sit on this site all day throwing round your Banksy this and Banksy that.
PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS!!!!!!

Best

[cutty]

This is what the guy wrote to me..................

If Banksy does not ask permission to paint on other people's
walls what right does he have over the ownership of the piece.

Banksy made his name by painting in very public places. He
never expected those pieces to stay up indefinitely and it would
take him literally 20 minutes to spray another dozen of these
whenever he wants.

He is already a millionaire through the work he sells privately.

The piece in time will be scrubbed of by the local council or
defaced anyway.

[fuzzed]

Apr 23, 2008 12:00:52 GMT 1 Curley said:

Apr 23, 2008 10:17:49 GMT 1 danvnuk said:

Which is interesting - as either he hasn't got GWB for sale at all.

or-

They were removed by that specialist company using the chemical process that had the 'Old Skool' piece on Clerkenwell Rd.

If so, presuming he has got Girl With Balloon - seeing as it was on public propety - would the council have given him permission? I'm guessing as this is London and you need a license or a permit to do anything - they must have dealt with some authority.
Were they paid to allow it to be removed?

It's interesting to speculate on the transactions and nature of the discussions, between this guy and the authorities that must have taken place to arrange this.

The one on London bridge is actually still partly there just very very faded.

What is the design next to the tag? As I took a photo of the same tag near to Liverpool Street Station.