Steal this Artwork. The Brave New World of The Public Art Heist.
“The artist Banksy categorically denies any involvement at all in the theft of his Parisian works.”
From Political to Popular.
Emerging in 1960s New York, political street art has become increasingly prevalent in recent years. Offering public social commentary accessible to all, increased visibility means you’d be hard-pressed to find someone unfamiliar with the name Banksy.
Although synonymous with political reflection, art has always been inter-connected with its institutions and display methods. Political street art in contrast consciously severs itself from these systems allowing works to sit within a different sphere of contemplation.
By taking themselves entirely outside the traditional systems these works have found themselves additionally separated from their protection and security. This, combined with their increasing private market value, has resulted in an ever-present threat of theft. These unguarded artworks have proven ripe for the taking creating a new kind of very public art heist.
Very Public Disobedience.
Possibly the best-known of all political street artists, Bristol-born Banksy is famous for his tongue-in-cheek acts of political and social disobedience and the dizzying prices his works can reach. Illegal at their conception, his works created under cloak and dagger, with very few people knowing the person behind the controversial name. This has led some to ask how you can police the theft of works that are already themselves illegal. And if these crimes could be said to be political statements in their own right forming part of the artwork, aiding and abetting the extent of their social impact.
Call To Arms.
Banksy has asked if he actively instructs people to steal his work. The two men arrested in February 2020 for the theft of his Pompidou Centre rat in Paris later claimed they were instructed to commit the robbery. Banksy however reportedly denied any involvement. But is direct instruction needed, or is political street art intrinsically a call to arms that begs the viewer to interact with, destroy, steal or deface it?
An impressive number of Banksys have been stolen or defaced (13 removed, twenty-nine defaced and three demolished, not to mention his Sotheby’s stunt that saw Girl with Balloon transformed into Love is in the Bin). Competing artists have also been known to deface the work sometimes just hours after they have been revealed such as OMAR NYC in 2013.
Are these acts of destruction in fact the final part of the artwork, maybe even the point? If so, should they be policed at all?
A Victimless Crime?
When art is created illegally in the public sphere, it begs the question of who owns the work and therefore who are the victims of these ‘art nappings’. Banksy will only issue certificates of authenticity if he believes the works have not been moved from the public domain into the private. This firmly suggests that his works should be considered public property for the benefit of the public only. If the work is political, with a distinct call to arms (in 2019 he offered the ‘kidnapper’ of The Drinker “£2 towards a can of petrol” to set the piece on fire) do we need to consider where political art ends, and simple criminality begins.
Maybe something is to be said for the continual creation, removal and renewal of political public art. Politics is continually shifting, and political art needs to be current to be truly impactful. Maybe these ‘kidnappers’ are providing a needed public service in the same way street artists do, enabling and forcing a continually changing and reflective narrative surrounding current political themes.
Part 2 Coming Soon…