New Criticism- Analysis # 2

         This is a painting done by Banksy in the West Bank on a security fence. To me, this painting tells a story of two kids who are painting a wall and stumble upon a whole, which leads them to paradise. They are working kids, painting the wall for money but instead of working, find a utopia where all their dreams are going to come true. The kids look happy and their is optimism on their face that life has more to offer them. After just watching the film “Exit Through the Gift Shop,” I believe that Banksy’s work is done to make people happy and provoke questions about society. 

  If I were to look at this painting from a New Criticism perspective I would have to erase what I just watched about Banksy in “Exit Through the Gift Shop.” In New Criticism, a piece of art or writing is self contained, the biography of the artist and the historical context are unimportant.  From this perspective I would say that the painting is of two children who are painting a wall. As they are painting the wall they see a hole and discover that there is a beach.Their is irony and paradox in the painting. The paradox is seen by looking at the color contrast and the children’s lives in front of the wall as opposed to what is behind the wall. The color contrast also emphasizes irony because the wall and children are black and white and “paradise” is very colorful. Taking a New Criticism perspective, I did not include any background on Banksy and, I resisted telling what the painting means to me. Along with historical and biographical context, New Criticism does not rely on psychological or sociological impact. I think that this perspective is not as effective. I find it impossible to get everything I can get out of a piece of work without knowing some background information on the artist or historical context. For this piece of work, from a New Criticism perspective, the audience has no idea that Banksy is one of the pioneers of street art or that his paintings often time get erased because what he does is illegal. The context is crucial to understand the painting as a whole. I understand why this technique is effective though because often times in works, people rely to much on the author or historical context for analysis. Once in a while it is interesting to see what you get just by reading the work or looking at the painting and analyzing the form. 

word count: 427