.just what i could do.

(subtitled: a review)

So I just got back from the Banksy show at the Vanina Holasek Gallery (on the same block as Aperture, of course). Today was also the first real snow in the city and it was still coming down as I headed out for the show.

What opening is 1-5 on a Sunday?

Anyways. It's snowy and cold and I get there (it's a very small gallery in an old three story townhouse, a great, different space) at about 1:10 and there is already a line down the block. Apparently the gallery can't hold more than 111 people at once and everyone had to move up and down the stairs in shifts.
The wait wasn't long and the people behind me were hilarious and I should have said something but I thought it to be rude. Oh well.

As for the show.

I didn't like it.
Not at all.
I thought I would. I love Banksy and his "work" (he is the artist of this generation that makes all sorta of people ask that horrid question, "is it art?") but it does not belong in a gallery. It looked completely out of place, like a hobo in a business suit at the beach.
The gallery was "destroyed" which meant candles, smiley face night lights, Christmas lights in wastebaskets (what was that?) and pink paint splatter all over the wall to resemble (?) the drips of graffiti. I guess. His work which is usually spray painted all over Britain seemed to defy its purpose carefully printed and framed (on this splatter wall). I understand the contrast of these two but the execution was incomplete.

For those who have no idea who Banksy is, there is some great material on him and his work, especially since there are little (if any?) appearances of his work in America. His stencils are commentary on the currently climate of unrest, unemployment, royalty worshiping/hating in Britain. It reminds the viewer that the Thatcher-ism that plagued the nation in the 80s is still in effect today.

In Banksy's world Princess Di is on the pound note, the Queen is a monkey and Winston Churchill has a mowhawk (this one was new to me and I felt it was just a stretch for him). It also deals with the brands and companies that are dominating Britain, especially Tesco who, to my knowledge, doesn't really have an American equivalent (the closet I guess would be a large Costco or Walmart). He now plays with Warhol imagery and places it in a dim, modern context. Which, as being bias toward the side of the fence that hates Warhol, I didn't like at all.

Banksy is best when he's on the street. Playing with the environment he's graffiting on (see picture). His earlier rats played on British politics and classism that was effective and also interesting aesthetically. He created controversy by spraying anything and anywhere making the public question more what is was about rather than if it was art. The only thing people seem to interested in now is how much (for Christ's sake Angelina Jolie bought a works by him, ugly ones at that) and what he actually looks like and who he is (actually that's been answered but I don't know what the next step is). I was really looking forward to the opening, hoping it would be chaos and tagging going on all over the place. But it was like any other art opening, where people came to talk to each other and shuffle by the art in a line.

So, thats my review and if any New Yorkers are reading this you should check it out and report back to me. I'm trying to answer my own question if its genius in its unabashed candidness or corny beyond reason.

And also, if you're a British ex-pat, don't worry all your fellow countrymen/women are at that show, I was one of maybe 12 Americans. You should feel at home (?).