DAMage Report - What is more important - the art or the artist?

"Banksy, the secretive British artist whose work has appeared on city streets around the world, said on Sunday he hoped his documentary film "Exit Through The Gift Shop" will raise the standing of urban art. But the anonymous graffiti artist with a cult following said in a shadowy video message to audiences at the Berlin Film Festival on Sunday before the screening of his film that it was possible it could have the complete opposite effect.

"My ambition was to make a film that would do for graffiti art what 'The Karate Kid' did for martial arts  As it turns out, I think we might have a film that does for street art what 'Jaws' did for waterskiing. There was no plan, there was no script and we didn't even realize we were making a film until halfway through. I think it's a good film as long as you've got very low expectations."

We've talked about intent being important to the artist in order for the creative product to be considered art. The whole graffiti art versus random tagging argument. Art is a means of communication - a way to express, to scream, to shout, to cry, to celebrate, to share a complex concept that can't adequately be conveyed with enough force using plain old conversation. Conversation can often be easily dismissed or forgot. Art on the other hand leaves a lasting impression... or tries to. Banksy is known for using the world as his canvas to convey his political and social messages. By remaining anonymous he initially drove the focus toward the art. The artist was invisible. The longterm results however is that the artist is possibly more fascinating than the art. And that more than anything else is what his film appears to be about. Whether the irony is intentional or not I'm not sure - but i suspect, given his propensity for ironic wit as shown in his art, that it is. 

From a small-time graffiti artist to a global star, Banksy's work has become so valuable that several of his street works have been salvaged and sold, including a painting on a London wall that fetched $340,000 in 2008. He's become world famous for illegal outdoor graffiti, including painting the West Bank barrier and leaving a life-size figure of a Guantanamo Bay detainee at the California theme park Disneyland -- both documented in the film. Banksy has had four exhibitions in Britain and the United States that attracted a total of over 550,000 visitors. For an invisible man he has cornered a nice portion of the art market that he disdains.

According to one critic "the story he tells is hilariously outrageous --somehow too implausible NOT to be true. It offers plenty of opportunity to poke fun at the art market, and intriguing insights into the ingenuity -- and agility -- of the street artists themselves."

I admit as far as generating curiosity about his film, Banksy has done that. I'm interested to find out if the film itself ends up feeling like a piece of graffiti with the early random film clips woven in with a haphazard autobiographical story line. 

The Banksy name and the urban myth developed about his artistic persona carries as much, if not more artistic merit and weight than the graffiti art that was initially his focus. Given some of his personal antics, I can see why. In 2004, Banksy walked into the Louvre in Paris and hung on a wall a picture he had painted resembling the Mona Lisa but with a yellow smiley face. Though the painting was removed by the museum staff, it and its counterpart, temporarily on unknown display at the Tate Britain, were described by Banksy as "shortcuts". He is quoted as saying: "To actually [have to] go through the process of having a painting selected must be quite boring. It's a lot more fun to go and put your own one up."

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61D22X20100214?type=entertainmentNews