MichaelRobartes Posted April 17, 2014 Report Share Posted April 17, 2014 If only more people could have been arsed to vote against having an elected mayor Michael. The really sad thing is that we had two chances to avoid having Georgie porgie running the city and people's apathy meant that neither were taken. Can only hope that he's sent packing the next time around before he can do too much damage but who knows in this city. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted April 18, 2014 Report Share Posted April 18, 2014 Apparently the Local Government Act 2000 permits citizens the power to remove elected Mayor's, presumably through some sort of petition/referendum or plebiscite (I do love that word). I've been told it's a fascinating read if you're interested M Ha ha I'll skip the reading thanks, that's why I came on here to ask! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS34Red Posted April 19, 2014 Report Share Posted April 19, 2014 The fact Banksy did it on a board and not on a wall suggests he intended for it to be removed. Going by Banksy's work he is anti establishment so for it to be in the councils hands would most likely make him rage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted April 20, 2014 Report Share Posted April 20, 2014 Must be nice to be able to spray money on a wall. Standard procedure after the pub on a Saturday night Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 The fact Banksy did it on a board and not on a wall suggests he intended for it to be removed. Going by Banksy's work he is anti establishment so for it to be in the councils hands would most likely make him rage. Not sure - I think he pre painted it on board and then quickly tacked it up - minimal sighting of him that way. As said previous the location and the back street was part of the whole art work IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tins Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 Not sure - I think he pre painted it on board and then quickly tacked it up - minimal sighting of him that way. As said previous the location and the back street was part of the whole art work IMO But this was a public piece of work. It was meant to been seen. If the youth club had it they would of sold it to a private bidder and it would be seen by the public no more. At least being in the museum people can go and see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 But this was a public piece of work. It was meant to been seen. If the youth club had it they would of sold it to a private bidder and it would be seen by the public no more. At least being in the museum people can go and see it. Yep wasn't happy with club taking it but ultimately someone would have had it otherwise. It's a winless situation now his work carries so much value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 Interesting stat. Of all the art work owned by the City of Bristol, ONLY 9% of it is available to be viewed by the public. Red trousers a hypocrite? I'll let you decide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tins Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 Interesting stat. Of all the art work owned by the City of Bristol, ONLY 9% of it is available to be viewed by the public. Red trousers a hypocrite? I'll let you decide. Where would you put the other 91% though? And who really cares about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 Interesting stat. Of all the art work owned by the City of Bristol, ONLY 9% of it is available to be viewed by the public. Red trousers a hypocrite? I'll let you decide. If you saw the stats of other councils/city's this was one of the highest %. Councils should be selling this stuff off instead of just hoarding it out of public sight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted April 22, 2014 Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 Where would you put the other 91% though? And who really cares about it? Not really the point I'm making. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tins Posted April 22, 2014 Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 Not really the point I'm making. Not really answered my question. If you use figures to make a negative point then be ready to answer questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted April 22, 2014 Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 What a stupid argument. I'm not interested in the locations or even the logistics, just the facts that show a person using "art for the people" can easily be exposed as hypocrisy. So no I've not answered your question, but then if you're going to use out of context approaches to go off on a tangent, then be ready to look silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tins Posted April 22, 2014 Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 What a stupid argument. I'm not interested in the locations or even the logistics, just the facts that show a person using "art for the people" can easily be exposed as hypocrisy. So no I've not answered your question, but then if you're going to use out of context approaches to go off on a tangent, then be ready to look silly. He isn't a hypocrite for saying that though. It's not like he has loads of Banksy's work in which he is keeping from the public is it. It's so easy to criticize but when you have no alternative you're the one who looks silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted April 22, 2014 Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 There's always an alternative. Of course we could all be like you and bury our head in the sand, and assume the ststus quo is correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tins Posted April 22, 2014 Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 There's always an alternative. Of course we could all be like you and bury our head in the sand, and assume the ststus quo is correct. I dislike the bloke a lot, but what I do have is a great interest in the arts. Banksy gets people into galleries and museums, so it is on show and numbers have gone up big time this bank holiday. The other artists wouldn't get nearly as many people in too see them, and there is no place to put them anyway. You make it sound like George Fergusion is hiding all the worlds great pieces, and it is only he whom is doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tins Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Bristol-boys-club-told-Banksy-s-mobile-lovers/story-21068175-detail/story.html???#ixzz313gIPKjh Banksy has said the artwork is for Bristol Boys club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted May 7, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Bristol-boys-club-told-Banksy-s-mobile-lovers/story-21068175-detail/story.html???#ixzz313gIPKjh Banksy has said the artwork is for Bristol Boys club. Probably report Banksy to the old bill for criminal damage in revenge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelRobartes Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 George won't like that at all. Wonder who he'll take it out on. Maybe he'll sell off a bit more of the central library, or one of the city's other few proper assets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS34Red Posted May 8, 2014 Report Share Posted May 8, 2014 Up yours George!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.