wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 21:01:56 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:
On 15/07/2020 14:47, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 14:39:07 +0100, Scott
wrote:

I hope they billed 'Banksy' for the cost.

You have missed an obvious problem with that.

Do you really think the authorities don't know who Banksy is?


There's a theory that it's not one man, but a group of two or three, such
as Robin Gunningham, Robert Del Naja and Jamie Hewlett. I reckon that, in
ths case, the video is the actual artwork, shot by Banksy, with a masked
friend doing the application.

Subcontracting/delegation to someone else to do the actual work while the
artist was the "inspiration" (or project manager more like) seems to be fairly
common in the art world. Even the old masters were at it. Slightly fraudulent
IMO but YMMV.

Yes, having their studio do most or all of the actual physical work is a
long established tradition for artists great and not so great (like Hirst).
We don't know if Banksy normally does that.

But in this case, I think the artwork itself is the video, not the
graffiti, which they knew would soon be removed. So, if Banksy designed the
stunt and shot the video, than he could be said to have personally produced
the artwork. The spray paint was just one of the materials used.