Get Premium
Dark mode theme is available exclusively for premium users. Learn more about the benefits of subscribing.
No fees, cancel anytime.
Dark Mode 
No fees, cancel anytime 
then open in external browser
and click "Open in External Browser" 
16.2K
Guy Notices That Something Doesn’t Add Up In Banksy Shredding, Explains Why It Was FAKE
Banksy is known the world over for his acts of rebellion, sticking two fingers up to the establishment with a series of poignant, humorous and provocative street artworks in unexpected locations. Recently he delivered perhaps his most famous artwork, protesting against the commodification of art by very publicly having his own work shredded at auction while horrified salespeople and investors looked on.
But was all really as it seemed? Was this wanton act of self-destruction the ultimate expression of anarchy and a troll of epic proportions, or actually a calculated and cynical scam to gain publicity and increase the value of his famous paintings?
Josh Gilbert, an artist and blacksmith from Chicago, has some serious doubts. Presenting his theory with impressive attention to detail, his arguments about something being fishy with the accepted version of events certainly carry some weight. “What piqued my interest was the appearance of the device in his video,” Josh explained to Bored Panda. “I’m a maker, so the way it was presented as being constructed struck a sour note with me. I re-watched Banksy’s artwork getting shredded several times and looked at stills, and it just didn’t make sense as a machine designed to shred a painting.”
“I’m also a magician, and when I started looking at it as a performance rather than documentation, that’s when it clicked.”
Being an artist himself, specializing in metal sculpture and modernized ‘art nouveau’ style wrought iron, Josh can appreciate the brilliance of Banksy, even if he’s not convinced by this particular stunt. “I still think Banksy is a famous artist not without reason, and I would definitely not call my theory “facts” at this point,” he told us. “It just seemed like a very fitting conclusion. I think Banksy is ultimately a performance artist and he’s doing a lot to stretch and expand what that means in popular culture.”
“That said, if it had been me trying to pull this kind of hoax, I like to think I’d do a bit of a better job covering it up. But maybe that’s all part of the performance? He wants to keep us guessing and talking about it, and he’s certainly done that!”
Who knows? No matter what you think about the stunt, there’s more to this story, that’s for sure. Scroll down to check out Josh’s findings below, and let us know what you think in the comments!
RELATED:
Bansky shocked the art world recently by setting up one of his works to self-destruct upon sale
But Chicago-based artist Josh Gilbert had some doubts about the much-publicised stunt
Here’s what people had to say about Josh’s astute observations
What do you think ?
stellermatt 7 years ago
wait... hold the phone Mable, Banksy was doing something for attention? he was doing something to possible annoy some, amuse others and entertain the rest. Well I am shocked. I shall sit in my gumdrop house on lollipop lane and be shocked.
LuckyPineapple 7 years ago
Can I come to your house? That sounds pretty nice
Load More Replies...
Greg Hoggarth 7 years ago
Ever since I saw the video I thought this was kind of obvious - simply because the shredding stopped with the picture halfway down.
Dian Ella Lillie 7 years ago
As soon as I saw the first photo about the shredding I was suspicious. The shredded portion has a curve in the material a few inches up from the bottom, at a part of the image that would have been expected to be visible and flat in the orginial frame, or just near the frame itself. The curve implies that the material has been rolled for a while and has set that way, like hair in curlers. To me this suggested that the shredded pieces had been rolled up for a while, with the very ends poking out straight from a feeding machanism so that they'ed extrude from the bottom, and that the curve higher up the shredded portion was either being pulled out by the weight of the material below, or reflected a set-up where it lay flat after curving around a roller. I thought that it was going to be announced almost immediately as a Banksy prank, but many people really did seem to take it seriously.
Sri Shan 7 years ago
Another consideration that should make one very suspicious is that Sothebys would careful check and vet all pieces they auction off. For the painting to appear out the bottom , they would need to be a gap in the frame, a gap no examiner could have missed. This is why I believe Sothebys and the buyer were well aware of what was about to transpire right after the gavel fell.
joe Shmoe 7 years ago
you're correct. the idea that an auction house like Sotheby's wouldn't figure out that a painting frame had lots of heavy electrical and mechanical equipment inside is absurd.
Load More Replies... Paul K. Johnson 7 years ago
The only thing I noticed when I first saw the video is that it looks like the painting isn't in the same plane as the shredded painting. The shredded painting is behind the original. One thought I had was that could just be painting going over rollers. The other thought I had was that this was all a ruse and the original never got shredded. Then I decided I don't actually care that much and we'll find out when we find out.
Crochet lady 7 years ago
Besides all his points the auction house would have to have been part of the conspiracy. They aren't going to accept a Banksy work without removing the painting from the frame to verify it is indeed a Banksy. Once they began the process of removing the painting they would have seen the shredder. This is a publicity stunt and the auction house is in on it. They think people are stupid.
Stannous Flouride 7 years ago
Off hand I think I could come up in a minute with a couple of dozen examples of people being stupid so the auction house's opinion wouldn't be far off.
Load More Replies...
Ralph Scavone 7 years ago (edited)
Has anyone compared the painting at Sothebys' pre auction with the shredded one by overlaying them? The original and the still shot where it stops are the same height. You'll see they are exactly the same height from her head to her shoes (feet). How is that possible with a canvas going through rollers and emerging from the bottom of frame at least an inch behind the face of the painting? The "shredded" one should be the shorter of the two. But it's not.
Josh Gilbert 7 years ago
I did the same thing after writing the post, and came to the same conclusion!
Load More Replies...
Turd Ferguson 7 years ago
The only thing I know for sure is that this guy is a lot smarter than me.
Carol Emory 7 years ago
Personally, I think it's ridiculous to drop millions of dollars on a painting. Use that money for something else..like creating a charity that helps people with serious medical issues or helping to get the homeless off the street and safe. Who gives a rats a*s if you have a piece of cloth smeared with paint from some long dead artist hanging on your wall. SMH
Diana R 7 years ago
I used to think that too but can't they do both? Just because a wealthy person buys a painting doesn't mean they aren't being charitable with their money also
Load More Replies...
stellermatt 7 years ago
wait... hold the phone Mable, Banksy was doing something for attention? he was doing something to possible annoy some, amuse others and entertain the rest. Well I am shocked. I shall sit in my gumdrop house on lollipop lane and be shocked.
LuckyPineapple 7 years ago
Can I come to your house? That sounds pretty nice
Load More Replies... Greg Hoggarth 7 years ago
Ever since I saw the video I thought this was kind of obvious - simply because the shredding stopped with the picture halfway down.
Dian Ella Lillie 7 years ago
As soon as I saw the first photo about the shredding I was suspicious. The shredded portion has a curve in the material a few inches up from the bottom, at a part of the image that would have been expected to be visible and flat in the orginial frame, or just near the frame itself. The curve implies that the material has been rolled for a while and has set that way, like hair in curlers. To me this suggested that the shredded pieces had been rolled up for a while, with the very ends poking out straight from a feeding machanism so that they'ed extrude from the bottom, and that the curve higher up the shredded portion was either being pulled out by the weight of the material below, or reflected a set-up where it lay flat after curving around a roller. I thought that it was going to be announced almost immediately as a Banksy prank, but many people really did seem to take it seriously.
Sri Shan 7 years ago
Another consideration that should make one very suspicious is that Sothebys would careful check and vet all pieces they auction off. For the painting to appear out the bottom , they would need to be a gap in the frame, a gap no examiner could have missed. This is why I believe Sothebys and the buyer were well aware of what was about to transpire right after the gavel fell.
joe Shmoe 7 years ago
you're correct. the idea that an auction house like Sotheby's wouldn't figure out that a painting frame had lots of heavy electrical and mechanical equipment inside is absurd.
Load More Replies... Paul K. Johnson 7 years ago
The only thing I noticed when I first saw the video is that it looks like the painting isn't in the same plane as the shredded painting. The shredded painting is behind the original. One thought I had was that could just be painting going over rollers. The other thought I had was that this was all a ruse and the original never got shredded. Then I decided I don't actually care that much and we'll find out when we find out.
Crochet lady 7 years ago
Besides all his points the auction house would have to have been part of the conspiracy. They aren't going to accept a Banksy work without removing the painting from the frame to verify it is indeed a Banksy. Once they began the process of removing the painting they would have seen the shredder. This is a publicity stunt and the auction house is in on it. They think people are stupid.
Stannous Flouride 7 years ago
Off hand I think I could come up in a minute with a couple of dozen examples of people being stupid so the auction house's opinion wouldn't be far off.
Load More Replies... Ralph Scavone 7 years ago (edited)
Has anyone compared the painting at Sothebys' pre auction with the shredded one by overlaying them? The original and the still shot where it stops are the same height. You'll see they are exactly the same height from her head to her shoes (feet). How is that possible with a canvas going through rollers and emerging from the bottom of frame at least an inch behind the face of the painting? The "shredded" one should be the shorter of the two. But it's not.
Josh Gilbert 7 years ago
I did the same thing after writing the post, and came to the same conclusion!
Load More Replies... Turd Ferguson 7 years ago
The only thing I know for sure is that this guy is a lot smarter than me.
Carol Emory 7 years ago
Personally, I think it's ridiculous to drop millions of dollars on a painting. Use that money for something else..like creating a charity that helps people with serious medical issues or helping to get the homeless off the street and safe. Who gives a rats a*s if you have a piece of cloth smeared with paint from some long dead artist hanging on your wall. SMH
Diana R 7 years ago
I used to think that too but can't they do both? Just because a wealthy person buys a painting doesn't mean they aren't being charitable with their money also
Load More Replies... You May Like 50 AI Art Fails That Are Both Horrifying And Hilarious 40 Famous Paintings That Changed Art Forever And Cost A Fortune Doing It 72 Creative Graffiti Art That Turned Blank Walls Into Objects Of Admiration
Eglė Bliabaitė
Viktorija Strelciunaite
Eligijus Sinkunas
Related on Bored Panda
288
97