A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
Related communities:
Banksy used something to etch the stone before applying the paint knowing they'll try to wash it off.
Edit: more context, the building that has the art is 150 years old so they can't just replace the tiles. They are going to have to take some layers off.
They only did more damage by erasing it, they just proved the point Banksy was making.
I don't know, it seems quit obvious that that was the whole point. He might even done it himself
Removing it, of course, creates a Streisand effect and add more fuel to the Palestinian cause.
The people removing the graffiti couldn't even be bothered to change the border. Still clearly an outline of a power imbalance.
Banksy knew that it would look like this if they tried to remove it. He put it on a building where they couldn't just break a chunk of wall off, but they had to remove it. He understood exactly what kind of commercial removers were out there, he understood that it would leave a shadow.
Banksy has experimented with this theme before, of the art being destroyed, where the act of destruction is like a transaction.
One of his paintings was sold at auction, and when the bidding was closed, the big frame the work was displayed in began shredding the drawing. Except with the murals the "destruction" of the art was carried out by the state bureaucracy that the work is critiquing. But its a mundane, meaningless sort of removal. Human creativity and expression of injustice, likely worth millions, wiped away because of faceless, mindless state bureaucracy.
This is what makes Banksy an incredible artist. The after shot is the art.
That's a 4D chess move, if that's true. I do remember the Bansky shredded artwork event, that was wild.
Are there any other examples besides one of the most famous and expensive art pieces?
Most of his works have been moved or destroyed, I think. He's had works washed off, he's had works vandalized, the walls where a work resided has been broken out and then the wall has been sold to collectors.
He spray painted a piece onto plywood at a charity Boys Club, confirmed with the people running the club that the work belonged to them, so they removed it and eventually sold it for a pretty penny to keep the club running.
That dynamic seems to have always been present. I'm seeing some people saying he even may have etched the wall first, so I'm not sure. But with stuff like this you have to assume it was the artist's intention. This is what artists spend all their time thinking about and discussing! In art school even, beginner students are made to critique every line and mark of each others work. Any single piece of art itself is a conversation with the history of art. We aren't used to thinking like that, we think of art works as commodities with a dollar value. I promise you, banksy does not think that way
It's fine if you like banksys art, i do too, we have a saying that "you can get away with things as long as you keep it clean". (Poorly translated)
If the owner or rightsholder of the property he defaced/vandalised/painted on, decides to restore it, sell it, keep it, whatever. That's entirely up to them. Always was.
There's no "dynamic", he wants to make a statement, so he goes out and vandalises a piece of property to amass attention. In theory, it's no different than the "just stop oil" people trying to throw paint at the Mona lisa or some random stores windows. Vandalism is vandalism.
Ofc he also produces art that isn't vandalism. But he rose to fame for his vandalism. I think it's with keeping in mind.
No
all this does is amplify the message. Banksy is brilliant.
What are the chances banksy was the masked person who covered up the mural it seems to be done with intent to keep the silhouette perfectly. The banksy crew had to have known it was going to be covered up and they planted someone to be the cleaner-upper? Or this whole thing is a sanctioned stunt... It seems there is people within the system that want it to change.
You call that erasing?
Maybe it's like tattoo removal. It's never really gone because something-something white blood cells. Or takes hundreds of sessions until it's gone.
They should all make T-shirts with this pic and use them in their daily lives.
In some way it's erased in malicious compliance, because the message is still showing, doubly because of the censorship.
Knowing Banksy, the image itself, while powerful in its message, was never going to be the main message of the art. The actions that followed were what it was all about. When your government is so predictable, it's easy to troll them.
Do you remember what the artwork was that was shredded after the auction? Few would. The message was always the shredding. Just like this, it was always the censoring. Government fell right into it and what was once some graffiti on a wall in a local area is now international news provoking discourse. That's art doing its thing.
Yeah, that mural was very clever.
The gov really had no winning move either way, and realistically leaving it up was never an option anyway.
I'd argue it had one winning move, but it wasn't going to happen. They could have protected it and said they agree with his right to speak (or something more UK; since there is no freedom of speech). The winning move is to recognize that people have issues with the actions and are discussing it —even if this is bullshit.
That would have invited more graffiti. Which IMO wouldn’t be a bad thing, but I can also understand the potential problems with it.
If I were in charge of it, and had the freedom to do anything, I'd do something like saying: "We recognize people's frustration. We will protect this piece for [some amount of weeks] but any further vandalism will be removed. However, we will host an exhibit for others to produce art expressing their opinions and will display them, within reason and legal boundaries."
This would remove almost all the power and give people a place to vent. However, it's not very fascist, which is about controlling people's ability to speak against you, so it's not going to happen. This piece is only powerful because it isn't allowed. As soon as it is then people stop giving a fuck. If they were actually intelligent then this is what they'd do. However, if they were intelligent they wouldn't have gotten into this mess to begin with.
It really does feel more powerful half-erased lol
The final form of the art piece. Honestly, I wouldn’t even be surprised if Banksy anticipated this. It wouldn’t be too tough to predict that the government would respond this way.
It's far more poignant like that. Whoever did this is either very stupid or very clever.
The ground is wet there like it just rained, I wonder if this is the first time it’s rained after he put it up. Maybe he used paint that washes away, exactly for this reason.
Just a thought though. Unlikely.
pressure washer
They were scrubbing it with paint stripper I assume.
why didn't he get his ass kicked
That would belittle the powerful message being sent here - a peaceful protest about a peaceful protest being repressed is being repressed.
Also I assume there were a ton of cops around the guy.
They completely covered it in plastic foil, put barricades in front of it and two guards to prevent anyone seeing it. It did definitely not get washed away by the rain. It existed for 3 days and was covered for most of that time.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/10/arts/design/banksy-destroyed.html
Here is a pic of the removal process this morning:
Thanks for the info. I thought I was probably wrong, but banksy has done some crazy stuff in the past so I was hopeful.
lol now I’m hoping another mural shows up with this on the other side
Yeeah. A painting of those guards standing infront of a pile of food and infront of the guards a group of starving kids. Thats the kind of grin im seeing here. "Aww you wanna live? You wanna not get genocided? Well guess what, we dont give a fuck!"
Same sort of vibe as the nuclear shadows, you can still tell what was supposed to be there.
The worst part is that it's the more progressive party that is doing this.
New Labour are regressive as shit.
It's just that the Tories are even more regressive and Reform are complete total nutters.
It's a grade 1 listed building, it'd have to go no matter what it was.
Banksy would have known this beforehand, it's masterful actually.
Space Invader put a mosaic on a listed building where I live. We didn't have police blocking it, it wasn't removed the next day. It was removed eventually and it was investigated but I didn't have the Big Brother feel to it.
I think it is pretty clear by now that Keir Starmer is a seat warmer for Nigel
He's behaving like that's his goal even. It's just hard to fathom. Like is he a plant? I don't see how you could set the table better than what he's doing right now.
Blairites were never purged from the party.
Whoever thinks that twat will make things better in stad of worse is delusional
It's an admission of guilt.
It's still pretty artsy. You can totally get the message without the finer details.
Calculated?
why clear it and leave a silhouette?? why just don't leave an entire square silhouette to no one ever knows what was there.
because the picture was taken only partway through the removal.
I can't say they didn't/won't try to remove/cover it further, but on another article it's at least dry (and seemingly not obstructed) pointing to the removal as calculated by Banksy as others have suggested.
Perhaps being a historic site, paint is not really an option instead needing a more costly restoration to obscure it.
