I bet none of you thought you'd ever see the day when people were protesting to have graffitti back on a wall. However, this is currently the case on the art scene, with an iconic Banksy piece, being mysteriously removed from a wall last week.
Slave Labour appeared on a wall outside Poundland in North London last year around the time of the Queen's Jubliee. It now however, is sitting awaiting auction in Miami, and is thought to fetch around $500,000.
Unsurprisingly, many have been up in arms about this. What's evoking most controversy however is the way it's been taken. It was shiftily moved during the night, and the seller is remaining anonymous, leaving his auctioneer in Miami to take the abuse.
The auctioneer's argument started with him trying to justify his client's actions in that they were 'preserving' the work (surely you've caused more damage by cutting the lump of concrete out of the wall and flying it to Miami?) but after eventually realising he was clutching at straws, he stated that it was a private wall and it was therefore legal for them to take it. Legal, maybe. Moral, no.
There were several things that annoyed me when I heard this story, one being the nerve of people to claim ownership over it, it belongs in England: fact ... and secondly, the people of North London are now left with an ugly crater in the wall.
Now Banksy remains anonymous, and there was never any solid evidence that this particular piece was by him, only art expert's opinions. In my eyes however, even if it isn't by the infamous Banksy, it is still a British piece of art, by a British artist, making a social comment on Britain. Thus, for it to be sitting in America, ready to make them money, is disgusting. Remaining anonymous, Banksy clearly does not create his art for financial gain. He offers his creative expressions free of charge for the public to enjoy. The fact there's such controversy about this shows that he's changed the way people view street art and for that, who ever he is, he must be admired.
His work is a social comment. It is powerful, sometimes moving and genuinely forces society to address it's faults; to move this work out of it's context, for me, makes it meaningless and indeed worthless. It is one of the many symbols that make Britain truly 'great' and to take it under such circumstances really poses many questions of security for artists.
Whether Britain gets this work back or not, whoever has taken it upon themselves to attempt to sell it, has stolen a truly beautiful piece of work from the entire population and should be ashamed of themselves.
