# "Repainting" a Banksy - What's the point?



## Build_A_Fire (Apr 6, 2009)

I've just read that some group has "repainted" a bit of Banksy by chucking red paint all over it. Er....whats the point? I had a look at their website too, they're called Appropriate Media by the way, and it still looks pointless. 

The thing they're saying is that Banksy is only enjoyed by fakes and posers, so I think "Well, so what if it is? Haven't you got anything better to complain about? Is Banksy really worth becoming the focus of all your activism? If you don't like it, don't like it - don't make it look worse!

I'm in Cardiff by the way but posted here so you Brizzle lot could tell me what da fucks goin onnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn???


----------



## big eejit (Apr 6, 2009)

AFAIK it was some twattish art students who decided to spoil a much loved bit of Bristol to make some half-assed point about art. Knobheads.


----------



## Skin (Apr 6, 2009)

There is a Banksey on a garden wall near me and some one has put a frame over it!
Next to it someone has painted a knob and written something like Wanksey!
It was painted out, but has reappeared.


----------



## Skin (Apr 6, 2009)

I'm sure the Mild Mild west was OK today when I past it earlier!


----------



## big eejit (Apr 6, 2009)

Skin said:


> There is a Banksey on a garden wall near me and some one has put a frame over it!
> Next to it someone has painted a knob and written something like Wanksey!
> It was painted out, but has reappeared.



Now that is quite funny.


----------



## Skin (Apr 6, 2009)

Eeeeeeeeeeeeeek
That's it!


----------



## Paul Russell (Apr 6, 2009)

Skin said:


> I'm sure the Mild Mild west was OK today when I past it earlier!



I think people have been cleaning off the red paint today, so it sounds like they did a good job!


----------



## Build_A_Fire (Apr 6, 2009)

big eejit said:


> Now that is quite funny.



Thats way more artistic than that red paint job! Good to see yr not all knobheads in Brizzle, lovely job!


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 6, 2009)

big eejit said:


> Now that is quite funny.



I suppose if you are banksy you can't really complain about this, and it hasn't defaced the banksy itself. 


As for the red paint lot I expect they are just trying to get some notoriety to flog their own art.  Yawn.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Apr 6, 2009)

Idiots.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 6, 2009)

Someone threw red paint on Mild Mild West?  Wankers.


----------



## spitfire (Apr 6, 2009)

stick up a link to the idiots website. I have an artistic point to make.

(i did google it but couldn't find it)


----------



## Gerry1time (Apr 7, 2009)

photos - http://bristolgraffiti.wordpress.com/2009/04/06/banksy-mild-mild-west-defaced/

the culprits' website - http://www.appropriatemedia.net/


----------



## spitfire (Apr 7, 2009)

jesus, what a bunch of jumped up little idiots.

Their best response to the "over-interpretation of public space by city planners, council regeneration officers, community artists,
graffiti artists and other such unrelenting fundamentalists." is to _throw paint at it_?!?

useless oxygen thief, book burning bastards.


----------



## Build_A_Fire (Apr 7, 2009)

spitfire said:


> jesus, what a bunch of jumped up little idiots.
> 
> Their best response to the "over-interpretation of public space by city planners, council regeneration officers, community artists,
> graffiti artists and other such unrelenting fundamentalists." is to _throw paint at it_?!?
> ...



Yeah, surely if you did have that point of view you'd paint over the whole damn wall with whitewash? Now _that_ would make a statement!


----------



## Skin (Apr 7, 2009)

There was a fantastic picture painted in the ruined building doorway on Stokes Croft! The same artist has done the special brew (?) drinkers picture in Brunswick Square.
But some talentless signature freak painted over the Stokes Croft pic. Why?
Stokes Croft is a very exciting and artistic place to pass through. I'm really pleased I live 2ft away from it!


----------



## Crispy (Apr 7, 2009)

The amount of good graffiti in Bristol is astounding


----------



## Paul Russell (Apr 7, 2009)

Crispy said:


> The amount of good graffiti in Bristol is astounding



http://www.bristolgraffitimap.com/


----------



## Build_A_Fire (Apr 7, 2009)

Paul Russell said:


> http://www.bristolgraffitimap.com/


 That _is_ astounding, I like that you have your own map for it hehe


----------



## Build_A_Fire (Apr 7, 2009)

'Course, there's always the possibility that it was Banksy who threw the paint on the wall........


----------



## stupid kid (Apr 7, 2009)

One I made earlier


----------



## Lost Zoot (Apr 7, 2009)

hmm i dont really see the issue? if bansky can paint on walls anyone has the right to paint over it.


----------



## Gromit (Apr 7, 2009)

Lost Zoot said:


> hmm i dont really see the issue? if bansky can paint on walls anyone has the right to paint over it.


 
This.

If he doesn't want his art defaced he should do it proper like. On canvas and hung in a gallery or in someone's home.

If the owners of the wall had paid for an commissioned piece of wall art, only then it would be artistic vandalism.

As it stands its just vandalism against vandalism. The quality / imfamy of the orginal vandalism is irrelevant.


----------



## Thora (Apr 7, 2009)

Lost Zoot said:


> hmm i dont really see the issue? if bansky can paint on walls anyone has the right to paint over it.



It was a nice picture that local people like, and some art students decided to ruin it.  It's not really an issue of whether they have a "right" to do it or not.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 7, 2009)

Lost Zoot said:


> hmm i dont really see the issue? if bansky can paint on walls anyone has the right to paint over it.


Depends how you define "rights"... 

...legally speaking it is usually down to the owner of the wall, with possibly/theoretically the community being involved via their elected representatives and the local planning laws.

...morally speaking you could claim that there are a whole bunch of different people with different sets of "rights".

Maybe your view of what is right boils down to "ownership" of the space/wall? Would you say it is OK (legally/morally) for anyone to destroy anything that is not legally owned by someone?

IMO there are things which are 'wrong' which can't be prevented by law but which people generally don't like. For example lying to people could be wrong even if it isn't illegal or preventable. The general response is to view the person doing it as a twat, even if it isn't criminal.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 7, 2009)

Nothing to stop them throwing paint on it. Nothing to stop me calling them twats for doing so


----------



## Gromit (Apr 7, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Would you say it is OK (legally/morally) for anyone to destroy anything that is not legally owned by someone?


 
They didn't destroy it. They modified it using their awesome art powers!


----------



## Build_A_Fire (Apr 7, 2009)

Lost Zoot said:


> hmm i dont really see the issue? if bansky can paint on walls anyone has the right to paint over it.



Indeed they can, but it bugs me when they do it to make some big political point that just isn't there y'know?

Unless it was banksy what did it obv, hahaha


----------



## Gromit (Apr 7, 2009)

Build_A_Fire said:


> Indeed they can, but it bugs me when they do it to make some big political point that just isn't there y'know?
> 
> Unless it was banksy what did it obv, hahaha


 
They are doing it to get an art degree. Cause controversy. Spark debate. Document the fuss. 

Accept the pludits and course marks for sparking an artistic debate in the media and writing a paper about what you did and the repurcusions.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 7, 2009)

I can't believe no ones quoted the Brooker article yet


----------



## Belushi (Apr 7, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> I can't believe no ones quoted the Brooker article yet



Or that Goering quote about reaching for his pistol


----------



## JTG (Apr 7, 2009)

Thora said:


> It was a nice picture that local people like, and some art students decided to ruin it.  It's not really an issue of whether they have a "right" to do it or not.



totally. skim reading that website it looks like they have an issue with the PRSC lot as well. The Stokes Croft area has some beautiful pieces which are a joy to look at as I pass and Mild Mild West has long passed the point where it's relevant who painted it, people love it regardless. It's like defacing any other much loved local landmark.

Selfish twats


----------



## big eejit (Apr 7, 2009)

This is apparently their flickr page:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27892381@N04/sets/72157612323436337/comments/


----------



## Geri (Apr 7, 2009)

JTG said:


> totally. skim reading that website it looks like they have an issue with the PRSC lot as well. The Stokes Croft area has some beautiful pieces which are a joy to look at as I pass and Mild Mild West has long passed the point where it's relevant who painted it, people love it regardless. It's like defacing any other much loved local landmark.
> 
> Selfish twats



I agree, and I'm not a huge fan of Banksy. I get irate when people put graffiti on the Spirit of Bristol.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 7, 2009)

Gerry1time said:


> the culprits' website - http://www.appropriatemedia.net/



Doing a "whois" on that website gives: 

*Registrant:*
Clean Collective
Po Box 2695
Bristol, Avon BS6 9BJ
GB

Which then leads to:
flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/27892381@N04/sets/72157612323436337/comments/

An entry on 'bristol creatives' http://www.bristolcreatives.co.uk/node/1626
"CLEAN - Sarah Cockings and Alice Hodge"

and another wesbite: http://www.clean-art.co.uk/

Pretty stupid for an artist (if it is this in fact them) to wreck someone's art. They are almost inviting people to go and destroy their stuff in retaliation, and I'd guess there are a fair few people out there who are pretty pissed off about this and will be for a long time to come.

eta:
Just saw this on the 'hijackBristol' forums:


> Just seen this and I know Sarah. She isn't even in the country so could not have been her, just because a search on flickr throws up their names doesn't mean that it is automatically them and as far as I know there is quite a few people in this collective, so you should get your facts straight before accusing anyone you morons!


----------



## big eejit (Apr 7, 2009)

I saw that whois link on the flickr bristol graf group. It is pretty stupid if it is them cos their personal details are all over those websites. Tho stupidity seems to be the main 'talent' of the people who did it.

It is in danger of turning into a witch hunt tho and I hate witch hunts. They just jump on their brooms and you've no chance of catching them!


----------



## Skin (Apr 7, 2009)

Having looked at the Mild Mild West this morning. It looks damaged to me!
I believe that the painting was going to be hidden from public view eventually because they were knocking the building down next to it and the new one would mean the painting would then be inside a building. Did I imagine this?


----------



## big eejit (Apr 7, 2009)

As I understand it there are plans to protect it in a perspex box and develop the building next door, which some are saying, would obscure the view of the painting.


----------



## Geri (Apr 7, 2009)

"Bristol Creatives" - what a load of wank!


----------



## _float_ (Apr 7, 2009)

Another post on hijackbristol by the 'art-el' people:





> "Over the last 24 hours a huge storm has blown up in Bristol over the (attempted) defacing of Banksy's infamous 'Mild Mild West' piece on Stokes Croft by a group calling themselves Appropriate Media. Internet chat on local graffiti forums suggests that The Clean Collective (whose work we sell) are somehow linked to this action; an allegation that we are looking into. It seems unlikely, however, that there is any connection between the two groups, not least because the two individuals alleged to be involved are currently not even in the UK. Furthermore it would be extremely odd if The Clean  Collective shared the same vehemently anti-graffiti ethos as Appropriate Media, in light of their links with us and - by implication - our roster of street artists. We will keep you posted with any further developments as they occur."


note: if the connection is the 'whois' registration of the Appropriate Media webpage... how easy it is to give someon else's details when you register a domain?


----------



## Build_A_Fire (Apr 7, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Another post on hijackbristol by the 'art-el' people:note: if the connection is the 'whois' registration of the Appropriate Media webpage... how easy it is to give someon else's details when you register a domain?



Loving the sleuthing there....that hijackbristol forum is pretty hectic hey, they get pretty fired up over there!


----------



## JTG (Apr 9, 2009)

Hijack's full of idiot 15 year olds on ketamine though, I'd be wary of anything posted over there.


----------



## Zaskar (May 4, 2009)

Like most self appointed activists that lot appear to be young people in need of a slap.


----------



## _float_ (May 4, 2009)

Probably worth adding:



> RE: Red paint splatter/Banksy scandal in Bristol.
> 
> SARAH COCKINGS AND ALICE HODGE (aka CLEAN) WOULD LIKE TO CLEAN A FEW
> THINGS UP!
> ...


 source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/27892381@N04/sets/72157612323436337/comments/


----------



## strung out (Jun 23, 2009)

someone's just chucked blue paint all over the banksy at the bottom of park street. this one...


----------



## sned (Jun 23, 2009)

yeah saw it on the news this morning, i mean it could be worse but still.. whats the point!? 

who did it? some 'pesky kid'? or an anti-Banksy hypocrite? shame.


----------



## Stigmata (Jun 23, 2009)

You know if you google 'Appropriate Media' this thread is the third hit from the top.


----------



## Gromit (Jun 23, 2009)

sned said:


> whats the point!?



What is the point of any graffiti?

Its immature and cowardly mooning your arse at society. 
The blue paint is no different to the paint its been splashed onto imo.


----------



## strung out (Jun 23, 2009)

you're an idiot then


----------



## Gmart (Jun 23, 2009)

.


----------



## Yu_Gi_Oh (Jun 23, 2009)

Gromit said:


> What is the point of any graffiti?
> 
> Its immature and cowardly mooning your arse at society.
> The blue paint is no different to the paint its been splashed onto imo.



What do you mean?  That Banksy wasn't pointless, I liked looking at it each morning when I was on the bus.  I reckon a lot of people in Bristol enjoy seeing them as they go by.  It's been spoiled now.

I don't see whether it matters if it was commisioned as public art (thus having a point? Or is all art pointless?) or just put there, it's treated as art now and most people liked it, a lot more than most public art tbh.

ETA- I really can't believe that's two Banksys fucked up so quickly.  And there's one near Cotham with paint on it too, but that's been on it for ages I think.


----------



## cliche guevara (Jun 23, 2009)

Stigmata said:


> You know if you google 'Appropriate Media' this thread is the third hit from the top.



Then hopefully they'll see me calling them a bunch of fucking idiots.


----------



## geekpenguin (Jun 24, 2009)

such a shame! But it looked like they managed to get rid of the red paint on "Mild Mild West" so hopefully they'll be able to do that again? 

It sounds silly, but I think Banksy is a big part of our Bristol culture. Anyone who wants to spoil that, or other great pieces of street art, are just jealous IMO.


----------



## stupid dogbot (Jun 24, 2009)

Gromit said:


> What is the point of any graffiti?
> 
> Its immature and cowardly mooning your arse at society.
> The blue paint is no different to the paint its been splashed onto imo.


----------



## Build_A_Fire (Jun 30, 2009)

Stigmata said:


> You know if you google 'Appropriate Media' this thread is the third hit from the top.



Top hit now - good that we're more famous than they are


----------

