« Absolut New Orleans | Main | Michel Gondry's Be Kind Rewind trailer »
Banksy:
I wanted to be an artist once.
I used to think I could be one within my job. Now I feel my job lets me be one in life.
Posted by bryan chiao in A Word to the Wise | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834539a3069e200e3982212078833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Banksy::
Comments
bry... what does that entail?
Posted by: bryan | Aug 5, 2007 7:43:59 PM
“Advertising is the greatest art form of the 20th century.” Marshall McLuhan
Posted by: Adam | Aug 6, 2007 12:51:21 PM
That is what I am talking about people!
Posted by: Brian | Aug 7, 2007 9:47:25 PM
he makes a great point. why are so many talented creative thinkers flooding the field of advertising rather than embarking on the nobler path of true art?
...hold up. my iphone just rang. they're bringing my car around. i'll catch you gents on the golf course.
Posted by: gillette | Aug 7, 2007 11:05:55 PM
come on, guys. the only people that give a rat's ass about advertising are the people who work in it. true artists create art. not 30-second commercials, magazine ads, or boring websites.
for the 99.9% of the population outside of the ad world, we're considered at best an annoyance.
Posted by: fizzle | Aug 8, 2007 4:45:55 PM
think that was bansky's point. he's pissed at advertising for stealing creative thinkers that might otherwise bring some real art into the world. rather than 30-second bits of (sometimes) artful, but always commercial propaganda.
i have no doubt there are true artists living comfortably in the advertising profession. dr. seuss was a copywriter once. my hope is those folks eventually find their way out and join bansky in the less lucrative but seemingly more fulfilling world of real art.
Posted by: gillette | Aug 9, 2007 3:17:50 PM
Banky is the Warhol of our generation.
Pollock has a exhibition called "Banksy Vs. Warhol"
http://www.warholvsbanksy.com/
Posted by: Gong | Aug 9, 2007 3:35:33 PM
I think its funny that people who make ads think they can make art. Sure there are those that have and can. But most of the art that ad people make ads is bad. Drib. Drab. Drib.
What you thought you would be and what you are is never the same thing. Good luck with that though.
Posted by: Butch Brown | Aug 10, 2007 3:25:45 AM
Sure, Dr. Seuss was a copywriter. That's great. There are movie directors who used to toil in ad-making as well.
The key point here is they all WERE in advertising. They had the talent to get out of it and do what they truly loved--create art for themselves.
Why would an artist choose to work for Buick, Wal-Mart or Coke when he could work for himself? One reason: he doesn't have the talent to succeed on his own.
Posted by: fizzle | Aug 12, 2007 2:19:20 PM
Why would Jack White write a song for Coke? Why would Paul Simon write Kodachrome? Why don't architects just build shit they think is cool instead of working for clients?
Is the world of art and advertising really different?
You don't think Picasso wanted his paintings to sell?
Posted by: kodak | Aug 13, 2007 6:25:33 PM
The art world gets all the self obsessed kids?
Um, are you aware of how many ad award shows there are today? How many websites there are that cater strictly to ad Creatives trying to show off for one another? The pathetic lengths to which even Senior Creatives will go to get fake ads produced purely so they can enter them into the shows?
The art world may get the slow folks, but no one except maybe Hollywood tops the ad world for self-obsession. No one.
Trust me, Bansky, if even half of these exposure-at-any-cost yahoos were plying their trade in the art world instead of in advertising, you'd be begging the ad biz to take them back.
Posted by: CD | Aug 14, 2007 12:32:17 PM
Jack White's career isn't jingle-writing. And neither is Paul Simon's. They were already presumably getting the self-satisfaction they desire from their music. They merely decided to cash in for a one-time bundle o' cash. And money wasn't behind the paintings of Picasso. Talent was.
Make no mistake, kodak--ad creatives are about as close to Jack White and Picasso as is an accountant for H&R Block.
Posted by: fizzle | Aug 14, 2007 3:45:14 PM
I think the question shouldn't be whether or not an ad is art or a creative an artist.
The question is, what's not an ad?
Jack White's songs are certainly his own self-expression. But they're also ads to buy his album, his merchandise, and tickets to his tour.
Same goes for Paul Simon.
If you're selling your art in any way, congratulations:
You're in advertising.
And that's that.
Posted by: Kodak | Aug 15, 2007 4:41:35 PM
I would research my world a bit more before concluding that I wasn't in it for the money. If there ever were a brand, it was my name. I jerked around and took advantage of so many art collectors/dealers once I understood the power of a "Picasso." No one understands selling them self more than me.
Posted by: Picasso | Aug 16, 2007 10:48:54 AM
Banksy is one of the largest commodities in the art world. He has built his own brand that is followed religiously by consumers who really don't understand what he's trying to do. (And really, what kind of ironic statement is that? People are obsessed with finding out his identity, and collect works for the sake of cool) There's a great article in the NY Magazine on this, a great quote from Brad Pitt who really doesn't get what Banksy is attempting to do. You should look for it, if you are interested in Banksy
So the real question is, is anything that Banksy does to be considered art? And is he really one to criticize advertising when he has made himself a brand in the art world unlike others have? He pulls in loads of cash for each work, some would call him an opportunist...
I don't know what I think about Banksy. He definitely points out the hypocrisy but then benefits from it immensely.
Posted by: Claire | Aug 27, 2007 10:29:24 AM
Fuck you Bansky!
Posted by: Rodrigo Trevino | Aug 29, 2007 2:31:31 PM
it's funny that all the ad professionals on this page only point to his supposed critique of advertising, but no one talked of his actual critique of the modern art world around him.
Posted by: rich | Oct 12, 2007 10:23:09 AM
that's because a lotta adfolk think the world revolves around advertising. which is why so much of it bloooowwwwws.
Posted by: wyatt | Oct 14, 2007 3:23:28 PM
Excellent quote!
Posted by: Fubiz | Aug 26, 2008 1:39:03 PM
Bansky's quote isn't about is advertising good or bad. Yeah, there's good ads and bad ads out there. Of course, there are plenty of talented designers putting out bad ads – you can thank the client, or the market, or the budget or many other factors. Of course, there are more bad designers putting out bad ads than we can count... that's easy to find
The point is, there are many bright and talented designers and advertisers that really "get" the popular culture. You have to if you want to create good ads. Just like you have to "get" popular culture if you want to do good modern art. To me, that is the power of Bansky's art, he "gets it". In a very simple image, he can convey a great deal. I would love to have that kind of skill myself.
So, the point is, these talented advertisers might otherwise become talented artists, but when the realities of life hit, sometimes choosing the path that you know you can provide for your family and still enjoy the work you do, becomes an easy one.
At the end of the day, even Picasso had to eat.
Posted by: Ben | Sep 8, 2008 2:54:47 PM
