When Banksy’s “Girl With Balloon” self destructed on the wall of Sotheby’s in London on Oct. 6, after fetching $1.4 million to an anonymous buyer, the secret British street artist either subverted the entire art auction society—or contributed greatly to its haughty nature.
The shredding of “Girl With Balloon” in front of a confused, awestruck auction-house crowd is the most recent act by Banksy, who has built a reputation for his subversive street art, as well as for the steadfast commercialization and sale of his work. Being the figurehead of a once-underground and mostly taboo medium has made Banksy a household name, but it has also corroded an ideal of authenticity that runs the street art scene (and to be honest, most art scenes). With fame and commercialization, Banksy has lost the once powerful subversion he used to hold, and now, in the view of many, is part of a larger system of capitalist exploitation and inequality.
When Banksy’s spray paint on canvas piece started automatically shredding after the gavel fell on its sale, it immediately became art history. The destruction of a piece remotely—and during an auction—had never happened before. Of course, while at face value Banksy’s act seems to be a middle finger to the crowd and patrons of art auctions (and the inequalities of the business as a whole), one can’t help but feel, even if Banksy was not aiming to do as such, that the act was just a continuation of the industry norms.
Banksy posted a video on Instagram apparently showing him creating the hidden shredding frame. He captioned the video with “the urge to destroy is also a creative urge,” a quote often attributed to Picasso. Banksy’s act at Sotheby’s wasn’t really destruction, though. While the painting was obviously changed from its initial state, the clean, perfectly even shredding of the piece meant that not only could it be reinstalled within a frame, but the act itself along with the painting still being relatively put together possibly only upped the value of the piece for the buyer, as it now has an aura of spectacle and history around it. If Banksy’s aim was to embarrass, or make a statement against the art world, committing an act that only increases the already tremendous value of a piece for auction seems to do little to subvert or otherwise antagonize the art establishment. In fact, it’s hard to see it as anything other than a stunt that only reinforces a loss of authenticity that plagues the artist.
Banksy’s subversion cannot really be called as such if the auction house was in on the event. According to The New York Times, the frame for the piece would have been rather large and heavy for a painting the size of Banksy’s. Somebody, especially those as experienced and renowned as the art handlers at Sotheby’s, would have possibly noticed the unwieldy frame. As well, the art was hung on the wall, unusual for its size, instead of put up on a podium or other presentation. And maybe most revealing, the art was the last offer of the day, as if it was known that the piece would cause considerable commotion among the ranks of the auction house and disrupt other sales.
The art world is a convoluted, inflated place. It is no stranger to spectacle or conspiracy. As auction prices continue to climb into numbers never before thought possible, and street-art—once seen as a vestige of artistic authenticity—becomes a product of upper-class commercialization, it is easy to see where the line between artist and art market blurs. Banksy’s stunt at Sotheby’s is maybe a clever act of subversion, but it seems more that it is—maybe not a celebration of—but a piece of the puzzle that is the art market and its absurd wealth, a fraternization with the powers at be, the powers that stand in direct defiance of what artists like Banksy stand for.
