Thinking more about this. Is this pushing boundaries just as artists have always done -- (and we all benefit from their "shocking" ideas)? And collectors with the money gladly support what they're doing? So the story is about challenging the reader's conventional thinking. Happily challenged, this reader.
3
I love this.
4
That's serious money and apparently art collectors have money to throw away on a cynical jokester. Why would Sotheby's agree to be used like this and why would they agree to submit their clients to wasteful humiliation?
1
Banksy is hilarious. Why would anyone worry about serious things like whether it's the original painting?
13
Banksy continues to tease and vex those who look at art and see only dollar signs.
27
"Banksy". The name has vain hard edge to it. Art? Boy do I miss the giants of the Art world.Hopper, Kline, Moore.
6
The painting's much nicer with the lights. Yes, I'm aware of how pedestrian that sounds.
11
It should be bought by the US Congress.
If need be by a Popular Financing-
10
It's more Banksy for your buck.
8
Either the contemporary art “ experts “ at Sotheby’s are idiots ( possible ) or they are aware of some subterfuge by Banksy ( likely ) by not noting and stating the obvious alterations in the work between its earlier museum exhibition and its present state as it goes up for auction . Sotheby’s has a solemn responsibility to clearly , throughly , and accurately describe the art they sell , including later alterations to a work. That they have not, in the case of this Banksy painting , seriously puts into question the credibility of Sotheby’s . Banksy can be a jokester , Sotheby’s in their role as a responsible auctioneer cannot . It is either incompetence or publicity seeking collusion with Banksy on the part of Sotheby’s , but either way , it tarnishes the reputation of this century’s old firm
12
One is reminded of Sir Edwin Landseer adding the 6th Duke of Devonshire's Blenheim spaniel, Boney, to his "Laying Down the Law," a painting depicting members of the legal profession portrayed as dogs.
https://www.chatsworth.org/art-archives/devonshire-collection/paintings/laying-down-the-law/
7
Hello "paint on velvet."
6
Will the painting be secreted away, perhaps in a locked attic, to continually grow darker while the actual Parliament simply proceeds as is?
27
i seriously doubt this is the same physical painting; the changes are not details but an all over difference in light and textures. it is more likely a jape at the problem of gallery assurances of art authenticity, for example in the dispute between alec baldwin and mary boone gallery.
15
He's done it before, he'll do it again. It's part of the theater of Banksy.
18
"Also left unexplained is why Banksy would choose to alter the painting..."
He felt like it. That's all you need to know. Artists owe the public, the media and rich collectors absolutely nothing.
50
Prediction: The painting will get darker and darker as Brexit gets closer.
58
A suggestion for the Times copy desk about Banksy and other mysteries: Since the identity of the artist is unknown, perhaps the Times might follow Merriam-Webster's recent example and employ the singular "they" to acknowledge the ambiguity.
18
@Betsy O'Donovan Does Banksy itself refer to itself as he or she or they in any statements?
8
This behavior seems completely reasonable by both Sotheby’s and Banksy, aimed to stir controversy by not declaring the very obvious. These changes clearly represent an artistic choice. There’s a long history of what “original” means in the Art world. The discussion is not new (see...the entire history of Art for reference). A collector or scholar made uncomfortable by these discrepancies should probably invest their time elsewhere. The changes refer to a long tradition. In fact, this story is so not new to Art that its promotion makes me wonder if this news is simply advertisement in the guise of controversy.
21