Hacker News Reader

Comment by xevb3k | Hacker News Reader

I assume they won’t actually have to pay? I’d guess whatever contract their is with the seller also requires that the art is delivered safely to the purchaser.

I wonder what the message is here, or if there is a message beyond the publicity. I guess something about the art having no inherent value...

View on HN

It's now a part of art history, it would be a foolish move on the part of the buyer to not accept it. Banksy has reaffirmed why he's maybe the only contemporary visual artist today who counts as a household name. Although I guess we cuold debate whether he's first and foremost a visual artist, or a performance artist. The audacity of his stunts and trickery far outweigh the merits of his clever visual puns.

If that’s the case, I guess Banksy will be laughing even harder...

Walked past one of his works on the upper west side of manhattan. I wouldn’t have known it was his except for the plaque put up next to the plastic barrier installed to protect it.

Kind of crazy that the art is likely worth as much as the entire building it’s on. Although, this is Manhattan so who knows.

His works in the Gaza strip are definitely worth more than the entire buildings.

“But is the work destroyed? Or is it transformed? Even Branczik isn’t sure. “You could argue that the work is now more valuable,” Branczik said. “It’s certainly the first piece to be spontaneously shredded as an auction ends.”

since information cannot be destroyed (at least, according to quantum physics), i argue it's transformed. And it's just as valuable transformed, if not more so.

I doubt a burned, sorry, transformed, version of the Mona Lisa would be more worth than before.

What if Leonardo had very publicly transformed it before he died?

An urn with the ashes of the painting would not be that much worth or admired now.

Sports rather than art, but this comment is vaguely reminiscent of cricket.

They'll pay and be happy to do so.

Banksy's art is valuable exactly because his art pushes the boundary. It wasn't just destroyed for no reason. His graffiti art is meant to be public, and he has made no secret he thinks private art collection is bullshit.

But the shredding functionality was part of the work of art all along. A feature, not a bug!

I read on Vice they are already speculating that this may have increased its value.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com