Last time Banksy's "Slave Labor" was set to sell, groups from the town from which it was taken caused such an uproar that the piece was pulled from auction minutes before bidding began. Now, a new auction house is set to sell the painting, re-igniting the controversy...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2013/may/11/banksy-slave-labour-mural-row-sale
I guess the question comes down to whether or not you think this piece "belongs" to the people, or, like I assume any other street art would be treated, left as a problem to the building owner...I understand why the people feel connected and why they feel it's theirs, I guess I just don't agree. I think, if this was a less well-known artist, they would have made the building owner pay to remove it...and ownership should not be determined based on whether the public likes the thing or not...
That said, if it was illegally removed from the wall and the building owner is completely with the rest of the public, bring it back...however a lack of a police report leads me to think someone paid the guy a decent sum for the wall, removed it at with his permission, and is now trying to sell it for a major profit....definitely not the intended result of Banksy...but understandable for a building owner with graffiti on his wall.
No comments:
Post a Comment