The artist Richard Prince has created a series of portraits that has totally pissed off and confounded the public (for many artists, this would be victory number one). The series of ‘portraits’ are really just printed versions of other peoples’ Instagram photos. Prince’s pieces are priced at $90k. The Instagram comments sections include comments written by Prince – kind of the artist’s postmodern, digital signature on each piece (see bottom of this post for gallery photo).

The show has created controversy and dialogue surrounding two important subjects: ownership and value of artistic content in the digital era. This dialogue is victory number two for Prince’s series.

As if to underline the misunderstanding of Prince’s intentions, one of the original Instagram photographers is selling her original work for $90, as if that’s a bargain. This is to totally miss the point. First of all, she’s not selling a Richard Prince. Prince is a world-famous fine artist who has a 40-year career of appropriating imagery. And that’s the most important point: Prince’s work performs the classic Warholian Pop Art trick of taking a mundane, everyday image (an otherwise value-less Instagram photo) and using context (including but not limited to authorship, gallery setting, and price tag) to elevate the item to fine art status. Therein lies the value. It’s no different than Warhol’s Campbell’s soup cans. Prince could’ve used anyone’s photos, and to sell the original Instagram photo itself is to remove the context and miss the point.

So like we're some fancy NYC art now? I'm just imagining hipsters all drinking wine and having intellectual conversations in front this photo @chavezwho took of @sabbbrre and I last year, stolen straight from my Instagram page. Idk man kinda trippy…

A photo posted by Lucid Suicide (@lovelightlucid) on May 14, 2015 at 7:45pm PDT

The Banksy painting ‘The Banality of the Banality of Evil’ was one of the artworks of his October 2013 NYC residency. According to Banksy’s website, this piece is an oil painting of a landscape that was purchased from a thrift store, “vandalized” (Banksy’s word) with Banksy’s painted Nazi seated on a bench, and re-donated to the thrift store. Here are some thoughts on its meaning.

The piece is a ‘collaboration’ between two artists in much the same way that graffiti artists collaborate: the landscape painter’s work of art has been literally painted on by another artist without his knowledge or consent. In graffiti/street art, this style of working with other artists is an inherent element of the medium. It’s a form of shared authorship.

When I first saw this image, I was struck by the contrast of symbolism: seeing a Nazi in a placid American landscape painting is jarring. It’s like seeing Darth Vader in a Norman Rockwell painting.

The phrase ‘the banality of evil’ refers to the idea that ordinary people can commit acts of horror when they are following orders, or following the herd. Naziism is the ultimate symbol of this idea. The Nazi soldier shown here is pictured contemplating a mundane scene. Banksy’s meta title pokes fun at the artwork (and therefore both of the artists responsible for its creation): the scenery and lack of action make for a banal image.

Consider ‘The Banality of the Banality of Evil’ in context: it was made in New York City by an artist whose favorite themes include consumerism and corporate greed. This piece is a satirical riff about man’s ability to blindly follow malevolent orders (be they from a Nazi general or a capitalist criminal). Banksy looks at evil in repose, and has a banal chuckle at its expense.