Well, that's about as clear a view of the future as any of us is likely to get. Nice front row seating, though.

A friend gave me a belated Christmas present today, "Wall and Piece", a collection of photographs of Banksy's graffiti art. Great stuff. The guy's amazing. But, of course, there's a problem (isn't there always?). He criticizes the crassness of billboards, commercial signage invading public space, etc. Buuuuuut, um, isn't that exactly what he's doing? He does sign his work, right? He does profit from his work, right? And, so, the difference between his work and a beer ad is, um, what?

Any art historians out there? When did a disdain for the commercial become a requirement of the "artist" persona? I'm thinking that it was late 19th, early 20th century? It strikes me that an argument could be made that the real "art" is in convincing people that you're above mere money while accepting a cheque for a few thousand dollars from them. Maybe this is another reason I like Warhol. He was unabashedly about the money. And he turned out good art.