So let me get this straight. Jolie shelled out $226,000 for a painting depicting how White Americans have more than Starving Africans.

Am I the only one that finds this to be the most ironic thing I've ever heard? Why didn't she just send $226,000 to some poor African family?

Reply

Don't be silly Joey--do you have any idea how much Angelina already regularly gives from the "ridiculous amount of money" she says she makes? $226,000 is a fraction of pennies compared to that.
I saw the show and the painting--it's moving--and as art is supposed to--may move some viewers it to reach in their pockets and cough up a fraction of what they make for world hunger.
I can see why it would mean even more to someone who dedicates so much of her own money, time, and energy to publicizing and raising consciousness on exactly that disparity, as well as fund-raising, and actually personally funding.

Reply

Natasha you have right.
But doing this, maybe, Angelina Jolie, want to show us she loves art :P

http://www.auto-power-girl.com/

Reply

She's a wacko. Nothing she does makes sense. Don't even try to understand this looney Joey.

Reply

Natasha, you have missed the point. You call the painting "moving" but paying $226,000 for it counteracts the entire point it is trying to make. The artist would have done better to donate the work to a museum or something where more people that just angelina jolie can enjoy it.

So she's given tons to charity. Yes i know this, that is why it makes even less sense that she would purchase something like this. The fact that she has given money previously doesn't make this any less ironic.

As you said in your own words. This is like pennies to her. THAT IS THE WHOLE FRICKIN POINT OF THE PEICE OF ARTWORK!!!! Thank you for coming to the meeting, have a nice day.

Reply

Bansky is actually being very tongue in cheek with that piece. His work makes a statement on multiple levels. It actually mocks the person who buys it, while backing up what the painting is saying at the same time. I'm surprised Angelina didn't understand that about Bansky.

Reply

So let me get this straight: everyone else who does work is allowed to make money for their work, but artists are supposed to forego all their renumeration, keep living as they did when no one was paying for their work and DONATE their works so that others can benefit from their art?
Who's missing the point here? Art is not something that just "happens." Art is a product that takes a lot of education, practice, and mastery.
Would that every profession would just donate their work for the good of all. Or is it that artists are somehow so special they can just work for nothing? Get real!

Reply

>> Bansky is actually being very tongue in cheek with that piece.

Please! The "Ironic Artist" argument rears it's head again. This is just a loophole so you can avoid some healthy criticism.

>> His work makes a statement on multiple levels.

How many levels do you need to explain banksy? One - His work is popular because it essentially uses the style and vocabulary of advertising.

Two - It's nice to see that Banksy has sold out - historically this means the fashion for this drivel is on it's way out :)

Reply

I have some tips for new pieces as well:

1. Banksy tattoos prisoners on death-row with political statements admonishing the legal system.

2. Banksy visits a poor third world country and sets up an art factory using the poor as labour to produce his artworks which in turn critique labour exploitation. He then claims (probably through a curator or critic) that he is being "ironic" about the capitalist society we live in. Then we can all feel comfortable about his motives.

3. Banksy produces works of art that are on the surface critical of a system but are essentially simplistic, because they use the existing visual vocabularies of advertising and design they are "popular" So when a "film star" buys his work this cycle reaches it's natural conclusion. Warhol pretty much covered all of these routes off 50 years ago... yawn

Reply

wow, what do you know, another forum on the internet where people are having an interesting discussion about poverty, capitalism, the value of art, and the role of wealthy people in helping to solve some of our societal woes. That Banksy sure has done a bad thing! And, man, that self-righteous Angelina Jolie, when's she gonna cough up another 10 million to help out. You all type here like you know her and can assume her intentions because you heard some wacky story in the press about her. This show was amazing, the message is wonderful, and all of the money exchanging hands between these individuals involved will most definitely be better suited in their hands than the probable alternatives. I love to read all of this NOISE. It's precisely what Banksy had hoped for when mentioning the elephant in the room that no one is talking about. PEACE

Reply

Nice little thread...

No so fast there Zietguest. Banksy's own work tells us that he does in fact think Angelina Jolie is an idiot.

http://media.knuttz.net/0609/banksy_barely_legal/banksy_barely_legal_expo_068.jpg

If you don't think Banksy thought of the irony in Angelina Jolie purchasing that work, then you are a total idiot, or know nothing of Banksy and his work.

Reply

I'm fan Angelina's from Poland and find she is beautiful woman. I would like to meet she!!!
This is her business expensive painting to purchase!
The "picnic" is super! I'm with you Angelina!!!
Best regards from Poland
Sebastian

Reply

That's amazing. Congrats to that artist for the sale! I'm sure he'll be very generous with that new money of his... and not being greedy like he so much despises.

Reply

I think everyone has missed the point...Even though Irony has it day and time I think Angelina is a very Political person....She has obvious great taste and to her it makes a statement....Something that is already so prevailent in our society as a whole....Of commercialism,expliotation and the like...I love Banksy he is refreshing and I love his work and I think Angelina deserves something to call her own....If she likes it who cares how much she paid for it....It's not like there are so many people so appalled by anything that they decide to put back those 350.00 dollars jeans instead of donating it to charity.....At least she does her part to help when she can....I admire her immensely....

Reply