Banksy strikes again....

So is Sotheby's culpable of trying to increase the value of an artwork that they later might sell and get a higher Commission on?
 
applecorped said:
So is Sotheby's culpable of trying to increase the value of an artwork that they later might sell and get a higher Commission on?
Click to expand...

How so? They were not responsible for whatever the frame did to the painting. It's possible they may have colluded with the artist, but that may have simply been agreeing to certain demands, e.g. the item being the last in the auction, without knowing what was going to happen.
 
The shredding didn't go according to Banksy's plan. It wasn't supposed to stop partway and instead should have completely shredded and fell to the floor. He has a new video showing a "rehearsal" and he has also stated that Sotheby's didn't know about the prank.


Banksy’s Shredding Prank Misfired, He Says: ‘In Rehearsals It Worked Every Time’

The New York Times said:
As the $1.4 million artwork began passing through a shredder hidden in its frame, gasps were heard in the auction room. About halfway through, the shredding suddenly stopped, and the top portion of “Girl With Balloon” seemed to have been saved.

But that reprieve, according to Banksy, the street artist who created the work — and who organized the prank to destroy it — wasn’t planned. In a clip posted to YouTube on Wednesday, Banksy suggested that he had meant for the painting to be completely destroyed at the auction in London on Oct. 5, but that the plan had been foiled when the shredder unexpectedly jammed.

In the clip, called “Shred The Love,” a man is shown building the frame, his face hidden by a hoodie. “In rehearsals it worked every time,” a caption says. The video then shows a copy of “Girl With Balloon” being completely shredded as it slipped out of the frame.

The copy in the clip appears to have been printed on paper, whereas the “Girl With Balloon” sold at auction was spray-painted on canvas, a tougher material, which may explain why the shredder failed. Joanna Brooks, the director of JBPR, who answers media enquiries on behalf of Banksy, did not respond to phone calls or to an email asking whether the rehearsals had indeed been conducted on paper copies...
Click to expand...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/18/arts/design/banksy-girl-with-balloon.html
 
The new video shows rollers and a belt pulley thing but I still can't figure out how those blades worked in that position. Maybe we aren't shown the final assembly with the blades in a working position.

It must have weighed a lot and seemed really strange to anyone lifting it.
 
William Parcher said:
The new video shows rollers and a belt pulley thing but I still can't figure out how those blades worked in that position. Maybe we aren't shown the final assembly with the blades in a working position.

It must have weighed a lot and seemed really strange to anyone lifting it.
Click to expand...

It's misdirection. He's trying to maintain the veneer of the street artist deconstructionist. He used an off-the-shelf unit (with perhaps some roller blades removed). My first reaction was why did it only go halfway? The person who bought it could easily just wind it back up. I think they'll have to do it eventually anyway. Then we'll see what's really in there.
 
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/18/arts/design/banksy-girl-with-balloon.html said:
The copy in the clip appears to have been printed on paper, whereas the “Girl With Balloon” sold at auction was spray-painted on canvas, a tougher material, which may explain why the shredder failed.
Click to expand...

Never send an artist to do an engineer's job.
 
William Parcher said:
The new video shows rollers and a belt pulley thing but I still can't figure out how those blades worked in that position. Maybe we aren't shown the final assembly with the blades in a working position.

It must have weighed a lot and seemed really strange to anyone lifting it.
Click to expand...

OK. I watched the clip. You can see the rotary blades in between the rollers.


OMG!! Banksy and I have the same Oria Precision Screwdriver Set available on Amazon.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0778K3PH...&pd_rd_r=665ea338-d32c-11e8-acb5-95f73567967b

Cheap bastard.


But no ST-100 soldering iron. Take that, Banksy!!


ETA: Pretty sure the Oria Precision Screwdriver Set was not available anywhere in 2006. Checkmate, Banksy!!
 
Last edited:
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Oh, and if that's not convincing, then this also suggests that something isn't quite right:

[imgw=800]https://i.imgur.com/4UqBCve.jpg[/imgw]
Click to expand...
That would be explained by the canvas laying over a roller instead of being perfectly flat. Total canvas length is reduced when it's curled over a roller.

You can also measure the height of the girl and see that she becomes shorter in the shredded result.


1 roller and 2 separate pictures seems like the most parsimonious explanation, no?
Click to expand...
I don't think that that is what happened. One roller and one canvas.

Lack of complete information and therefore ignorance (on our part) is also very parsimonious.
 
Elagabalus said:
The person who bought it could easily just wind it back up. I think they'll have to do it eventually anyway. Then we'll see what's really in there.
Click to expand...
"Winding it back up" or even opening the frame will alter the artwork and significantly effect the value. It won't be opened but it might be X-rayed.
 
William Parcher said:
"Winding it back up" or even opening the frame will alter the artwork and significantly effect the value. It won't be opened but it might be X-rayed.
Click to expand...


Does Banksy have the address of who purchased it. What's to stop him from driving by and trying to activate the shredder again remotely? It's a ticking time bomb, Parcher!!
 
Imagine if it had worked as planned. You have an empty frame and a pile of canvas strips on Sotheby's floor. Do you stuff the shreddings into a sack or cardboard box? Or should they be gently placed into a very expensive Christian Dior or Kate Spade handbag?
 
William Parcher said:
That would be explained by the canvas laying over a roller instead of being perfectly flat. Total canvas length is reduced when it's curled over a roller.

You can also measure the height of the girl and see that she becomes shorter in the shredded result.
Click to expand...


The shortening of the height of the girl in the shredded portion could be explained by the shredded portion of the canvas being farther away from the camera. If you look at angled photos of the "after" piece, it's easy to see that the plane of the shredded canvas is a considerable distance recessed from the plane of the framed canvas. The framed canvas is closer to the front surface of the frame than to the back, and the shredded canvas emerges close to the back of the frame, and the frame is quite thick.

I don't think that that is what happened. One roller and one canvas.

Lack of complete information and therefore ignorance (on our part) is also very parsimonious.
Click to expand...


I don't think it's possible for there to be one canvas. In three dimensions there's no way to connect the shredded portion with the un-shredded portion, given both the vertical and depth separation between their visible portions. Unless the mechanism tore the canvas across the hidden portion (which seems mechanically unlikely, though it would be another explanation of why the shredding didn't complete) or it's a very stretchy material instead of canvas.

Another clue is the permanent (or at least, long-lasting) S-shaped curvature near the bottom edge of the shredded strips. Not consistent with having been flat in a frame for years and then passed once rapidly through a mechanism. (Why would such creasing happen only near the leading edge?) Quite consistent with having been held between rollers for days (or years) waiting for the mechanism to activate.

If the shredding had completed, it would be much harder to tell two canvases were used.
 
Last edited:
William Parcher said:
That would be explained by the canvas laying over a roller instead of being perfectly flat. Total canvas length is reduced when it's curled over a roller.

You can also measure the height of the girl and see that she becomes shorter in the shredded result.



I don't think that that is what happened. One roller and one canvas.

Lack of complete information and therefore ignorance (on our part) is also very parsimonious.
Click to expand...

Shouldn't the canvas be significantly wider than the frame? Unless the canvas that should have been under the frame was being rolled up internally?
 
Banksy is still trolling us. Note how the soldering iron is being held in the new video.


Clue: you don't hold a soldering iron by the hot part.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom