Why is Banksy a good artist?

I think with him it’s his anonymity, no one knows who the fuck he is which adds an elusive quality to his charisma. His work sticks two fingers up to convention & the bullshit of politics, which helps. I love this quote of his, “when you go to an art gallery you’re simply a tourist looking at the trophy cabinet of a few millionaires.”

He is a vandal and should be in prison.

It’s a fair question, @tinyfaery. Following with interest.

Firstly, @tinyfaery one should look into their definition of “art.” Always a good idea to reconsider what you think art is and consider reasons why one definition may not be complete.

Banksy makes good art. Thoughtful, profound, clear, aesthetically pleasing, and often in an attitude of protest. What more could you ask for?

@ucme I appreciate the social narrative, but how is his work aesthetically pleasing? His quote reflects a lot my own attitude about art.

@ninjacolin I don’t see it as aesthetically pleasing. That is a big part of what I don’t get about Banksy.

I work in an area where graffiti has become the art I see every day, the people’s art, with beautiful pieces thrown up on
abandoned buildings, and freeway onramps and overpasses. Many of these works are colorful and drawn out. But Banksy doesn’t do this.

Can you explain his aesthetic?

He’s not a great artist but he has interesting visual ideas that make an impact. His work isn’t hidden away in art galleries it is out there in the street where it is noticed and commented on and copied.

I like Banksy’s work because it makes me think. His pieces are all well-thought-out, detailed and clear. Some are shocking, some are funny. There is a message in his art, and that is as if not more important to me as something being aesthetically pleasing.

However, I do see some of his pieces as aesthetic, in the sense that they brighten up places which would otherwise be dull. Is it possible to explain why something is aesthetically pleasing, though?

If admiration is an aspect of art, that would factor in for me. How does he manage all those tiny details while painting with a spray can?

stencils

^ STILL, let’s see you try.

It’s just a fad, the artistry is very limited in appeal.

@tinyfaery I don’t think that’s his aim, to have his work regarded as aesthetically pleasing, it’s not like he’s marketing the stuff he does, so no profit margin to fuel his ego.
A lot of it is done for impact & to provoke debate on political issues, others just random graffiti.
Is it art? Absolutely, is it pleasing to the eye? Well, to each their own, personally I think a lot of it is, certainly beats a big arsed billboard poster plastered on a wall advertising some commercial crap.

@tinyfaery this is all very subjective territory.. but I’ll tell you what I see and how I relate to his aesthetic:

In short: I consider him a comic book artist similar to Gary Larson with a visual style similar to the sort of cut-and-dry illustrations you would find in old school text books. They are direct and simple illustrations, not necessarily surreal or funny in themselves.. Their somewhat boring appeal contrasts the brilliant messaging that they’re a part of. The artwork itself, visually, is almost entirely unremarkable. They feel like they won’t have any kind of well thought message behind them. They’re in disguise, like so many of the bad things in society which they allude to.

I almost like them better when I hear that you (not you personally, of course) don’t see an aesthetic appeal in them. I consider that more of a success on his part. That he communicates without candy coating is also a paradox because there are certainly less aesthetic ways to communicate still.

He’s achieved a level of visual minimalism that communicates extremely clearly and everything from the visual appeal to the “writing” of the pieces feels purposeful.

Another comment on the visual style, it feels like a graduated street artist’s work. If you take a regular vandal and graduate him up through the highest levels of art while maintaining his medium, the permission-less public space, you would have a banksy. His artwork is true to the form.

@ragingloli, yes, he is a vandal. He’s good at it. He has mastered the art.

Sorry, i can’t spend much time editing this :(

Bansky is so totally different from someone who will “spray-paint a word on a wall”.
For one thing his pieces are planned and executed with an order of magnitude more skill than tagging. The work always has a point to make, and is often very clever.

If there is anything not to like about that kind of work is that it’s done on publicly seen surfaces without permission of the owners. Banksy’s work is in a peculiar category right now that would increase the property value suddenly, but most free-ranging artists cannot claim that improvement.

Bansky is a clever artist and his stencils and ‘art’ are actually pretty good. It may be illegal sometimes,but it’s still art. It shows the beauty of a creative mind.But I won’t support the defacing of buildings unless they are so ugly or useless.

He is witty, he is ironic, his art works are full of life, he is close to people and social problems, that’s why he is so outstanding

Thanks all. I am left with it’s the message not the medium. Or maybe the medium is the message.

He’s also got mad skills, not just as an agent provocateur (look this up if you’re not familiar with it) but as a craftsperson. If his imagery or technical skills get your interest BECAUSE they don’t appeal to you, then he’s captured your interest in his own way. I call that effective.
He doesn’t use spray cans and he’s not a tagger (a tagger just writes his name on existing surfaces; Banksy makes images anonymously. People know it’s him by the expertise of placement and drawing style, though he does lots of other kinds of guerilla work too, see the film “Exit Through the Gift Shop”. You might like to some time googling this stuff. It’s a huge world. He’s the cleverest of the commentators in this realm and if you learn to appreciate that realm you’ll enjoy him. I took some time to “get” his work too and I’m glad I learned to.

Perhaps it is because he captures people effectively in a spur of the moment type of way. Unaware and without apology.

For street art I’ll take Keith Haring over Banksy any day of the week.

But, just as they say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so is art and he evidently appeals to significant numbers of people.