into the void, or off the edge?

"off the edge" is a clear interpretation of the statue. "into the void" is a bit more of a stretch. IMHO.

But that's art for you. Everyone has their own take on it.

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.

Plus the execution is also part of the art.

There are many examples of the same thing: Andy Warhol and the soup cans and screen-printed portraits with different color backgrounds or Led Zeppelin and English folk hard rock songs that have hobbits in them are two of them.

Eventually, it's hard to even process their work in the context of how predictable and trite it seems to be a few decades later.

His other works aren't subtle.

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

Not sure who you think "they" are but "This is England" is superb. It deals with a lot of issues, way beyond just nationalism and the like.

Perhaps you would like to fix your gimlet gaze on "A Clockwork Orange" and deliver a further withering critique.

A simple explanation regarding the increase of the number of nationalists within England is the population has increased. QED.

It's not so much a secret as it is simply not public.

This is part of what's obvious. The whole thing, including this oooh aahh Rorschach part, is obvious. It's thoughts that we all had in high school, and it is hack.

Banksy is from Bris'l which is sort of north Somerset (Somerset keeps on morphing faster than a sci-fi shapeshifter).

Cornwall has had a white cross on a black flag since 18something. Devon decided to adopt a black edged white cross on a green flag. I remember seeing Devon flag car stickers in the '80s - its a little older than that. Somerset now has ... a flag. Yellow and red I think.

No idea why because people can't decide what it is! The land itself knows exactly what and where it is but the political boundaries ebb and flow with the phases of the moon. Is Avon included ... what is Avon? Ooh, BANES - Somerset? Not today thank you. It goes on. Anyway, do Devon and Somerset and co really need a flag? No of course not.

What we really need is a Wessex flag, which will take over Mercia ... and a few other regional efforts ... and end up as a red cross on a white background. Then we could munge that with a couple of other flags and confuse the entire world with something called the Union Flag.

Then we can really get complicated ... hi Hawaii!

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

You really don't see any good ol' fashioned short and sweet headlines that read best to the ear in a Mid-Atlantic accent anymore.

There's a (mostly terrible) documentary about a previous bansky "statue" deposited in London that, in one of its better moments, tracks down the people who actually make statues for artists like banksy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Banksy_Job

edit: I feel I should clarify that this is not an official Banksy documentary. He made "Exit Through the Gift Shop" which is an amazing film which I highly recommend to anyone.

As seen by the raised fist, the man is angry because the operation Epic Fiber has caused a blockage just in the strait of Trump, so is a metaphor about the dangers of having too much nuts in the world. Banski has planned also that the flag ends totally white by seagull activity; so this, always evolving and deceivingly simple piece of art, gives us hope for a future restoration of the blockage soon before we end nuking everybody on the process.

Denouncing the raise to nuttionalism while providing hope for the future. A powerful message.

See?, this is art, everybody can sell anything with a little practice. If they can sell a banana taped in a wall, so you can too.

You'd be very surprised.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musicians_who_oppose_Donald_Tr...

Welsh for river.

I suppose I should've figured that one out.

Historically, the black flag is strongly associated with anarchism, anti-state politics, revolt, and rejection of national authority.

Had he colored it in the union jack, then I would've said it was nationalism, and the person is blinded by nationalism.

But. This is Banksy, black-and-white Banksy, so there may be no symbolism behind the black flag, but it's just very interesting. I can't accept that he would not have considered the color of the flag.

But this is kind of "water is wet" message.

But from an American perspective a guy wearing a suit while carrying an "anarchist" flag wouldn't be inappropriate, either.

You said, "Whether we think he's a hack", which fundamentally changes what is being discussed.

The only reason we're talking about this is because of Banksy. Not because it is a clever or "deep" piece. It's disappointingly surface level, and the fact that we're talking about that doesn't suggest otherwise.

Can you point me to where he expressed agreement with the global bureaucratic regime? Interested to educate myself.

Seriously, this is part of the fun of art. Neither of you are wrong for reading different messages into it.

Communists are blinded by the flag with the hammer and sickle.

Teachers and doctors are blinded by trans ideology and its flag.

Examples abound, but wanna transgressor blanksy knows who butters his bread.

Waving a flag is not a problem in itself. You can be proud of being part of whatever group you like and not hurt anyone. The problem is when the flag becomes the prism through which you see the world. Or, as the statue puts it, when you’re blinded by it.

Clearly it depends on your actual object-level position on the Israel/Palestine conflict. Or in general, what specific nationalisms you mean when you talk about being "blinded by nationalism".

And that's the main reason why I think this is a mediocre piece of art. Very few people actually are genuinely anti-nationalist for all possible human groups that have some sense of themselves as a nation. All anti-nationalist rhetoric is implicitly aimed at a specific nationalism that someone has a problem with - and also everyone knows this. So everyone wants to use the blank slate of bansky's featureless flag as a canvas upon which to paint a nationalism they don't like in order to discredit it. And I personally think that's boring. Maybe engendering that reaction was itself part of Bansky's artistic vision, but I still don't think that makes for good art.

i.e., as a member of the group of people represented by the statue?

The Brexit vote was a decade ago and though many mourn the outcome, it’s a bit late to be erecting artwork about it. References to being blinded by a flag now are probably about the particular far-right organizing of the last year or so that employs the English and UK flags in a very particular way. [0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Raise_the_Colours

Baloney. It's a guerilla sculpture put up in the center of London. My guess is we might be talking about it more if it were unsigned as a case of whodunnit.

But for me personally, I roll my eyes at all the ex-art students who always complain "it's a hack" for any piece of art that appeals to a wide audience and isn't some obnoxious 8-layers deep meaning. You literally see it all the time, and half the time it just strikes me as thinly-veiled jealousy, if not from the art student perspective than from the "I'm so much more sophisticated than the unwashed masses" perspective.

It happened on HN a few months ago in a post about Simon Berger, an artist who makes portraits with cracked glass. The artist has achieved relatively wide appeal, and many of the comments here were along the lines of "Meh, he's a talentless hack, he just stumbled along a 'cool' technique but the subjects are boring."

I'd have a lot more respect for folks that could just say "it's not my bag" and move on, rather than pretend they're so much more sophisticated than people who enjoy this art.

There's always a response that his work is "anti-establishment", despite it often giving support of the establishment's viewpoints (read: liberal).

The hypocrisy seems lost on his fans/proponents.

Just imagine thinking this piece is somehow anti-establishment / thorn in the side of power, yet it was erected in one of the most surveilled areas in London and he's somehow got away with it?

Give me a break.

My parents did. Their parents did. My children will.

>you did not earn them

My parents did. Their parents did. My children will.

Everything I have today has been hard-earned by my ancestors. Everything my children have will be hard-earned by my ancestors and I. We earned them.

>These two statements appear to be contradictory

Only if you believe such things to be due to purely random chance. I can feel 'fortunate' that my parents got me the bike I really wanted for Christmas, but there's no randomness in my parents working overtime and budgeting responsibly that made it possible.

>And what was your contribution to those achievements to justify this pride?

I am a part of the same collective, the long and continued story of my people. I am proud of those who came before me.

>You have to be careful to not fall into the trap of borrowed glory

You have to be careful not to fall into the trap of nihilistic individualism. You are part of something much bigger than yourself. Be suspicious of anyone trying to sever your connection to your people and your history.

>Are you implying that the place belongs more fully to descendants of earlier inhabitants than to newer members of the community?

That makes sense, yes. To your example, I would say that Native Americans have very little claim to the modern USA as practically everything was built by Europeans. They failed to defend their lands and were successfully conquered. In the same way, it would be absurd in my view for the majority non-White population of London (almost all of whom are very recent colonisers) to gaze around at the infrastructure and architecture and think "We made this."

>Are you then also ashamed of their crimes?

Sure, but not nearly as ashamed as our enemies would like us to be. Isn't it funny how we are supposed to recoil in shame and horror with the constant reminders of the worst parts of our people's history, yet we are condemned for also proudly owning our best?

Still, aren't you at least a little bit curious? Why did it have to be invented in 1971? What is it replacing?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Raise_the_Colours https://manchestermill.co.uk/the-men-who-raised-the-flags/

Even the new positioning of the art on a plinth in some open space is enigmatic. If it were a critique of the powers that be, why would officialdom collaborate in propping it up?

Sure, they might have had generated enough sacred reverence, those bloodbaths of past.

This campaign, which has been highly visible on social media and in physical neighborhoods, claims to promote patriotism. However, it has been deeply polarising, with critics and anti-racism groups arguing it is being used by far-right groups to mark territory and intimidate immigrant communities.

We anarchists with careers do in fact exist. There are probably dozens of us outside of tech, even!

Modern Slavery Stats:

1. Asia and the Pacific: ~29.3 million (6.8 per 1000 ppl)

2. Africa: ~7.0 million (5.2 per 1000)

3. Europe and Central Asia: ~6.4 million (6.9 per 1000)

4. Americas: ~5.1 million (5 per 1000)

5. Arab States: ~1.7 (10.1 per 1000 [highest] )

https://www.walkfree.org/global-slavery-index/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDfGblfOsZ4

It's an offence against public decency however you slice it!

  >> Are you claiming to have controlled where and to whom you were born?
  > My parents did. Their parents did. My children will.

  >> you did not earn them
  > My parents did. Their parents did. My children will.

  > Everything I have today has been hard-earned by my ancestors.

  > Everything my children have will be hard-earned by my ancestors and I. *We* earned them.

“Nations” as synonym for country started appearing only recently, in last two/three hundred years.

Flags have thousands of years of history.

Which spate and which nation? The one the local flags were in response to, or the local flags?

I would like to disagree on this point.

When did that change?

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/08/29/uk/st-george-flag-england...

It also discounts the value of groups, absent concerns about competition. No man is an island, and the society you grow up in, the people you grow up with, greatly affect who you become and what your life is like. To say it doesn't matter who you live around discards all that, or reveals the profound mistake (or lie) of thinking who makes up a society doesn't affect what the society is like.

If I had to ballpark it, I’d guess something like 1:5 people in tech are broadly aligned with me politically (meaning “less extreme, but directionally similar”) while maybe 1:100 would self-identify as an anarchist and 1:500 both self-identify and align fully with me.

Does that help?

The fact that the statue was allowed to stay up means that the authorities approved it. So, Banksy isn't really counterculture, he's government approved counterculture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_slave

This is arguably the reason why the Overton window has shifted towards the rejection of human slavery over the last century or so, with the growth of fossil fuel use.

Human slavery will thus likely swing back into fashion again in the future as oil, coal and natural gas run out.

To deface it would first have to have a face.

Oh, and you'll find it at plenty of football matches, notably Glasgow Rangers, who fly it while singing songs about wanting to be "up to our knees in Fenian blood".

There must be some other solution, surely! If only we could somehow find some other source of energy...

Authorization could be done with permits, or just tacitly by the notability of the artist. And while one can kind of do some handwaving and liken the latter dynamic to some mild corruption, that is still nowhere near the level of motivated corruption under fascism. And at this point comments invoking phrases like "established media" and "global bureaucratic regime" have a general thrust of pushing us away from liberal institutions and towards fascism, so I find those appeals quite disingenuous.