WSJ on Banksy in Detroit

[Lt. Dan Bassett]

animals respond to their uncontrollable urge to mark territory by lifting their leg ==>

gangs respond to their primal urge to claim territory by vandalizing others property with their spray-painted signs ==>

non-gang members emulate them by vandalizing others property with spray painted images and suddenly it's "art" ==>

lawyers get involved and now finally somebody is making real money over the modern-day equivalent of animal piss on a bush

animal piss on a bush is, at the end of the day, about the will to power -- continuing to procreate and extend your family line.
In the search for meaning I suppose I want to make the argument that many of those paid-for billboards that clutter our freeways urging us to buy more stuff are more destructive to our dying culture than any "Kilroy was here" street scribble. Banksy for sure does not remember when there were trees on E.Grand. Maybe he was born about the time that the jobs began to leave town enmasse. As a critique of the priorities of our culture and how they contribute to our dissolution I see the value in preserving this sprayed-on-cinderblock concept for contemplation. Turning the piece into a commodity to fight over extends Banksy's prophetic vision of our future.

[Goose]

the irony to me is not the fact that the piece of street art has been removed from it's "natural" environment to be showcased out of context....

the irony to me is that the so called "owners" of the packard plant have all of a sudden come forward to claim "ownership" of this piece of "artwork" after years and years of abandonment....

i also find it interesting that the salvagers claim they were given permission to remove the artwork, but were told not to purloin any scrap metal.... that the notion that this somehow valueable piece of art was an affront to scavange the place for scrap metal....

[Johnlodge]

Way to get the scoop on this year-old story, WSJ!