4 ms·
It's not trolling, the work was a performance piece.
by midnitewarrior 8y ago
It's not trolling, the work was a performance piece.
- philliphaydon 8y ago> It's not trolling, the work was a performance piece. If the buyer wasn't aware of this prior to buying it then technically Banksy ruined the buyers art, or the buy can back out because he's not getting what he paid for.
- okket 8y agoBut the buyer would be stupid to do so. Also, transformation to the point of self-destruction is an accepted part of art, at least since Joseph Beuys' "Fettecke".
- philliphaydon 8y agoWhat if the buyer just loved the piece of art prior and now hates it? I liked the before. The new “art” to me is crap. Art is subjective right? Not all art is purchased for its value. But the emotional connection one has for it. And such.
- okket 8y agoIf you don't like it you can either return it and maybe get your money back, or sue, or whatever, or try selling it for much more. I am not even sure an assurance would cover this case, because it is obviously still there, and worth more, presumably.
- jypepin 8y agoright. But if the buyer bought the piece because they just want to see it in their home, and now don't like anymore, then it is ruined for them, even if they can sell it for more money :)
- int0x80 8y agoA performance, yes. But the deeper act is the very definition of trolling (in the broad sense of the word) :)
- IIAOPSW 8y agotrolling is a art
- krustyburger 8y agoOne art, please.
- sthgrau 8y agoWhat a clever impersonation of a stupid, poor person. How much is that placemat actually worth, Brannigan?