Banksy may be one of the most famous artists in the world but his identity has been a closely guarded secret, perhaps until now. The Mail UK has printed an article that supposedly reveals Banksy’s true identity and has even gone as far as to print a photography (allegedly) of him. I find it funny how the media are always so concerned with the background of people like this. We have no control over where we come from or how we were brought up, we can only control where we go after that. And besides, it’s the message, not the messenger. If accurate, this article will surely put a dent in Banksy’s ability to create in the future. So it begs the question: if you care enough about art to care who Banksy is, why would you destroy what he is trying to do by writing an article like this? Article Link
Photo via nolifebeforecoffee
20 Comments Leave A Comment
PT says:July 14, 2008 at 2:45 am
Journalists try ruin everything good.
skwidspawn says:July 14, 2008 at 2:49 am
Agreed. I find it very offensive that there are people out there determined to out those who prefer to be kept anonymous.
James Houston says:July 14, 2008 at 7:26 am
The Daily Mail is about as reliable as Fox News. It’s always been clear that he’s wanted to remain anonymous. Interviewing his family, and publishing private information is just tacky.
Justin S. Meyers says:July 14, 2008 at 8:51 am
I am not quite sure this is actually real. But, who knows.
Tom says:July 14, 2008 at 9:26 am
Context is key here.
The Daily Mail is a tabloid-style newspaper, and many of its readers see Banksy’s work as glorified vandalism. That’s why they want to “out” him.
The photo itself is several years old and was never proven to be authentic. Typical Daily Mail.
emily says:July 14, 2008 at 10:05 am
Scott, you sound like you are in a very good mood today. I can tell in your writing :)
joshua says:July 14, 2008 at 10:30 am
Agreed. As temping as it is I’ve decided to not click to the link to the article. Although I doubt someone so talented and with such well known work can keep anonymous forever, I don’t believe in taking advantage of that to make “news”.
Michael says:July 14, 2008 at 11:43 am
Banksy is Elvis Costello?
Op says:July 14, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Can’t believe some of the comments at the end of tht article calling to have him arrested…..some people really must have crap grey boring lives if they wish to remove any sort of non-conforming behaviour.
Forrest says:July 14, 2008 at 9:22 pm
That is really sad if true. I just hope it stops there, and they don’t actually try to track him down for charges and what not…
ralph fisker says:July 15, 2008 at 1:36 am
funny this should appear here
i know banksy personally
and the guy in the picture ain’t him
that’s for sure
Simon Jakobsson says:July 15, 2008 at 6:31 am
Haha, well, if the guy in the picture isn’t bansky, who is he? And can’t you get a pretty serious lawsuit on your hands if you put someone in his situation? (Being pictured as a world-known graffiti artist that is.) :)
Alex / HeadUp says:July 15, 2008 at 7:12 pm
I for one, won’t care who Banksy is for just that reason– it’s the message, not the artist. But I’m disgusted enough with the media nowadays, this doesn’t surprise me in the least.
Rent says:July 16, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Yeah this isn’t surprising at all that they would release this kind of article, especially considering his popularity. It just pisses me off that they try and shatter these almost anti-hero type figures we have that people for the most part look up to and respect…shit his stencil of the two bobby’s making out is basically a national landmark and truly is protected along with almost every other piece he does within Britain.
LAB says:July 18, 2008 at 9:20 am
First of all im going to clear some of this up because i have been aware of this picture for over a year now.
The person in the picture is believed to be Banksy and was taken by a journalist who took the picture without the consent of Banksy. After releasing the picture to numerous newspapers over a year ago he was threatened legal action against by Banksy and his “manager” Steve Lazarides. The man was then forced to take the picture off the internet and became the scum of the graffiti scene.
Then a few months ago Banksy was pictured while painting one of his pieces, which depicted a pair of parking lines being painted up a wall and into a daisy. The picture was taken during the day and was done secretly by a member of the public who happened to see Banksy at work. It showed him stood near some scaffold while painting the wall and to me the person looked completely different to that of the one pictured in the Daily Mail. Banksy himself has said that he has a group of people working at one time to help him finish a piece thus explaining that it may not be him.
Overall only a minute amount of people know who he actually is and it will stay that way till the day he dies.
Doc McCoy says:July 22, 2008 at 3:58 pm
I’m one of these loveable rogues who savours a bit of a debate and reading some of the view comments on the page almost made me laugh out loud… I raised a few points but I doubt it will get through the screening process and make it onto the site. You can see these below. Any comments are more than welcome.
“Ah the age old debate over whether it is art or vandalism…
1. Art is the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power. If his work evokes an emotional response then it is art, whether it angers you or pleases you no?
2. What possible gain do you have knowing what he looks like? If you NEED to know this, try satisfying yourself by watching Big Brother (I hear their ratings are going down the pan). If I were to express myself illegally I’d hide my identity, wouldn’t you?
3. His educational background is irrelevant.
4. I arrived here from an external link. I now realise I’m on the Mail on Sunday website so I’d take this article with a pinch… No, handful of salt.”
steff says:July 23, 2008 at 11:25 pm
“why would you destroy what he is trying to do by writing a post like this?”…
Scott says:July 23, 2008 at 11:46 pm
Are you honestly suggesting that by posting an article on an obscure blog like this about an article that was printed in a massively circulated newspaper like The Mail which was then copied thousands of times over on countless online sources (and then was ultimately covered in TIME magazine and on TIME.com) I have somehow helped to impede the mission of Banksy? that’s completely insane.
The news was common knowledge by the time I posted this, I was merely commenting on the effect that news could potentially have, I wasn’t breaking the news myself.
the latest: http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1825271,00.html
steff says:July 24, 2008 at 7:11 am
no definitely not. i totally agree what you are thinking. dont get me wrong.
but this could lead us to a debate on principles. just because your blog is not that massive this doesn´t mean that your “word” is any less important. for me its a contraction in term to convict this artikel by writing a post about it.
nevertheless i dont think that revealing banksys identity makes his work any meaningless. the point is that he had done great social and politic critical art which made people think. and fortunatly he will continue. maybe this circumstance challenges his creativity doing new nice stuff!
btw…sorry for my bad english :-)