FooDog: Had that one as a desktop for a while at my old job.

awesome :)

we don't care you don't care
you don't care we do care
who cares? why care?
existence is futile
nihilism all the way down
all of this and everything is
pointless

oh and:

Advertising Dorito's in space
Can we buy your forehead
Get the demographics
Age, race, sex, income, hobbies
psychoanalysis

Bus billboard
Strategically placed information
You didn't even notice
Billions of impressions
OOOOOOh, put the logo on the floor

Let us know more
Where do you fit in to our marketing plan

our product is now correctly targeted
Buy this tremendous product
It will change your life
Now you are happy
Now you are cool
Now you are complete
Chicks dig you now
That guy thinks you're hot

Buy this
Buy that
You need to consume more
CONSUME CONSUMERS
Not human, just statistical information
For sales sales sales sales sales
It seems to work
but
I'm not buyin' it

stop thinking
we can do that for you
you will love this product
you cannot live without it

And even if you can
you shouldn't
You should buy it
It's on sale
come on, buy it
you need it
you know you need it
you want it
you know you want it
just buy it
come on
buy it

We've got you figured out
How can you resist?
You can't resist
Why would you resist?
Are you not a good little consumer
Be a good little consumer
Thank you for your purchase
Sucker

/sorry, sort of

Actual Farking: Banksy is, and always has been, completely full of shiat. Some of his vandalism is interesting, but his politics and ethos are so ill-informed its embarrassing.

Yeah, I'm sure its not just your farked up beliefs skewing your judgement into the meaningless.

I don't like women who overdo their makeup. Is it OK for me to walk up to them, scrub their faces, and reapply a little foundation and maybe some light blush?

This guy's house, car, and artwork all need to be the target of an intensive graffiti campaign. A few cans worth of spray paint on some of those canvases might change his attitude.

Contents Under Pressure: The statement, standing alone, makes a tremendous amount of sense.

Coming from somebody that spray paints things on other peoples property it looks like a tremendous amount of douchebaggery.

The best thing about Banksy is he basically stands the art world upside down. While art gets judged by who made it, priced based upon who made it, artists now have managers plus dealers and so on, Banksy doesn't bother with it. Who cares who he is or where he studied art or if he even studied it? Either art is good or it's not, or rather either you like it or you don't, why care who makes it or say because it's this artist that it's worth more than some other artist just because someone who couldn't draw a straight line wrote something in some art magazine about how great their art is?

These are all interesting, relevant points that are worthy of further discussion and thought over a nice, cold refreshing Coke.

spray painted image?

disregard meaning.

eh, Banksy or not, hard not to agree with sentiment.

tillerman35: A few cans worth of spray paint on some of those canvases might change his attitude.

He'd nominate you for sainthood if you managed to do that. Altering a Bansky painting would be rather meta actually. And he did alter a Damien Hirst painting, though he did actually buy it first.

Any advert in a public space that gives you no choice whether you see it or not is yours.

Do his graffiti qualify as adverts? If so, I'm out now to take home my very own Banksy. He said It was mine, no?

annitabonghit: Trademarks, intellectual property rights, and copyright law also have nothing to do with the point he seems to be trying to make.

One does not gain ownership of something because it may exist in the public space at a given point in time. By that logic, I hotwire a car that is parked on a public street and do I want with it using the sole justification that it is parked on a public street.

If he is only using that logic with respect to advertisements, what about the person wearing a Nike T-shirt, wearing their Banana express jeans, wearing the branded Doc Marten shoes, drinking a latte from Starbucks? All of those are a form of advertising and a clearly visible. Does this mean Banksy wants me to tag or "take, re-arrange, and reuse" these people?

We get it Banksy. You don't like advertisement. It doesn't mean your illogically defined thoughts on property rights is any less illogical.

/you can't own property, man
//I can. But that's because I'm not a penniless hippie!

You can choose to go to Fark or not. If you do, you'll see advertisements. That is a trade-off for what Fark provides.

If I drive to work or go outside at all, I am bombarded with advertising that is specifically designed to manipulate my subconscious. This advertising is not done in trade. I cannot avoid it by 'choosing not going out into the world'. It is the price I am forced to pay for living my life.

I'm not a vandal, but I have little sympathy for those who impose on my life with psychologically damaging ads. Those who seek to profit from manipulation of my subconscious mind.

Imagine instead of billboards there people in the street yelling at you about how ugly you are and how much better your significant other deserves. Being berated and told that you are fat and need this certain diet program if you want people to like you. I'm not going to punch the guy, but someone will. And I didn't see anything. I walk on with one less person trying to manipulate me on my own time..

WhyteRaven74: tillerman35: A few cans worth of spray paint on some of those canvases might change his attitude.

He'd nominate you for sainthood if you managed to do that. Altering a Bansky painting would be rather meta actually. And he did alter a Damien Hirst painting, though he did actually buy it first.

[ecx.images-amazon.com image 300x300]

Team Robbo goes out of their way to alter his street work all the time. However, I don't imagine anyone from that crew would be able to access any of his canvases or sculptures though. Link (new window)

goatleggedfellow: If I drive to work or go outside at all, I am bombarded with advertising that is specifically designed to manipulate my subconscious. This advertising is not done in trade. I cannot avoid it by 'choosing not going out into the world'. It is the price I am forced to pay for living my life.

Makes me think of two of my other favorite Banksy quotes

"Imagine a city where graffiti wasn't illegal, a city where everybody could draw whatever they liked. Where every street was awash with a million colours and little phrases. Where standing at a bus stop was never boring. A city that felt like a party where everyone was invited, not just the estate agents and barons of big business. Imagine a city like that and stop leaning against the wall - it's wet. "

"the people who run our cities dont understand graffiti because they think nothing has the right to exist unless it makes a profit...
the people who truly deface our neighborhoods are the companies that scrawl giant slogans across buildings and buses trying to make us feel inadequate unless we buy their stuff....
any advertisement in public space that gives you no choice whether you see it or not is yours, it belongs to you ,, its yours to take, rearrange and re use.Asking for permission is like asking to keep a rock someone just threw at your head.."

Glenford: Banky? Isn't he just a tracer?

WhyteRaven74: He does actual paintings and sculpture, which can be bought.



LOL!

KatjaMouse: Team Robbo goes out of their way to alter his street work all the time

And he's altered their alterations. Though after Robbo got tangled up in a fight and went into a coma, this is what Banksy did, at the sight of their longest running back and forth

goatleggedfellow: If I drive to work or go outside at all, I am bombarded with advertising that is specifically designed to manipulate my subconscious. This advertising is not done in trade. I cannot avoid it by 'choosing not going out into the world'. It is the price I am forced to pay for living my life.

I'm not a vandal, but I have little sympathy for those who impose on my life with psychologically damaging ads. Those who seek to profit from manipulation of my subconscious mind.

I am not against free speech but I have little sympathy for people who make speech I don't agree with.



goatleggedfellow: Imagine instead of billboards there people in the street yelling at you about how ugly you are and how much better your significant other deserves. Being berated and told that you are fat and need this certain diet program if you want people to like you. I'm not going to punch the guy, but someone will. And I didn't see anything. I walk on with one less person trying to manipulate me on my own time

Imagine instead of responding to your post I came to your house and punched you in the jaw. Now you know what it is like to imagine something completely unrelated tot he topic.

WhyteRaven74: goatleggedfellow: If I drive to work or go outside at all, I am bombarded with advertising that is specifically designed to manipulate my subconscious. This advertising is not done in trade. I cannot avoid it by 'choosing not going out into the world'. It is the price I am forced to pay for living my life.

Makes me think of two of my other favorite Banksy quotes

"Imagine a city where graffiti wasn't illegal, a city where everybody could draw whatever they liked. Where every street was awash with a million colours and little phrases. Where standing at a bus stop was never boring. A city that felt like a party where everyone was invited, not just the estate agents and barons of big business. Imagine a city like that and stop leaning against the wall - it's wet. "


I doubt it would be that highbrow, just a city covered entirely in poorly drawn penises and stick figures of women with big boobs.

I'd heard of Banksy, but never took the time to find out who he is. I just did. He's a genius. He's so brilliant, I see that some Farkers just have to hate him.

WhyteRaven74: tillerman35: A few cans worth of spray paint on some of those canvases might change his attitude.

He'd nominate you for sainthood if you managed to do that. Altering a Bansky painting would be rather meta actually. And he did alter a Damien Hirst painting, though he did actually buy it first.

[ecx.images-amazon.com image 300x300]

I'm sure a lot of people here are familiar with the "two cops" piece which was painted over. There was a large outcry from the locals.

You can't deny that Banksy is an accomplished artist. The fact that we're even talking about him says something. The quote is a little bit rage against the machine for me though. I don't think anyone really believes there's an evil elaborate conspiracy behind advertising, it's simply a result of free market capitalism. If you don't like it, change the law, don't act like a child and just destroy things you don't like.

Just because the message offends you does not mean you get to deface it.

I bet the same people who agreed with the blog post are also people condemning xenophobic graffiti on a billboard about peaceful Islam or homophobic vandalism of pro-gay marriage posters or municipalities applying puritanical standards on advertisements.

Remember: there are people who are offended by things YOU think should be a right to express and this can and WILL cut both ways.

WhyteRaven74: KatjaMouse: Team Robbo goes out of their way to alter his street work all the time

And he's altered their alterations. Though after Robbo got tangled up in a fight and went into a coma, this is what Banksy did, at the sight of their longest running back and forth

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 504x365]

Good on him. However, some talentless Robbo fans still go out of their way to mess with his other work.

Link (too big to put in here)

This piece had large sheets of acetate screwed into the wall to protect it (the store owner was thrilled when he came into work and saw this tourist draw on his building). Some Robbos pried off the top sheet, repainted it, and screwed it back in.

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: You and Banksy can enjoy museums filled with that. Me, I'm happy to see the art contained in trophy cabinets of millionairees.

You don't even know what the museums and galleries have. The Louvre is huge, and yet what you can see there is a tiny fraction of all the art they own. Same with the Prado, Tate Modern etc etc etc. And why is it the art in places changes? Here in Chicago at the Art Institute of Chicago the names of various artists are around the facade. And a good number of them, who were huge big deals when the building was made, today don't get talked about much. If you were to dig through old issues of the New York Times going back to the 40s and 50s and saw who were the biggest artists of the day, you'd find that a good many are completely unknown now. How the fark does that happen? It's because the people who write for the New York Times arts section and various other art periodicals, are idiots. The entire industry of art criticism is getting people to agree with you because you are an "expert" and they're not. Guess what? No one's opinion is more valid than anyone else's when it come to how good some work of art is or isn't. And it doesn't help that art history is not really history, if it was well, things would be presented very differently. Like Flemish artists of the early to mid 1400s would presented on equal footing, if not greater footing, than Italian artists from the 1400s. For one they figured out perspective first and were busy with stuff the Italians didn't get to until a few decades later. Also impressionism wouldn't be restricted to a few artists and the first would be J.M.W. Turner, with artists like Fragonard coming in as proto-impressionists. But what can be seen, doesn't matter in art history or art criticism, there's a narrative and you must stick with it.

Oh also, contempt for the public, or rather contempt for what you think the public wants, is a big part of the problem.

How can you hate a guy with a philosophy such as this?

Why does that remind me of this?

agoodz: WhyteRaven74: tillerman35: A few cans worth of spray paint on some of those canvases might change his attitude.

He'd nominate you for sainthood if you managed to do that. Altering a Bansky painting would be rather meta actually. And he did alter a Damien Hirst painting, though he did actually buy it first.

[ecx.images-amazon.com image 300x300]

I'm sure a lot of people here are familiar with the "two cops" piece which was painted over. There was a large outcry from the locals.

You can't deny that Banksy is an accomplished artist. The fact that we're even talking about him says something. The quote is a little bit rage against the machine for me though. I don't think anyone really believes there's an evil elaborate conspiracy behind advertising, it's simply a result of free market capitalism. If you don't like it, change the law, don't act like a child and just destroy things you don't like.

As someone who lives in a town that's trying to fend off invasive digital billboards. This part is laughable. You probably have no idea how nearly impossible what you suggest is.

CthulhuCalling: I doubt it would be that highbrow, just a city covered entirely in poorly drawn penises and stick figures of women with big boobs.

Even Banksy admits there'd be a lot of that, but then he isn't saying there'd be a lot of high brow stuff, just a lot of stuff.

KatjaMouse: the store owner was thrilled when he came into work and saw this tourist draw on his buildin

Wait you mean some property owners actually like what Banksy does? But I was told no such people exist ;)

goatleggedfellow: annitabonghit:

You can choose to go to Fark or not. If you do, you'll see advertisements. That is a trade-off for what Fark provides.

If I drive to work or go outside at all, I am bombarded with advertising that is specifically designed to manipulate my subconscious. This advertising is not done in trade. I cannot avoid it by 'choosing not going out into the world'. It is the price I am forced to pay for living my life.

I'm not a vandal, but I have little sympathy for those who impose on my life with psychologically damaging ads. Those who seek to profit from manipulation of my subconscious mind.

Imagine instead of billboards there people in the street yelling at you about how ugly you are and how much better your significant other deserves. Being berated and told that you are fat and need this certain diet program if you want people to like you. I'm not going to punch the guy, but someone will. And I didn't see anything. I walk on with one less person trying to manipulate me on my own time ...


First your analogy isn't quite right. It should be a person in the street yelling that everyone is fat and everyone's significant other deserves better (Most ads don't target a specific identified individual). So let me get this straight - you provide an analogy comparing (what you deem offensive) billboards to someone in the street yelling (what you deem offensive) things. You won't punch the guy, but you won't stop someone who will or feel bad about it.

Nice to see you're such a (sarcasm)strong defender of free speech.(/sarcasm)

There is no difference between some jackass on the street screaming "THE HOLOCAUST NEVER HAPPENED!" and running a billboard saying the same thing.

And this is irrelevant to the point I was making. I was not commenting on the content of a billboard or advertisement, but instead commenting on Banksy's endorsement of destruction of property specific to forms of advertisement. I don't draw a distinction between modifying a billboard/advertisement and say, the side of someone's house. Someone owns the billboard, someone owns the house and "modifying" either without the owners consent is vandalism.

One reason I think Banksy gets a pass is because his art is good. He is a creative and talented artist and I think people look the other way when he creates his art on other's property without permission, whether it is the side of a building or across a billboard or the side of car. Regardless, his art is still vandalism if his "canvas" belongs to someone else. I imagine that people who have a completely different opinion on this matter if it was images of giant, veiny, engorged penises instead.

/If you want my personal opinion on the content of advertising, feel free to ask.

robbiex0r: How can you hate a guy with a philosophy such as this?

That's another thing, he doesn't give a crap for claiming intellectual rights to anything. You see a Bansky post card? He gets nothing from it. And he doesn't give a damn. See other artists or their estates going to court for some copyright thing or other, and there he is completely not giving a fark, because why bother?

robbiex0r: As someone who lives in a town that's trying to fend off invasive digital billboards. This part is laughable. You probably have no idea how nearly impossible what you suggest is

What makes them invassive?

If "the town" was trying to fend them off it would be simple.

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom:

I'd say that they're less banksy fans and more "defend my personal likes and attack my personal dislikes" - fans.

Why is being forced to look at ads in the public space more wrong than to have to look at somebodies political message they call art?

WhyteRaven74: CthulhuCalling: I doubt it would be that highbrow, just a city covered entirely in poorly drawn penises and stick figures of women with big boobs.

Even Banksy admits there'd be a lot of that, but then he isn't saying there'd be a lot of high brow stuff, just a lot of stuff.

KatjaMouse: the store owner was thrilled when he came into work and saw this tourist draw on his buildin

Wait you mean some property owners actually like what Banksy does? But I was told no such people exist ;)

We're not denying that some property owners like his work. I'd be thrilled if Banksy made a piece on something I owned. But like I said upthread, the only reason I think he gets away with it is BECAUSE he is a good artist. If someone tagged an image of a giant turd on the side of your car, would you be thrilled about it?

WhyteRaven74: CthulhuCalling: I doubt it would be that highbrow, just a city covered entirely in poorly drawn penises and stick figures of women with big boobs.

Even Banksy admits there'd be a lot of that, but then he isn't saying there'd be a lot of high brow stuff, just a lot of stuff.

A lot of stuff is not necessarily better than no stuff. When you oversaturate like this, the message becomes diluted losing its meaning and value.

I like Bansky, because he fulfills an important role in our society. He is an iconoclast artist. He's really not saying anything that hasn't been said before. But we still need people like him to say that kind of message (nonconformity, resistance vs. big business, etc).

When it comes down to it, the advertisers still "win" in the end. But we still need someone reminding us of that message.

liam76: robbiex0r: As someone who lives in a town that's trying to fend off invasive digital billboards. This part is laughable. You probably have no idea how nearly impossible what you suggest is

What makes them invassive?

If "the town" was trying to fend them off it would be simple.

What makes them invasive? Let me put up some 40x15 foot flashing screens in your neighborhood, illuminated at all hours of the day. It took a lot of work just to get them to stop at one, they wanted to put up 4 more. Yes, it's very simple to go against advertising moguls, with their army of lawyers and millions of dollars.

robbiex0r: liam76: robbiex0r: As someone who lives in a town that's trying to fend off invasive digital billboards. This part is laughable. You probably have no idea how nearly impossible what you suggest is

What makes them invassive?

If "the town" was trying to fend them off it would be simple.

What makes them invasive? Let me put up some 40x15 foot flashing screens in your neighborhood, illuminated at all hours of the day. It took a lot of work just to get them to stop at one, they wanted to put up 4 more. Yes, it's very simple to go against advertising moguls, with their army of lawyers and millions of dollars.

Have your city counsel write an ordinance, with lights flashing toward a street, they are pretty much in the clear on using the shield of public safety to limit the digital lights. Plenty of cities have ordinances limiting them.

annitabonghit: WhyteRaven74: CthulhuCalling: I doubt it would be that highbrow, just a city covered entirely in poorly drawn penises and stick figures of women with big boobs.

Even Banksy admits there'd be a lot of that, but then he isn't saying there'd be a lot of high brow stuff, just a lot of stuff.

KatjaMouse: the store owner was thrilled when he came into work and saw this tourist draw on his buildin

Wait you mean some property owners actually like what Banksy does? But I was told no such people exist ;)

We're not denying that some property owners like his work. I'd be thrilled if Banksy made a piece on something I owned. But like I said upthread, the only reason I think he gets away with it is BECAUSE he is a good artist. If someone tagged an image of a giant turd on the side of your car, would you be thrilled about it?

I must hate art. Whenever the wife and I take a walk around the neighborhood, we take a long some Soft Scrub just in case we happen across some "art". Generally it's on the community mailboxes or the cable company boxes, but we dutifully scrub off all the spraypaint and Sharpie work, because the farking HOA would take weeks to do it.

His graffiti is an advertising that he doesn't have to pay for. Very smart.

robbiex0r: agoodz: WhyteRaven74: tillerman35: A few cans worth of spray paint on some of those canvases might change his attitude.

He'd nominate you for sainthood if you managed to do that. Altering a Bansky painting would be rather meta actually. And he did alter a Damien Hirst painting, though he did actually buy it first.

[ecx.images-amazon.com image 300x300]

I'm sure a lot of people here are familiar with the "two cops" piece which was painted over. There was a large outcry from the locals.

You can't deny that Banksy is an accomplished artist. The fact that we're even talking about him says something. The quote is a little bit rage against the machine for me though. I don't think anyone really believes there's an evil elaborate conspiracy behind advertising, it's simply a result of free market capitalism. If you don't like it, change the law, don't act like a child and just destroy things you don't like.

As someone who lives in a town that's trying to fend off invasive digital billboards. This part is laughable. You probably have no idea how nearly impossible what you suggest is.

So your argument is that it's "too hard"?

I concede my stance then.

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: WhyteRaven74: "These art Galleries are just trophy cabinets for a handful of millionaires. The public never has any real say in what art they see"

You wanna know what "art" the public wants? Here ya go:

[neilshawcollection.com image 640x480]

You and Banksy can enjoy museums filled with that. Me, I'm happy to see the art contained in trophy cabinets of millionairees.

We know what art is.It's paintings of horses! (new window)

robbiex0r: liam76: robbiex0r: As someone who lives in a town that's trying to fend off invasive digital billboards. This part is laughable. You probably have no idea how nearly impossible what you suggest is

What makes them invassive?

If "the town" was trying to fend them off it would be simple.

What makes them invasive? Let me put up some 40x15 foot flashing screens in your neighborhood, illuminated at all hours of the day. It took a lot of work just to get them to stop at one, they wanted to put up 4 more. Yes, it's very simple to go against advertising moguls, with their army of lawyers and millions of dollars.

robbiex0r: liam76: robbiex0r: As someone who lives in a town that's trying to fend off invasive digital billboards. This part is laughable. You probably have no idea how nearly impossible what you suggest is

What makes them invassive?

If "the town" was trying to fend them off it would be simple.

What makes them invasive? Let me put up some 40x15 foot flashing screens in your neighborhood, illuminated at all hours of the day. It took a lot of work just to get them to stop at one, they wanted to put up 4 more. Yes, it's very simple to go against advertising moguls, with their army of lawyers and millions of dollars.

Who is forcing anyone to take those millions? Obviously enough people in "the town" do want it.

and just ecause soemthing is illuminated 24/7 in yoru neighborhood doesn't mean it is going to bother me.



Also he is talking about all billboards, but signs, etc.

Good thing I don't go around trying to convince people I'm right on the internet, or I might have something to say in this thread.

Is it really vandalism if he replaces a cheap advertisement with a now very expensive Banksy alteration? I mean, to a company that rented out ad space, that's like free money.

annitabonghit: the only reason I think he gets away with it is BECAUSE he is a good artis

Well he gets away with it because he doesn't get caught doing it. How he pulls that off in some cases is something I'd love to know. A lot of his stuff hasn't lasted but a few days, while some of it has lasted much longer. He's been at it over 20 years now, at first he was just another guy putting stuff up on walls, then one day he got good and then people started to notice. Though that really hasn't done much to improve the life expectancy of his work.