I think it's a reasonable statue. But does anyone else think it's a bit obvious, more so than his other work? Like there is no doubt on the meaning at all, it's all right there on the surface level.

Strong disagree. First, like many of the other comments mention, Banksy is known for being clever and witty, but not particularly subtle.

But more to the point, while you may think the meaning is a bit obvious, the fact that the flag is unadorned (which/whose flag is it?), and the man is unknown, makes me think this statue could be the ultimate Rorschach test. I'm sure there are tons of people thinking "Ha ha, this is the perfect commentary on all those idiot <people on the other side who I disagree with> wrapping themselves up in their ideology of <patriotism/social justice/cause du jour> as they march <some particular country/society/the world at large off a cliff>".

In other words, I'm guessing you probably felt the meaning was "obvious" because you filled in the blanks in the above madlibs-style statement in a way that feels obvious to you, and I think folks on "the other side" would probably fill in the blanks with the exact opposite notions in a way that feels "obvious" to them.

Not sure we think of Banksy as being particularly subtle. Innovative and impactful, sure - but the message is usually quite clear, no?

I don't think most of his work is trying for subtle? First thing that came to mind: "Slave Labour" is pretty obvious, it's a kid operating a sewing machine to make Union flags and it was painted on an actual pound shop. Were you unsure of the message? Even something like "Silent Majority" isn't difficult, the comic book "V for Vendetta" makes the exact same point just Banksy painted it as a mural.

I think the sheer number of people below arguing it might not be about nationalism shows this sort of "Obvious" direct work may still be needed.

> "in September 2025, Banksy painted a mural on the Royal Courts of Justice depicting a judge bludgeoning a protester with a gavel"

His other works aren't subtle.

> there is no doubt on the meaning at all

Which flag? Or, what kind of flag? Or does it matter?

it gets people talking which many of those who like it consider to be the primary point. In other words, it's not great public art, it's basically government approved engagement bait or engineered pro-establishment viral messaging and it's very successful at that! (but it doesn't inspire and elevate that art should aspire to)

I think a good old fashined "we are all fucked" is warranted now and again.

It's also referencing the recent flag controversies in the UK over the past year.

Certainly in America but all over the west, people are significantly less capable of media literacy. Sometimes the obvious needs to be said.

If you want to make a political message it often helps to be obvious. This way the meaning of your message will not be misinterpreted either intentionally or un-intentionally.

The best art makes you think and/or feel, and engage with it in a personal way.

There's nothing about subtly in that claim, and all forms of art are equally valid, if not the same quality.

Bansky's art has always been blunt and whimsical, probably because he makes popular street art. It's meant to be "accessible" for your average passerby who might only engage with it for a fraction of a second, but maybe get a little surprise when they do.

Have you seen the state of the world? Why would you go through the trouble of being subtle nowadays?

This one definitely lacks ambition compared to other works. Probably because his other work had a subversive undertone, this one seems sponsored by the powers that be. I also suspect it was installed with cooperation from the local authorities.

Have you seen his other works in recent years? It's hard to get any more obvious than a judge beating up someone with his gavel or a boy judo throwing Putin.

It's not like Banksy is known for being a sophisticated highfalutin MFA student anyway. Like it or not, appealing to the masses with simple and clear moral messages has always been his deal.

it's less than mediocre art. Using the following statue from Temu for vandalism would be a stronger art statement: https://www.temu.com/1pc-3d-printed-bride-sculpture-elegant-...

Yes doesn’t feel very innovative

He's always been one to land a one-liner, or just a punch line.

Sadly, in this day and age, that simple one-punch obvious meaning is just what's needed.

Well the problems it's referencing are glaringly obvious as well, and yet so many people still refuse to acknowledge them.

I have the same reaction to Banksy, and figure he and his audience just have to be in on the joke? I can’t discount there’s some layered irony going on in conversation between the artist and the intellectual / capitalist / trend-setting elite that are his effective patrons.

“I remember when all this was trees” [1] is maybe the best example. Detroit hasn’t been “trees” in something like two centuries. Platitudes doused in treacle.

[1] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/10/01/ba...

[dead]

[dead]

[dead]

[dead]

all his work is slop. No difference here...