ART.

[Marucho]

Well what do you think of Banksy? He is a grafitti artist. I think he is amazing, thought provoking and very clever.

http://www.banksyunmasked.co.uk/

LOL The guy and the pie.

it looks real and therefore i like it :8 Okay i think some graffiti is good, but i never refer to it as art.

[Lost]

Lol. I did my art exam last week, it was a popcorn box and it took forever o.o'.

[RedStratocas]

What makes the real Mona Lisa worth $499,999,990 more? :S Besides, the fake one actually looks better.

because of its' history. leonardo da vinci is one of the most highly regarded people of all time in any aspect, and even he considered it his best work.

you don't really have to look at art to be confused by prices of things. i mean who decided that gold is worth more than silver? its all relative of what people are willing to pay. there's only ONE mona lisa, and if someone is willing to pay $50,000,000 for it, then thats the price it is.

I know this is offtopic with the general theme of this thread but since you bring him up. It annoys me that people recognise his work as "thought provoking and very clever" yet shun 'normal' graffiti. I'm not talking about some scribble on a wall from some 'youth team' but proper good pieces are amazing if you stop and look at them, even if they don't contain one man's personal political opinion.

definitely. if you ever get a chance, watch the documentary "style wars" im sure its somewhere online. it's fascinating, its from when graffiti really started taking off in nyc in the early 80's. not that i didnt appreciate it before, but that movie made me think so much more of graffiti. its not all about vandalism, it really is artistic expression.

As an artist I view art as something purely aesthetic, something which I'm sure most other artists wouldn't agree with. Fair play sometimes you might want to express yourself, but if you do that you should then keep it to yourself because it ought to be personal. If there's supposed to be a message and that message isn't immediately apparent without you needing to be told what it is then it simply isn't done well enough, so it's failed as an art form in my view. As for Banksy, I have no respect for the man at all. His "work" is no more profound than that of any political cartoonist in a cheap magazine or newspaper and I strongly believe that all interest in him is purely hype

i think of it more as your art is directed at certain audiences. a piece of art that is frustratingly complicated to one person is incredibly simple to someone else. art that pleases everyone with messages too obvious is no fun. i feel if there were to be a measure for how good a painting is, it would be how long people are compelled to look at it.