Nope, he’s not painting over the dtLA Banksy, he’s applying some type of protective clear coat. This comes after the Banksy on 4th and La Brea was cut out of the wall and stolen.
Update: Here’s a video of the La Brea Banksy being taken away. I guess the owner of the building did this?
Another interesting update from LAist about the La Brea piece:
The video’s source claims they asked the workers what they were doing, and they responded that “they were hired to remove it, and that it would go into a ‘big collection of art.’” A look at Google Maps’ Street View of the building shows a banner with the phone number of Ace Gallery as a contact, which now puts the legitimacy of the piece and the sale in question. JetSet asserts “the artist never confirmed the work was his, and the piece is now considered counterfeit,” adding that it “makes sense for the artist to distance himself from the work now. Banksy never confirmed it was his to begin with, so Ace Gallery and every other greedy art-star fucker can piss off.” via slippy
According to the article above, Douglas Chrismas owns, rents, or is associated somehow with 400 La Brea where he had the alleged Banksy was removed this week. Now here’s a question, if he wants to start a museum (and I’m assuming it would be in this building) wouldn’t you want the Banksy on the building? I guess not when you can sell it for cash…And then the ethical dealer/museum issues come up.
UPDATE: In response to Alan’s response to the above, I just wanted to clarify that I don’t think the ethical issue is Douglas Chrismas taking the piece down, if it’s his building he can do what he likes, it’s the fact that he is trying to open a museum and probably in that building and he missed an amazing opportunity to have a Banksy in his permanent collection. Instead, he cut and ran (literally) at the first opportunity to sell a piece. That’s dealer thinking, not head of museum thinking. Therein lies the ethical dilemma.
Reblogged from SLIPPY JENKINS.
April 15, 2010, 10:45am