Sometimes life is so surreal it is difficult to take it seriously. I mean, seriously.
A Banksy mural has been vandalised with a spray-painted penis just two weeks after it appeared on a wall in a seaside town.
So now we have a piece of vandalism being vandalised. You couldn’t make it up.
A Kent Police spokesman said: “We were called at 8pm on Sunday to a report of criminal damage in Rendezvous Street, Folkestone.
“It was reported that artwork on a wall had been painted on and officers attended the scene. Inquiries are ongoing.”
The criminal damage was the original “artwork”. But now that Banksy is mainstream, painting on someone else’s property is all okay…
It somehow enhances it all further that the article (currently, at least) has the offending addition carefully pixellated in the main picture while an unexpurgated version of the same image appears further down the page.
Of course, it may all be a stunt stunt by Banksy himself to highlight the double standards involved…
My brain hurts.
If the graffiti penis had been drawn on a blank wall with no Banksy under it, would the police have bothered investigating?
Painting on someone else’s wall is criminal damage.
Surely anyone selling a ‘Banksy’ is attempting to profit from a criminal act?
‘Street artists’ should be either picked off by snipers with night sights or forced to clean it off with a tooth brush.
Ah, but he’s a guerilla “artist”, so is a darling of the establishment.
It’s nothing more than a latter-day “Emperor’s new clothes”.
It would not surprise me if Banksy, himself, was in full support of such amendments, even if it does damage his original idea.
This isn’t the first time police have tried to crack down on vandals who attack Banksy’s vandalism. See –
http://britain-today.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/criminal-damage-is-legal-now.html
Vandalized? Anyone who is not mentally retarded knows that having a Banksy work on your crappy wall has just increased its value from zero to many thousands of pounds. That would obviously exclude Conservative councillors.
Unless he asked permission before leaving his puerile daubs over other peoples property, then yes, it’s vandalism in exactly the same way as other graffiti. That the intellectually challenged establishment are taken in by this crap and call it “art” doesn’t change any of that. It just means there are people out there with more money than sense. Has always been thus. As is the case with double standards, of course.