The British artist Banksy, who is in part famous for being anonymous, has seemingly been unmasked – again. On March 13, Reuters published an investigation that claims to have "revealed, beyond dispute, Banksy's true identity".
This is not the first time Banksy's identity has ostensibly been made public. In addition to previous journalistic inquiries also cited by Reuters, an academic article titled Tagging Banksy: Using Geographic Profiling to Investigate a Modern Art Mystery was published in Journal of Spatial Science almost ten years ago to the day the Reuters story came out.
The article used a mathematical method that looked at where Banksy's graffiti appeared to figure out where the artist might live and work, and their results pointed to a specific person as likely being the artist. I argued at the time that the authors' decision to publish the name of a person they believe to be Banksy was ethically problematic. It seemed to serve no scholarly purpose and to have primarily been done to attract media attention to what is otherwise a niche academic study.
The Reuters investigation comes across as a thoroughly researched piece of journalism. However, the investigation's detailed account of how Banksy was ostensibly identified leaves another question unanswered: how does exposing Banksy's identity benefit the public?
The power of anonymity
The Reuters investigation claims that "the public has a deep interest in understanding the identity and career of a figure with his profound and enduring influence on culture, the art industry and international political discourse". I disagree.
Banksy's career and cultural influence are already well documented. It is not clear how naming the person behind the mask provides significant additional insights into their work or impact.
The longstanding mystery about Banksy's identity has played an important role in building the myth of a larger-than-life figure whose work could turn up anywhere at any time. Banksy's work is conceptually, technically and contextually accomplished – and often socially relevant. But it is the myth surrounding the artist that continues to inspire a fascination that goes beyond individual artworks. Anonymity and secrecy are fundamental to the artist's oeuvre.
Some art experts have questioned the intentions of the investigation
The Reuters investigation argues that Banksy is a public figure and as such is "subject to scrutiny, accountability, and, sometimes, unmasking". However, as noted by a commenter in a Reddit discussion started by one of the Reuters journalists, it is not clear "how naming him somehow increases his transparency or accountability".
On a practical level, anonymity has made it possible for Banksy to create work around the world without much interference from authorities or, indeed, fans. The attention given to a London builder previously "identified" as Banksy (though this was later disproved) suggests that the latter group could make life difficult for the artist, as well as anyone else bearing the legal name now attributed to Banksy by Reuters.
At least as important, though, is that anonymity enables the public to project their own ideas on to both artist and artwork. For example, it has been suggested that Banksy might be a woman.
As cultural studies scholar Sofia Pinto has pointed out, this idea may rest on stereotypical notions of what constitutes feminine traits in culture and art. This includes the artist's focus on social justice and "capacity for imagining being in someone else's shoes". However, the point is not Banksy's actual gender. It is rather that the artist's anonymity allows viewers to speculate and fill in the blanks.
The idea that Banksy could be anyone surely has broadened the artist's appeal and may also have inspired people who do not look like – or have the same background as – Banksy to engage in street art or other creative endeavours.
The Reuters journalists have quoted German art historian Ulrich Blanché, who likens the search for Banksy's identity to a treasure hunt. While this metaphor may seem apt, a treasure hunt does not necessarily entail taking the whole treasure for yourself – especially if doing so spoils the fun for everyone else.
At this troubled time in history, when it can seem increasingly difficult to meet the world with a sense of wonder rather than cynicism, why deprive the public of the enigma that is an integral part of Banksy's oeuvre? The vague notion that revealing the identity of the person behind Banksy is somehow in the public interest fundamentally misjudges the function and importance of the artist's anonymity.
Peter Bengtsen, Senior Lecturer in Art History and Visual Studies, Lund University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.