Banksy works cost public almost £150k(www.bbc.co.uk)

11 pointsby alvisan hour ago15 comments

ryandrake25 minutes ago
The article's photo of the art barricaded from public view with two security people standing guard in front of it speaks even louder than the original artwork.
And then, further down in the article, the picture of a whole structure built to block the view of the piece, with a locked door. Satire writing itself!
doikor14 minutes ago
It’s street art/graffiti. If someone wants to tag over it let them. Protecting this stuff with tax payer money is just stupid.
- tptacek4 minutes ago
  I think that's where I'm at too (as a lifelong fan of actual street art), but that leaves the question of why Banksy is privileged the way he is, for his trite brand of sub-tour-poster stencil work, most of which would be too on-the-nose for a Rage Against The Machine reissue cover.
xbar8 minutes ago
The Banksy cost-benefit and clean-protect loops are part of my favorite modern civic dialogs. I like it when the BBC takes the obvious side of the establishment because it is honest.
al_borlandan hour ago
They could do nothing and just let the art exist for free.
- tptacek29 minutes ago
  They can't. It's a listed building. They're legally obligated to remove it.
  - Schiendelmana few seconds ago
    Absolutely not. There is no enforcement mechanism to punish them if they chose not to enforce the listed building rules.
- benj111an hour ago
  Half this cost is related to security to actively stop people looking at the art work. If it's not acceptable for banksy to cost tax payers £50k to remove the graffiti, why is acceptable for the powers that be to waste another £50k on security to stop anyone seeing it?
  And if that ruins the character of the building, why is the fence acceptable?
  - nprateem39 minutes ago
    Probably to stop people rocking up and cutting them out of the buildings
m0lluskan hour ago
And the value of nothing.
omosubi30 minutes ago
why don't they just sell the works to recoup the costs?
how much does graffiti cost the public in general?
- tptacek29 minutes ago
  They can't; they're obligated by law to preserve the original structure the graffiti is painted on.
11 minutes ago
undefined
_8L34K11 minutes ago
"Think of the money!" This mentality needs to go extinct. Along with billionaires.
xnx16 minutes ago
Now do how much tourist money his works have brought in.
toomuchtodoan hour ago
A rounding error to support the arts.
allearsan hour ago
And well worth it. Too bad they defaced it.
puzzleincompletan hour ago
[dead]
jccalhoun36 minutes ago
Shadow Justice Secretary Nick Timothy said: ""Our courts are a national symbol of justice and the rule of law."
It seems like someone doesn't get the symbolism of the Banksy piece.
- tptacek29 minutes ago
  Uh, no, the piece isn't subtle. They simply disagree with it.
nzoschke18 minutes ago
Technically this is vandalism of a govt building.
If they're so concerned about cost, why not do what you'd do with any other vandal with a spray paint can...
Immediately paint over it with grey paint to neutralize the "blight", then efficiently do a deeper clean / removal / repair the facade.
Seems like they gave the Banksy very special treatment of fence, guards, etc. and now are paying for the side effects of that.
FatalLogic37 minutes ago
Original art by Banksy is reportedly valued at millions of £ or $ [0]
The BBC says "Banksy works cost public almost £150k" because "The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) says it has spent £50,000 trying to remove paint from the wall of the Grade II-listed building in Carey Street."
Therefore, the title is incorrect. The cost to the public is much more than £150k. The Ministry's damage to this freely-contributed artwork has probably already cost the public a few million £, not just £150k
[0] https://www.dawsonsauctions.co.uk/news-item/how-much-is-an-o...
- d4ng31 minutes ago
  Have you considered that the public may be gaining something from the conversations and awareness that arise from the performance of this art? I invite you to move away from evaluating a piece of art simply in terms of the monetary cost to the tax payer.
- kmoser17 minutes ago
  The government has appropriated Banksy's artworks (e.g. the police sentry box), and could sell them. If the sale of those artworks exceeds the cost of cleaning others, then the government has netted a profit, which takes the monetary argument off the table.
- DroneBetter32 minutes ago
  you mean... as opposed to removing the bricks with the art on them to auction off and replacing them with new bricks?