Wednesday's Weird Web Thievery - Banksy: An Urban Pirate, an Urban Guru or a sellout?

We have been very lucky to have been treated to quite the "street art" spectacle here in Nelson over the past month.

An urban art competition and exhibition has been happening, a key feature of this is an additional exhibition of the private Banksy collection belonging to "Oi You" organiser, George Shaw.

For fans of urban culture, to see Banksy's work up close and personal is a thrill, but one also has to ask the question of timing and relevance. Fine it is great to appreciate a moment in time captured forever and coveted by one or another, to hold onto the moment, but surely a huge part of all of this was the "time and place" factor.
The whole "urban art" movement began as a reactionary response to what was going on in our western society. A sense of taking ownership of the misinformation we were being collectively fed from the "establishment" to cover up what was really going on behind the scenes.

These underground works of Banksy came to the fore in urban UK - they popped up overnight and their controversial content had people scratching their collective heads and local councils trying to understand if this was art or graffiti. The subject matter indeed got people talking about relevant current events - at the time the UK was heavily involved in the first Gulf War, and there were a lot of people in the UK not too happy about this.

IN steps the enigmatic and forever elusive Banksy, whose poignant social commentary got people thinking, talking and certainly garnished some mainstream media attention. Job done one would think. A huge part of the movement was the anonymous nature of the acts, and the urban ninja skills - they often appeared in hard to reach places, which meant they could remain for a longer period of time whilst the authorities mobilised to remove them. They were clever, and far from defacing, egotistical scrawls.

They were once ART in the highest sense, but as soon as the art came off the city walls, done in secret at night, and onto "frames" for sale to collectors like George Shaw, Brad Pitt & Angelina Jolie, did the premise and intention behind the art also fade?
Is this just a sell out, just what Banksy was rallying against?

Granted he is a brilliant, gifted and accomplished artist who also produces "regular" art - hang it in galleries kind of way - what I can't understand is why the street art, that has had so much importance, passion and integrity being on the street, has to come off the city walls and be replicated so that collectors can buy it. Surely this is a sell out?

The Urban Movement - voice of a generation or just another brand?

The original thought processes behind these acts of art terrorism can only be guessed as the "real" Banksy leaves it up to us to guess just what is going on. The images tend to speak volumes though, and are a direct and damning commentary on where he feels we as a collective society are at.

These images speak volumes - the simplicity of them enough to be done quickly and quietly, yet leave a lasting impression.

The images he uses are iconic and need little explanation. But taken off the walls and put onto a medium and sold off as prints - surely this is as much of a corporate sell out as McDonald's and Disney?

The common thread seems to be one of Govt Overkill when it comes to Law and Order - quite a big thing if you lived in the UK in the early 90's when there was a complete crack down on the Dance party "E" scene, and youth / urban culture in general.

The feeling that Big Brother was really quite a bully comes through loud and clear, and these guerrilla art attacks not only stirred up conversation, but rallied together the disenfranchised - a call to arms - stand up and be counted!

This was a part of a whole counter-culture movement that was in full swing.
The urban art, the drugs, the rave parties, the festivals, the disbelief that governments and big business would put profit over people, all of this got a whole section of society up in arms. The media needed something to visually grab on to - and Banksy was it! His artwork was in every one's face, and it was reasonably constant and springing up where it was least expected, from the streets of London to the monumental dividing wall on the Gaza Strip.

So what makes someone like this, so opinionated, want to sell his work if the whole point of the work is to illustrate how shallow we have become as a society? I just dont understand.
The film that was made about this movement, "Exit through the Gift Shop", was very clever, but it did feel quite contrived and really ran against the grain of what the art is supposedly saying.

Is it art, is it a damming social commentary designed to motivate personal change, or a clever branding ploy to establish a counter culture artist into a dream lifestyle?

The whole elusive nature of Banksy has been such a crucial part of the art - the fact that he operated quietly and made a mockery of the establishment and all of it's camera's and controls played into the illusion.

So what of Banksy now?
That would require more time than I am going to allocate to all of this, for really the point of this is to question the process, and also the movement that has sprung out of it.

Don't get me wrong folks, I love art, urban culture and all of that - but it all seems to feel a little bit like American Idol.
If you take away the actual intent and sincerity, what you are left with is just a pale imitation, a cover song, that can never ever capture the spirit of the original, as that was all about a specific time and place, and one person's reaction to that.
Maybe the Native American's were completely right to fear that the photographs were stealing their souls - in this media driven age it is the singular pursuit of digital fame and longevity of the moment that seems to be sucking the spirit right out of the people.
Just a thought.

You can check out the OI You exhibition, and George Shaw's Banksy collection, at the website here < http://streetart.co.nz/ > (copy & paste people).