Art Coverup: Banksy's work is being erased
 

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/members...inted-over.jpg

Banksy is a popular graffiti artist who has gained fame with his incredible skill, biting political message, and his trademark rat. Recently he visited Manhattan for a small exhibit in the West Village and also managed to place a few tags around town.

Banksy: Let Them Eat Crack [PICS]|Environmental Graffiti

Today, I was walking down Broadway and I saw that they were painting over this work of art. I felt very very sad to see it. The irony is that the art would have given this building's property value a boost. Now, they're going to have a big white splotch that they hope will be covered up by whatever gets built beside it.

I would consider Banksy's art to be work of cultural importance and this censorship is heartbreaking.

I love Banksy stuff

they should leave it up... it's disheartening to see it being covered up..

I wonder if they even know what they're doing? This is like putting tens of thousands of dollars through a paper shredder.

Bastards.

That is all.

http://inlinethumb01.webshots.com/93...600x600Q85.jpg
Here's the work before it was painted over.

People simply don't get art sometimes.

they are going to do the same to some work that he did in london too.

as upset as i am to hear this news, i can also appreciate the view of the municipailities. it wasnt his property to deface. famous or not.

Man, talkin bout bullshit!

It's one thing if it's some kid writing some crappy tag on a wall, it's a completely different thing if it's a stencil that must have taken... WHo knows how long it took. Shit man, Banksy can graffitti all over my face, and I would fucking appreciate it!

Sometimes people are just plain stupid.

I am a huge fan of urban art. Defacing is tagging with fleeting spritzes of black spray paint. This is not defacing, but covering it with white paint is.
Graffiti as art is beautiful and many cities are beginning to realize that. Trenton, NJ has many walls that otherwise would be eyesores covered in colorful art; Philadelphia had a program that allowed young artists to paint walls of buildings and incorporated that with urban gardens (I don't know if this is still happening today tho).
Bansky probably realizes his art is fleeting, even if we feel saddened when it's painted over.
Keith Haring was a graffitist before he gained worldwide fame and altho he didn't like his art covered up or taken down, he apparently accepted it as a simple fact. Tat's Cru, a group of "Muralists", accept it as well. In a way, it might possibly be appreciated more because it is temporary. Kinda like life...

It's their private property. Let them do with it as they will.

Even if it is idiotic.

I love Banksy's work. His "Pet Shop & Charcoal Grill" exhibit was the most amazingly bizarre thing I've ever seen.

I hate to see the rat go but that's just the nature of these things. In fact, keeping it up defeats the purpose.

The street isn't a gallery and thankfully enough.

there are still 2 other Banksy rats on the sides of buildings in lower manhattan that aren't covered up yet... at least last time I walked past them.

it's part of the ebb and flow. if he wanted it to be permanent, he'd have gotten someone to pay for it.

and yes, the pet shop and grill was twisted beyond what I can comprehend as art.

Okay, I understand that if he wanted it to be in any level permanent, he could've asked permission, even been comissioned by the owners of the building to paint the mural. That would've been the proper way.

While it's entirely worth the owners' rights to paint over, I agree that it would give the building's worth a boost. I know I'd pay extra to live in a building covered in Banksy's art.

pffft the proper way. Banksy is all about irreverence - his value is directly connected to that. That would just be...ridiculous.

I also think it's a shame and I'd love to have his work on my building. Far better than the crappy pseudo-graffiti that usually shows up in most places.

If you check on Banksy's site, there is a next button on the main page. There, you can see how several of his works have been covered over in the UK, for a variety of reasons. In some cases it's councils and the people who don't want them there. In others, it's other graffiti artists who come along and deface his work.

This is, in a sense, the essence of his work. It is an ephemeral kind of art, that reflects the ephemerity of almost everything in our lives these days. Material things, relationships. Disposable society. Nothing has value and nothing is worth preserving.

I wouldn't want that painted on the side of MY building, as "artistic" as it may be.

I can get sentimental about it, too, since I really like his work and his philosophy about it. But that would be like wishing evolution won't happen since I like it the way it is/was at a certain moment of time. This is a natural part of the evolution of his kind of art.